I Would Never Take Preventive Medication! Perspectives and Information Needs of People Who Underwent Predictive Tests for Rheumatoid Arthritis

A comprehensive review on the role of mesenchymal stromal/stem cells in the management of rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune inflammatory disease with systemic manifestations. Although the success of immune modulatory drug therapy is considerable, about 40% of patients do not respond to treatment. Mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (MSCs) have been demonstrated to have therapeutic potential for inflammatory diseases.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides an update on RA disease and on pre-clinical and clinical studies using MSCs from bone marrow, umbilical cord, adipose tissue, and dental pulp, to regulate the immune response. Moreover, the clinical use, safety, limitations, and future perspective of MSCs in RA are discussed. Using the PubMed database and ClincalTrials.gov, peer-reviewed full-text papers, abstracts and clinical trials were identified from 1985 through to April 2023.

EXPERT OPINION

MSCs demonstrated a satisfactory safety profile and potential for clinical efficacy. However, it is mandatory to deepen the investigations on how MSCs affect the proinflammatory deregulated RA patients' cells. MSCs are potentially good candidates for severe RA patients not responding to conventional therapies but a long-term follow-up after stem cells treatment and standardized protocols are needed. Future research should focus on well-designed multicenter randomized clinical trials with adequate sample sizes and properly selected patients satisfying RA criteria for a valid efficacy evaluation.

Rheumatoid arthritis prevention in arthralgia: fantasy or reality?

The concept of a 'window of opportunity' in treating a disease assumes the existence of a time frame during which the trajectory of the disease can be effectively and permanently modified. In rheumatoid arthritis (RA), optimal timing of this period is presumed to be during the phase before arthritis is clinically apparent and disease is diagnosed. Several proof-of-concept trials of treatment during the 'arthralgia' phase of RA have been completed in the past 4 years, with the underlying notion that temporary treatment at this stage could prevent the development of RA or induce a sustained reduction in the burden of disease. This Review summarizes the results of these trials and reflects on the outcomes in relation to the patients' perspectives. Overall, the majority of symptomatic at-risk individuals could benefit from a fixed period treatment, even if RA does not develop. Various factors must be taken into consideration when translating these findings into clinical practice. More evidence is needed to target the individuals at highest risk, and additional tools are needed to monitor treatment and guide decisions about whether treatment can be discontinued. Without these tools, there is a paradoxical risk of seemingly increasing the incidence of the disease and prolonging disease duration, which is the opposite of what the concept of intervening in the window of opportunity entails.

Stakeholder perceptions of preventive approaches to rheumatoid arthritis: qualitative study of healthcare professionals' perspectives on predictive and preventive strategies

BACKGROUND

There is increasing research interest in the development of preventive treatment for individuals at risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Previous studies have explored the perceptions of at-risk groups and patients about predictive and preventive strategies for RA, but little is known about health care professionals' (HCPs) perspectives.

METHODS

One-to-one semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted (face-to-face or by telephone) with HCPs. Audio recordings of the interviews were transcribed, and the data were analysed by thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Nineteen HCPs (11 female) were interviewed, including ten GPs, six rheumatologists and three rheumatology nurse specialists. The thematic analysis identified four organising themes: 1) Attributes of predictive and preventive approaches; 2) Ethical and psychological concerns; 3) Implementation issues and 4) Learning from management of other conditions. Theme 1 described necessary attributes of predictive and preventive approaches, including the type and performance of predictive tools, the need for a sound evidence base and consideration of risks and benefits associated with preventive treatment. Theme 2 described the ethical and psycho-social concerns that interviewees raised, including the potential negative economic, financial and psychological effects of risk disclosure for 'at-risk' individuals, uncertainty around the development of RA and the potential for benefit associated with the treatments being considered. Theme 3 describes the implementation issues considered, including knowledge and training needs, costs and resource implications of implementing predictive and preventive approaches, the role of different types of HCPs, guidelines and tools needed, and patient characteristics relating to the appropriateness of preventive treatments. Theme 4 describes lessons that could be learned from interviewees' experiences of prediction and prevention in other disease areas, including how preventive treatment is prescribed, existing guidelines and tools for other diseases and issues relating to risk communication.

CONCLUSIONS

For successful implementation of predictive and preventative approaches in RA, HCPs need appropriate training about use and interpretation of predictive tools, communication of results to at-risk individuals, and options for intervention. Evidence of cost-efficiency, appropriate resource allocation, adaptation of official guidelines and careful consideration of the at-risk individuals' psycho-social needs are also needed.

Exploring preferences of at-risk individuals for preventive treatments for rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Some immunomodulatory drugs have been shown to delay the onset of, or lower the risk of developing, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), if given to individuals at risk. Several trials are ongoing in this area; however, little evidence is currently available about the views of those at risk of RA regarding preventive treatment.

