Ali Guermazi

PURPOSE: To develop guidelines for performing and interpreting positron emission tomography (PET) imaging for treatment assessment in patients with lymphoma both in clinical practice and in clinical trials. METHODS: An International Harmonization Project (IHP) was convened to discuss standardization of clinical trial parameters in lymphoma. An imaging subcommittee developed consensus recommendations based on published PET literature and the collective expertise of its members in the use of PET in lymphoma. Only recommendations subsequently endorsed by all IHP subcommittees were adopted. RECOMMENDATIONS: PET after completion of therapy should be performed at least 3 weeks, and preferably at 6 to 8 weeks, after chemotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy, and 8 to 12 weeks after radiation or chemoradiotherapy. Visual assessment alone is adequate for interpreting PET findings as positive or negative when assessing response after completion of therapy. Mediastinal blood pool activity is recommended as the reference background activity to define PET positivity for a residual mass > or = 2 cm in greatest transverse diameter, regardless of its location. A smaller residual mass or a normal sized lymph node (ie, < or = 1 x 1 cm in diameter) should be considered positive if its activity is above that of the surrounding background. Specific criteria for defining PET positivity in the liver, spleen, lung, and bone marrow are also proposed. Use of attenuation-corrected PET is strongly encouraged. Use of PET for treatment monitoring during a course of therapy should only be done in a clinical trial or as part of a prospective registry.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the knee is often performed in patients who have knee symptoms of unclear cause. When meniscal tears are found, it is commonly assumed that the symptoms are attributable to them. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the prevalence of meniscal damage in the general population and the association of meniscal tears with knee symptoms and with radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis. METHODS: We studied persons from Framingham, Massachusetts, who were drawn from census-tract data and random-digit telephone dialing. Subjects were 50 to 90 years of age and ambulatory; selection was not made on the basis of knee or other joint problems. We assessed the integrity of the menisci in the right knee on 1.5-tesla MRI scans obtained from 991 subjects (57% of whom were women). Symptoms involving the right knee were evaluated by questionnaire. RESULTS: The prevalence of a meniscal tear or of meniscal destruction in the right knee as detected on MRI ranged from 19% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15 to 24) among women 50 to 59 years of age to 56% (95% CI, 46 to 66) among men 70 to 90 years of age; prevalences were not materially lower when subjects who had had previous knee surgery were excluded. Among persons with radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2 or higher, on a scale of 0 to 4, with higher numbers indicating more definite signs of osteoarthritis), the prevalence of a meniscal tear was 63% among those with knee pain, aching, or stiffness on most days and 60% among those without these symptoms. The corresponding prevalences among persons without radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis were 32% and 23%. Sixty-one percent of the subjects who had meniscal tears in their knees had not had any pain, aching, or stiffness during the previous month. CONCLUSIONS: Incidental meniscal findings on MRI of the knee are common in the general population and increase with increasing age.

IMPORTANCE: Knee osteoarthritis (OA), a common cause of chronic pain and disability, has biomechanical and inflammatory origins and is exacerbated by obesity. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a ≥10% reduction in body weight induced by diet, with or without exercise, would improve mechanistic and clinical outcomes more than exercise alone. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Single-blind, 18-month, randomized clinical trial at Wake Forest University between July 2006 and April 2011. The diet and exercise interventions were center-based with options for the exercise groups to transition to a home-based program. Participants were 454 overweight and obese older community-dwelling adults (age ≥55 years with body mass index of 27-41) with pain and radiographic knee OA. INTERVENTIONS: Intensive diet-induced weight loss plus exercise, intensive diet-induced weight loss, or exercise. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Mechanistic primary outcomes: knee joint compressive force and plasma IL-6 levels; secondary clinical outcomes: self-reported pain (range, 0-20), function (range, 0-68), mobility, and health-related quality of life (range, 0-100). RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-nine participants (88%) completed the study. Mean weight loss for diet + exercise participants was 10.6 kg (11.4%); for the diet group, 8.9 kg (9.5%); and for the exercise group, 1.8 kg (2.0%). After 18 months, knee compressive forces were lower in diet participants (mean, 2487 N; 95% CI, 2393 to 2581) compared with exercise participants (2687 N; 95% CI, 2590 to 2784, pairwise difference [Δ](exercise vs diet )= 200 N; 95% CI, 55 to 345; P = .007). Concentrations of IL-6 were lower in diet + exercise (2.7 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2.5 to 3.0) and diet participants (2.7 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2.4 to 3.0) compared with exercise participants (3.1 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2.9 to 3.4; Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise) = 0.39 pg/mL; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.81; P = .007; Δ(exercise vs diet )= 0.43 pg/mL; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.85, P = .006). The diet + exercise group had less pain (3.6; 95% CI, 3.2 to 4.1) and better function (14.1; 95% CI, 12.6 to 15.6) than both the diet group (4.8; 95% CI, 4.3 to 5.2) and exercise group (4.7; 95% CI, 4.2 to 5.1, Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise) = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.33 to 1.71; P(pain) = .004; 18.4; 95% CI, 16.9 to 19.9; Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise), 4.29; 95% CI, 2.07 to 6.50; P(function )< .001). The diet + exercise group (44.7; 95% CI, 43.4 to 46.0) also had better physical health-related quality of life scores than the exercise group (41.9; 95% CI, 40.5 to 43.2; Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise) = -2.81; 95% CI, -4.76 to -0.86; P = .005). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among overweight and obese adults with knee OA, after 18 months, participants in the diet + exercise and diet groups had more weight loss and greater reductions in IL-6 levels than those in the exercise group; those in the diet group had greater reductions in knee compressive force than those in the exercise group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00381290.

BACKGROUND: Whether arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for symptomatic patients with a meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis results in better functional outcomes than nonoperative therapy is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving symptomatic patients 45 years of age or older with a meniscal tear and evidence of mild-to-moderate osteoarthritis on imaging. We randomly assigned 351 patients to surgery and postoperative physical therapy or to a standardized physical-therapy regimen (with the option to cross over to surgery at the discretion of the patient and surgeon). The patients were evaluated at 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome was the difference between the groups with respect to the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) physical-function score (ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe symptoms) 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean improvement in the WOMAC score after 6 months was 20.9 points (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.9 to 23.9) in the surgical group and 18.5 (95% CI, 15.6 to 21.5) in the physical-therapy group (mean difference, 2.4 points; 95% CI, -1.8 to 6.5). At 6 months, 51 active participants in the study who were assigned to physical therapy alone (30%) had undergone surgery, and 9 patients assigned to surgery (6%) had not undergone surgery. The results at 12 months were similar to those at 6 months. The frequency of adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, we did not find significant differences between the study groups in functional improvement 6 months after randomization; however, 30% of the patients who were assigned to physical therapy alone underwent surgery within 6 months. (Funded by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; METEOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00597012.).