METHOD

Three focus groups and three interviews explored factors that are relevant to first degree relatives (FDRs) of RA patients and members of the general public when considering taking preventive treatment for RA. The semi-structured qualitative interview prompts explored participant responses to hypothetical attributes of preventive RA medicines. Transcripts of focus group/interview proceedings were inductively coded and analysed using a framework approach.

RESULTS

Twenty-one individuals (five FDRs, 16 members of the general public) took part in the study. Ten broad themes were identified describing factors that participants felt would influence their decisions about whether to take preventive treatment if they were at increased risk of RA. These related either directly to features of the specific treatment or to other factors, including personal characteristics, attitude towards taking medication, and an individual's actual risk of developing RA.

CONCLUSION

This research highlights the importance of non-treatment factors in the decision-making process around preventive treatments, and will inform recruitment to clinical trials as well as information to support shared decision making by those considering preventive treatment. Studies of treatment preferences in individuals with a confirmed high risk of RA would further inform clinical trial design.

To treat or not to treat? Current attitudes on treatment aimed at modifying the disease burden in clinically suspect arthralgia: a survey among participants of the TREAT EARLIER trial and healthcare professionals

OBJECTIVES

While awaiting therapies accomplishing rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-prevention in individuals at-risk, recent evidence supports that a 1-year methotrexate treatment may lead to sustained reduction in disease burden and subclinical joint inflammation in patients with clinically suspect arthralgia (CSA). We aimed to study the previously unexplored attitudes of CSA patients and rheumatologists on 1-year DMARD treatment in the arthralgia phase to reduce the disease burden, while not preventing RA.

METHODS

CSA patients who participated in the TREAT EARLIER trial, thus being expert by experience, were informed on the trial results. Thereafter they completed an anonymous questionnaire about their attitudes on treatment in the CSA phase. We used the same approach for Dutch healthcare professionals in rheumatology.

RESULTS

The majority of trial participants (85%) considered the effects of the 1-year treatment as found in the TREAT EARLIER trial, beneficial in the symptomatic at-risk stage. 79% would recommend a 1-year methotrexate course to others with comparable joint complaints. Two-thirds indicated RA prevention and improving disease burden to be equally important treatment goals in the CSA phase. Most healthcare professionals (88%) were inclined to prescribe 1-year treatment to CSA patients aimed at long-term improvement of symptoms and functioning, while not preventing RA development. 59% believed the profits of a 1-year methotrexate course to outweigh disadvantages, for example, side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable willingness exists among CSA patients and rheumatologists to start a 1-year treatment resulting in long-term improvement of symptoms and functioning, while not preventing RA. This emphasises the need for more research optimising treatment regimens and disease monitoring in individuals at-risk to facilitate such treatment decisions in the future, while avoiding an intervention, either limited or for a prolonged period, which may have harms that outweigh benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The Netherlands Trials Registry (NTR4853-trial-NL4599). EudraCT number: NL2014-004472-35.

Preferences for preventive treatments for rheumatoid arthritis: discrete choice survey in the UK, Germany and Romania

OBJECTIVE

To quantify preferences for preventive therapies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) across three countries.

METHODS

A web-based survey including a discrete choice experiment was administered to adults recruited via survey panels in the UK, Germany and Romania. Participants were asked to assume they were experiencing arthralgia and had a 60% chance of developing RA in the next 2 years and completed 15 choices between no treatment and two hypothetical preventive treatments. Treatments were defined by six attributes (effectiveness, risks and frequency/route of administration) with varying levels. Participants also completed a choice task with fixed profiles reflecting subjective estimates of candidate preventive treatments. Latent class models (LCMs) were conducted and the relative importance of attributes, benefit-risk trade-offs and predicted treatment uptake was subsequently calculated.

RESULTS

Completed surveys from 2959 participants were included in the analysis. Most participants preferred treatment over no treatment and valued treatment effectiveness to reduce risk more than other attributes. A five-class LCM best fitted the data. Country, perceived risk of RA, health literacy and numeracy predicted class membership probability. Overall, the maximum acceptable risk for a 40% reduction in the chance of getting RA (60% to 20%) was 21.7%, 19.1% and 2.2% for mild side effects, serious infection and serious side effects, respectively. Predicted uptake of profiles reflecting candidate prevention therapies differed across classes.

CONCLUSION

Effective preventive pharmacological treatments for RA were acceptable to most participants. The relative importance of treatment attributes and likely uptake of fixed treatment profiles were predicted by participant characteristics.

Prevention of rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic literature review of preventive strategies in at-risk individuals

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease characterized by symmetrical peripheral polyarthritis in the hands and/or feet, leading to long-term disability if not treated effectively. RA is preceded by a preclinical phase, in which genetically predisposed individuals accumulate environmental risk factors, and during which autoimmunity develops, followed by the emergence of non-specific signs and symptoms before arthritis becomes manifest. Early treatment in at-risk individuals - i.e. before the disease is fully established - has the theoretical potential to delay or prevent disease onset, with a positive impact on both patients' life and society.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to understand the feasibility of preventive treatment in at-risk individuals, taking into account recently performed studies and ongoing clinical trials, as well as patient perspectives.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review (SLR) on Medline and Embase, searching articles published between 2010 and 2021 with the following key-words: "Rheumatoid arthritis", "arthralgia", "pre-treatment" or "prevent".

RESULTS

Our SLR identified a total of 1821 articles. Articles were independently screened by two researchers. A total of 14 articles were included after screening, and an additional 8 reports were manually included. We identified ten relevant clinical trials performed in at-risk individuals, or in individuals with undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis. Although no treatment was shown to prevent RA onset, early treatment with rituximab and abatacept delayed onset of full-blown RA, and both conventional and biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) decreased disease-related physical limitations and increased DAS28-defined remission, at least temporarily.

CONCLUSIONS

This SLR demonstrates that early treatment of at-risk individuals may be effective in delaying RA onset, thereby decreasing disease-related limitations in individuals in the pre-clinical phase of RA. Whether this may ultimately lead to prevention of RA remains to be determined.

Preferences and Insights for Participation in a Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Prevention Trial: A Mixed‐Methods Study

Objective

In rheumatoid arthritis (RA), anti–citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) can be elevated prior to inflammatory arthritis (IA). The potential to intervene in people with ACPA positivity underpins the development of prevention trials in RA. The Research Participation Influences Study examined factors influencing the decisions of individuals who are ACPA(+) to participate in a prevention trial using qualitative and quantitative methods.

Methods

Individuals with ACPA positivity without IA were provided information regarding their risk for future RA, were provided a description of a clinical prevention trial using hydroxychloroquine, and were asked if they would participate in the trial. After agreeing to or declining participation, they were surveyed on what influenced their decision using Likert scales and open‐response questions.

Results

Thirty‐nine individuals who agreed to trial participation (enrollees) and 31 individuals who declined (nonenrollees) completed surveys. Enrollees expressed greater perceived risk for RA and greater perception of benefit to themselves or others than nonenrollees. Nonenrollees expressed greater concern about medication effects and less personal or family experience with RA than enrollees. There was a higher proportion of first‐degree relatives (FDRs) of people with RA in enrollees versus nonenrollees (54% vs. 23%, P = 0.01).

Conclusion

Enrollees were more likely than nonenrollees to be FDRs, exhibit stronger concern for personal risk for RA, and have less concern about adverse effects. Further exploration is needed to determine why these differences were present, including exploration of symptoms and the role of family history. Understanding these issues will better inform researchers and individuals who are candidates for prevention.

Acceptability of predictive testing for ischemic heart disease in those with a family history and the impact of results on behavioural intention and behaviour change: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Tests to predict the development of chronic diseases in those with a family history of the disease are becoming increasingly available and can identify those who may benefit most from preventive interventions. It is important to understand the acceptability of these predictive approaches to inform the development of tools to support decision making. Whilst data are lacking for many diseases, data are available for ischemic heart disease (IHD). Therefore, this study investigates the willingness of those with a family history of IHD to take a predictive test, and the effect of the test results on risk-related behaviours.

METHOD

Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, LILACS and grey literature were searched. Primary research, including adult participants with a family history of IHD, and assessing a predictive test were included. Qualitative and quantitative outcomes measuring willingness to take a predictive test and the effect of test results on risk-related behaviours were also included. Data concerning study aims, participants, design, predictive test, intervention and findings were extracted. Study quality was assessed using the Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Research Papers from a Variety of Fields and a narrative synthesis undertaken.

RESULTS

Five quantitative and two qualitative studies were included. These were conducted in the Netherlands (n = 1), Australia (n = 1), USA (n = 1) and the UK (n = 4). Methodological quality ranged from moderate to good. Three studies found that most relatives were willing to take a predictive test, reporting family history (n = 2) and general practitioner (GP) recommendation (n = 1) as determinants of interest. Studies assessing the effect of test results on behavioural intentions (n = 2) found increased intentions to engage in physical activity and smoking cessation, but not healthy eating in those at increased risk of developing IHD. In studies examining actual behaviour change (n = 2) most participants reported engaging in at least one preventive behaviour, particularly medication adherence.

CONCLUSION

The results suggests that predictive approaches are acceptable to those with a family history of IHD and have a positive impact on health behaviours. Further studies are needed to provide a comprehensive understanding of predictive approaches in IHD and other chronic conditions.

Predictors of interest in predictive testing for rheumatoid arthritis among first degree relatives of rheumatoid arthritis patients

OBJECTIVES

There is increasing interest in prediction and prevention of RA. It is important to understand the views of those at risk to inform the development of effective approaches. First-degree relatives (FDRs) of RA patients are at increased risk of RA. This study assessed predictors of their interest in predictive testing for RA.

METHODS

Questionnaires were completed by RA patients (provided with their questionnaire by a healthcare professional) and their FDRs (provided with their questionnaire by their RA proband). FDR surveys assessed interest in taking a predictive test, demographic variables, perceived RA risk, attitudes about predictive testing, autonomy preferences, illness perceptions, avoidance coping and health anxiety. Patient surveys included demographic variables, disease impact, RA duration and treatment. Ordinal logistic regression examined the association between FDRs' characteristics and their interest in predictive testing. Generalized estimating equations assessed associations between patient characteristics and FDRs' interest in predictive testing.

RESULTS

Three hundred and ninety-six FDRs responded. Paired data from the RA proband were available for 292. The proportion of FDRs interested in predictive testing was 91.3%. Information-seeking preferences, beliefs that predictive testing can increase empowerment over health and positive attitudes about risk knowledge were associated with increased interest. Beliefs that predictive testing could cause psychological harm predicted lower interest. Patient characteristics of the proband were not associated with FDRs' interest.

CONCLUSIONS

FDRs' interest in predictive testing for RA was high, and factors associated with interest were identified. These findings will inform the development of predictive strategies and informational resources for those at risk.

Making space for patients' preferences in precision medicine: a qualitative study exploring perspectives of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Precision medicine in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) creates new opportunities to involve patients in early identification of accurate indicators of health trajectories. The aim of this study was to explore patient perspectives on patient-centredness in precision medicine for RA treatment.

DESIGN

Semistructured interviews were conducted to explore patients' perspectives on a new personalised approach to RA treatment. The interview guide was developed together with patient research partners and health care professionals.

SETTING

An invitation to the interviews was sent through a mobile application. The interviews were one-on-one, using an interview guide with open-ended questions. Interviews were conducted digitally (October 2020-February 2021) via Zoom or telephone, depending on each participant's preferences.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with RA (N=12) were purposively recruited. Patients were eligible if they had an RA diagnosis, were aged 18-80 years, and understood and expressed themselves in Swedish. Participants and researchers did not know each other prior to the interviews.

RESULTS

Participants expressed desires and needs for patients to have an active role in precision medicine by making shared treatment decisions together with a healthcare professional. In order for that to work, patients need information on potential treatment options, an ability to express their preferences, an individual treatment plan and identification of personal treatment goals. Patients also identified two requirements of healthcare professional in precision medicine: a safe environment to express personal matters and two-way communication with healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSION

Communication between patients and healthcare professionals needs to be more focused on patients' individual treatment preferences and expressed needs, in order to increase patient-centredness in treatment decisions, so shared decision-making can become a reality. More research is needed to design multifaceted implementation strategies to support patients and healthcare professionals to increase patient-centredness throughout treatment personalisation.

Public perceptions of predictive testing for rheumatoid arthritis compared to breast cancer and early-onset Alzheimer's disease: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

There is increasing research focus on prediction and prevention of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Information about risk of RA is increasingly available via direct-to-consumer testing. However, there is limited understanding of public perceptions around predictive testing for RA. This study explores public perceptions of predictive testing for RA in comparison to breast cancer (BC) and early-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD).

METHODS

Four focus groups with 21 members of the public were conducted using hypothetical vignettes about predictive testing for each disease. Transcripts of focus group proceedings were analysed inductively using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis of the data produced three key themes: decision-making factors, consequences, and consumer needs. Factors suggested that might influence decision-making about predictive testing included family history, fear, and perceived severity and treatability of the illness. RA was perceived to be less severe and more treatable than BC/AD. Potential consequences of predictive testing across all diseases included lifestyle modification, planning for the future and discrimination by employers or insurers. Predictive testing for RA was perceived to have less potential for negative psychological consequences than other diseases. Participants highlighted that individuals undertaking predictive testing should be signposted to appropriate support services and receive information on the accuracy of predictive testing. It was suggested that strategies to mitigate concerns regarding communication and confidentiality of risk results are required.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study reflect public misunderstandings regarding RA that may impact the uptake of and responses to predictive testing, and key informational needs of individuals considering a predictive test. Predictive strategies should be accompanied by awareness-raising initiatives and informational resources.

Patient Representatives' Perspectives on Healthcare at the Time of COVID-19 and Suggestions for Care Redesign After the Pandemic: A Qualitative Study in Twenty-Four Countries

Objective

Several comments and recommendations called to embed better the patients' and public voice in healthcare policymaking. Still, no studies captured patients' bottom-up perspectives regarding healthcare at the time of COVID-19 at a micro-level in a range of different countries. We, therefore, explored the perspectives of patient representatives in all six World Health Organisation (WHO) regions and extracted suggestions for care redesign after the pandemic.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with patient representatives until saturation. Thematic analysis followed a modified form of meaning condensation. We established rigour by transcript checking, inter-coder agreement, quote variation and standardised reporting.

Results

Disadvantaged people experienced an unprecedented inequity in healthcare from limited access to physical violence. The narratives revealed the extent of this inequity, but also opportunities for health workers to act and improve. Stigmatisation from COVID-19 differed between cultures and countries and ranged from none to feeling "ashamed" and "totally bashed". While experienced as indispensable in the future, patients refused telehealth when they were given "bad news", such as having an eye removed because of melanoma, and in end-of-life care. Patient representatives redefined their role and became indispensable influencers throughout the pandemic and beyond.

Conclusion

We reached out to patient representatives with diverse perspectives, including those who represent minorities and marginalised patient populations. Since preferences and personal meanings drive behaviour and could be foundations for targeted interventions, they must be considered in all groups of people to increase society's resilience as a whole. Future healthcare should tackle inequity, address stigmatisation and consider patients' narratives to optimize telemedicine.

Ultrasound-guided lymph node biopsy sampling to study the immunopathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis: a well-tolerated valuable research tool

Background

Analyses of lymphoid organs are required to further elucidate the pathogenesis of inflammatory diseases like rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Yet, invasive tissue collection methods are scarcely applied, because they are often considered burdensome, although patients do not always consider invasive methods as a high burden. We aimed to investigate the perspectives of study participants undergoing ultrasound-guided inguinal lymph node (LN) needle biopsy sampling and determine the molecular and cellular quantity and quality of LN biopsies.

Methods

Together with patient research partners, questionnaires were developed to evaluate the motives, expectations, and experiences of participants undergoing a LN biopsy. Healthy controls and RA(-risk) patients were asked to complete these questionnaires before and after the procedure. RNA and lymphocyte yields from obtained LN biopsies were also calculated.

Results

We included 50 individuals, of which 43 (86%) reported their pre- and post-procedure experiences. The median reported pain on a 5-point Likert scale (1 not to 5 very painful) was 1. Interestingly, almost all (n = 32; 74%) study participants would undergo a second procedure and more than half (n = 23; 54%) would encourage others to take part in the LN biopsy study. Motives for current and future participation were mostly altruistic. Inguinal hematoma occurred frequently, but no other significant or unexpected complications ensued. The LN biopsies yielded sufficient and high-quality RNA and lymphocyte numbers.

Conclusions

Ultrasound-guided inguinal LN biopsy sampling is well-tolerated, safe, and provides sufficient material for further molecular and cellular analyses. Our participants’ positive experiences endorse the application of this research tool to further elucidate the pathogenesis of RA and other inflammatory diseases.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13075-022-02728-7.

Perspectives of at-Risk Individuals on Preventive Intervention for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Mini Review

There has been intense research focus on the biological mechanisms underlying the transition from health to disease for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over recent years, and it is now well established that a state of autoimmunity precedes the development of symptoms for a large proportion of patients. This has led to an increased interest in the identification of at-risk groups and the potential for preventive intervention. The ability of several immunomodulatory agents to delay or prevent RA is under investigation and novel cellular therapies are in development. Preventive approaches are also being assessed in other chronic autoimmune diseases. For example, an anti-CD3 antibody has recently been shown to delay progression to type 1 diabetes in non-diabetic relatives of patients identified as being at high risk. The identification and treatment of individuals as being at risk of a disease where there is a degree of uncertainty around the potential for benefit is socially and ethically challenging. Recently reported difficulties in recruitment to RA prevention trials have underlined the importance of understanding the perspectives of at-risk individuals to identify barriers and facilitators that need to be addressed in order for preventive strategies to be acceptable. Understanding of their preferences for benefits and risks of preventive interventions can inform efficient intervention prioritization, prevention trial design and the development of informational resources for those at risk. In this review we summarize current knowledge of preferences for RA prevention and make recommendations for further research needed to ensure efficient development of preventive therapies and clinical implementation.

The lockdown and its consequences-Perspectives and needs of people at increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19 : Results from a qualitative longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of knowledge on how people at increased risk of severe illness from Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experienced the infection control measures. This study aimed to explore their perspectives and needs during the coronavirus outbreak.

METHODS

A qualitative longitudinal interview study was conducted in Austria during lockdown due to COVID-19 containment and afterwards. People older than 65 years of age and/or affected by a chronic medical condition participated in individual telephone interviews at two time points. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data and saturation was defined as no new emerging concepts in at least 10 subsequent interviews.

RESULTS

Thematic saturation was reached when 33 individuals (75.8% female, mean age ± standard deviation [SD] 73.7±10.9 years) were included. A total of 44 lower level concepts were extracted and summarized into 6 higher level concepts. They included (i) a general positive attitude toward COVID-19 measures, (ii) challenges of being isolated from the community, (iii) deterioration of health status, (iv) difficulties with measures due to their health condition, (v) lack of physical contact and (vi) lack of information versus overload. Participants suggested environmental adaptations for strengthening resilience in people at increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Strategies and interventions are needed to support people at risk under pandemic conditions. Their perceptions and needs should be addressed to reduce the potential deterioration of health conditions and ensure well-being even during prolonged periods of crisis.

Perceptions and experiences of individuals at-risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) knowing about their risk of developing RA and being offered preventive treatment: systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies

Objectives

There is increasing interest in identifying individuals at-risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and initiating early treatment to prevent or delay the onset of arthritis. We aimed to describe the perceptions and experiences of at-risk individuals and to inform the conduct of clinical trials and studies, and clinical practice.

Methods

A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies was conducted. Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion, appraised their methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist and assessed confidence in the findings using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation–Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research approach.

Results

Seven studies involving 115 individuals at-risk of developing RA were included. Three major themes (seven subthemes) were identified: understanding the risk of developing RA (knowledge of RA and identification of potential risk factors); preventive interventions to reduce the risk of developing RA (understanding the value and role of preventive interventions, and engagement with preventive interventions); and perceptions of predictive testing for RA (benefits of predictive testing, decision to undertake predictive testing and concerns about predictive testing). Moderate confidence in most review findings was evident.

Conclusion

While there are clear benefits in informing individuals at-risk of RA about their risk following predictive testing and offering preventive treatment, there are potential barriers to engagement, intensified by the burden of uncertainty. Identification of the optimum approaches for presenting risk information, including the risks and benefits of engaging with preventive interventions, is urgently needed to support individuals at-risk of RA in their decision making.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42021236034.

Should We Be Screening for and Treating Periodontal Disease in Individuals Who Are at Risk of Rheumatoid Arthritis?

There is increasing evidence supporting an association between periodontal disease (PD) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), both mechanistically and clinically. Trials have shown that treating PD in people with RA may improve RA disease activity. Patients with musculoskeletal symptoms without arthritis, who test positive for cyclic-citrullinated protein antibodies, are at risk of RA (CCP+ at-risk), with seropositivity preceding arthritis onset by months or years. Importantly, there is evidence to suggest that periodontal inflammation may precede joint inflammation in CCP+ at-risk and, therefore, this could be a trigger for RA. There has been increased research interest in RA prevention and the phenotyping of the pre-RA disease phase. This review will examine the merits of identifying individuals who are CCP+ at-risk and performing screening for PD. In addition, we discuss how PD should be treated once identified. Finally, the review will consider future research needed to advance our understanding of this disease association.

EULAR points to consider for conducting clinical trials and observational studies in individuals at risk of rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Despite growing interest, there is no guidance or consensus on how to conduct clinical trials and observational studies in populations at risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

An European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) task force formulated four research questions to be addressed by systematic literature review (SLR). The SLR results informed consensus statements. One overarching principle, 10 points to consider (PTC) and a research agenda were proposed. Task force members rated their level of agreement (1-10) for each PTC.

RESULTS

Epidemiological and demographic characteristics should be measured in all clinical trials and studies in at-risk individuals. Different at-risk populations, identified according to clinical presentation, were defined: asymptomatic, musculoskeletal symptoms without arthritis and early clinical arthritis. Study end-points should include the development of subclinical inflammation on imaging, clinical arthritis, RA and subsequent achievement of arthritis remission. Risk factors should be assessed at baseline and re-evaluated where appropriate; they include genetic markers and autoantibody profiling and additionally clinical symptoms and subclinical inflammation on imaging in those with symptoms and/or clinical arthritis. Trials should address the effect of the intervention on risk factors, as well as progression to clinical arthritis or RA. In patients with early clinical arthritis, pharmacological intervention has the potential to prevent RA development. Participants' knowledge of their RA risk may inform their decision to participate; information should be provided using an individually tailored approach.

CONCLUSION

These consensus statements provide data-driven guidance for rheumatologists, health professionals and investigators conducting clinical trials and observational studies in individuals at risk of RA.

Challenges and Opportunities of Targeted Behavioral Interventions for Groups at Risk for Developing Rheumatoid Arthritis

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a serious autoimmune disease which causes painful, swollen joints and can impact quality of life and increase morbidity and mortality. There are several preclinical stages of RA that correspond to at-risk groups that include: genetic risk, risk from behaviors, elevation of RA-related autoantibodies, and early clinical disease manifestations such as undifferentiated arthritis. Early interventions are crucial to slowing progression to and potentially preventing RA onset. Modification of behaviors among at-risk individuals may decrease RA risk. There are several challenges and opportunities in implementing preventative behavioral interventions, which may vary within different at-risk groups. Methods: We performed a narrative review of the literature, including meta-analyses focused on RA risk-related behaviors as well as publications investigating the potential efficacy of behavioral modifications on RA risk. Results: There are multiple behavioral risk factors associated with RA, including smoking, obesity, low physical activity, low quality diet, and poor dental hygiene, which may contribute to progression to clinical RA. Meta-analyses have been performed for smoking, excess body weight, and physical activity. Likelihood of adopting behavioral modifications may increase as RA risk increases. Conclusions: Clinicians may be able to tailor preventative approaches to various RA at-risk groups to help reduce RA risk, but further research is needed. A better understanding of the relationship of behaviors with RA risk and optimized approaches to implementing behavioral changes may allow for clinicians to tailor their preventative approaches for at-risk individuals.

The autoimmune response as a potential target for tolerance induction before the development of rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects the synovial joints. Although treatment options and efficacy have increased substantially in the past two decades, the disease cannot be cured or prevented. Therefore, rheumatoid arthritis still has a considerable effect on the quality of life of patients, not only because life-long medication is often required, but also because residual disease activity leads to progressive loss of function in the musculoskeletal system and extra-articular morbidity. Key future goals in the management of rheumatoid arthritis are the ability to induce long-lasting drug-free remission in patients with the disease (ie, to achieve a cure), and to prevent disease before it emerges. To reach these goals, it is pivotal to understand the autoimmune response underlying rheumatoid arthritis pathogenesis and to develop ways to permanently silence it (ie, to induce tolerance). For preventive studies, the identification of markers (clinical, immunological, and biological) predictive of future disease is crucial, as prevention of disease will not be feasible without the ability to identify relevant at-risk target populations. In this Series paper, we review the autoimmune response underlying rheumatoid arthritis, how rheumatoid arthritis-specific autoimmunity develops and evolves during the transition from health to disease, and how tolerance studies could be designed to achieve prevention or cure of the disease.

How to enhance recruitment of individuals at risk of rheumatoid arthritis into trials aimed at prevention: understanding the barriers and facilitators

OBJECTIVES

Several trials to test the efficacy of a pharmacological intervention aimed at primary prevention of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are ongoing or have recently been completed. A common issue in these trials is the severe difficulty with patient recruitment. In order to enhance recruitment, this qualitative study identified barriers and facilitators of individuals at risk of RA to participate in a prevention trial.

METHODS

Individuals at risk of developing RA (ie, arthralgia with anticitrullinated protein antibodies and/or rheumatoid factor without arthritis), who had previously been asked to participate in a prevention trial, participated in focus group discussions (n=18) exploring their facilitators and barriers for trial participation. Thematic analysis identified factors that were important in at-risk individuals' decision about trial participation.

RESULTS

The prospect of personal benefit, the acknowledgement of one's symptoms and the desire to contribute to society facilitated trial participation. In contrast, misconception about what it means to be at risk, or about the aim of the prevention trial, negative views on trial medication, and a low perceived urgency to act on the possibility of developing RA versus a high perceived burden of participating in a trial discouraged participation.

CONCLUSIONS

To enhance inclusion in trials aimed to prevent RA, the results suggest to use strategies such as optimising education about RA, personal risk, trial aim and trial medication, explicitly addressing misconceptions and concerns, using tools to improve information provision, limiting study burden in trial design and encouraging physicians to mention trial participation.

Patients' and rheumatologists' perceptions on preventive intervention in rheumatoid arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis

BACKGROUND

Individuals at risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may benefit from lifestyle or pharmacological interventions aimed at primary prevention. The same may apply to individuals at risk of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Our aim was to investigate and compare the willingness of individuals at risk of RA or axSpA and rheumatologists to initiate preventive intervention.

METHODS

Individuals at risk of RA (arthralgia and anti-citrullinated protein antibodies and/or rheumatoid factor positivity without arthritis (RA-risk cohort; n = 100)), axSpA (first-degree relatives of HLA-B27-positive axSpA patients (SpA-risk cohort; n = 38)), and Dutch rheumatologists (n = 49) completed a survey on preventive intervention which included questions about disease perception, lifestyle intervention, and preventive medication.

RESULTS

At-risk individuals reported willingness to change median 7 of 13 lifestyle components in the areas of smoking, diet, and exercise. In contrast, 35% of rheumatologists gave lifestyle advice to ≥ 50% of at-risk patients. The willingness to use 100% effective preventive medication without side effects was 53% (RA-risk), 55% (SpA-risk), and 74% (rheumatologists) at 30% disease risk which increased to 69% (RA-risk) and 92% (SpA-risk and rheumatologists) at 70% risk. With minor side effects, willingness was 26%, 29%, and 31% (at 30% risk) versus 40%, 66%, and 76% (at 70% risk), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk perception and willingness to start preventive intervention were largely similar between individuals at risk of RA and axSpA. Although the willingness to change lifestyle is high among at-risk individuals, most rheumatologists do not advise them to change their lifestyle. In contrast, rheumatologists are more willing than at-risk patients to start preventive medication.

Precision medicine in the care of rheumatoid arthritis: Focus on prediction and prevention of future clinically-apparent disease

There is an emerging understanding that an individual's risk for future rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be determined using a combination of factors while they are still in a state where clinically-apparent inflammatory arthritis (IA) is not yet present. Indeed, this concept has underpinned several completed and ongoing prevention trials in RA. Importantly, risk factors can be divided into modifiable (e.g. smoking, exercise, dental care and diet) and non-modifiable factors (e.g. genetics, sex, age). In addition, there are now several biomarkers including autoantibodies, inflammatory markers and imaging techniques that are highly predictive of future clinically-apparent IA/RA. Although none of the prevention studies have yet provided major breakthroughs, several of them have provided valuable insights that can help to improve the design of future clinical trials and enable RA prevention. In aggregate, these findings suggest that the most accurate disease prediction models will require the combination of demographic and clinical information, biomarkers and potentially medical imaging data to identify individuals for intervention. This review summarizes some of the key aspects around precision medicine in RA with special focus on disease prediction and prevention.

Development and formative evaluation of patient research partner involvement in a multi-disciplinary European translational research project

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

Patient and public involvement (PPI) improves the quality of health research and ensures that research is relevant to patients' needs. Though PPI is increasingly evident in clinical and health services research, there are few examples in the research literature of effective PPI in translational and laboratory-based research. In this paper, we describe the development and evaluation of PPI in a multi-centre European project (EuroTEAM - Towards Early biomarkers in Arthritis Management) that included both translational and laboratory-based and psychosocial research. We found that although most PPI in EuroTEAM was centred around the psychosocial research, there were examples of PPI in the laboratory studies. As the project evolved, researchers became better at accommodating PPI and identifying PPI opportunities. It was generally agreed that PPI had a positive impact on the project overall, particularly on public engagement with the research. We concluded that the inclusion of both psychosocial and laboratory-based research in the same project facilitated PPI across all aspects of the research. In future projects, we would try to specify individual PPI activities in more detail at the project-planning stage, and better accommodate patient partners who are not native speakers of English.

ABSTRACT

Background Patient and public involvement (PPI) enhances research quality and relevance and is central to contemporary health policy. The value of PPI has been recognised in rheumatology research, though there are limited examples of PPI in basic and translational science. The EU FP7 funded 'EuroTEAM' (Towards Early biomarkers in Arthritis Management) project was established to develop biomarker-based approaches to predict the future development of rheumatoid arthritis and incorporated psychosocial research to investigate the perceptions of 'at risk' individuals about predictive testing, and to develop informational resources about rheumatoid arthritis (RA) risk. Patient involvement was central to EuroTEAM from the inception of the project. The objective of this paper is to describe the development of PPI in EuroTEAM, formatively assess the impact of PPI from the perspectives of researchers and patient research partners (PRPs), reflect on successes and lessons learned, and formulate recommendations to guide future projects.Methods Two mixed-methods surveys (for PRPs and researchers) and a teleconference were undertaken to assess the impact of PPI on individual work packages and on EuroTEAM overall.Results There was consensus about the positive impact of PPI on the research and on the experiences of those involved. In particular, the positive impact of PPI on the personal development of researchers, and on effective public engagement with EuroTEAM research were highlighted. Researchers described adapting their practice in future projects to facilitate PPI. Spin-off projects and ongoing collaborations between PRPs and researchers reflected the value of PPI to participants. PPI was more frequently integrated in psychosocial research, though examples of PPI in laboratory/translational science were also described. PRPs asked for more opportunities to contribute meaningfully to basic scientific research and for more extensive feedback on their contributions.Conclusions The findings were used to formulate recommendations to guide effective involvement of patients in future similar projects, including identifying specific training requirements for PRPs and researchers, the identification of PRP focused tasks/deliverables at the project planning stage, and supporting access to involvement for all PRPs. Importantly, the distinctive multidisciplinary approach of EuroTEAM, incorporating both basic science and psychosocial research, facilitated patient involvement in the project overall.

The earlier, the better or the worse? Towards accurate management of patients with arthralgia at risk for RA

The favourable long-term results of early treatment in patients with classified rheumatoid arthritis have resulted in an increasing interest in the diseases phases preceding clinical arthritis. The hypothesis to test is that an intervention in these early phases may better prevent or reduce disease persistence than an intervention when arthritis has become clinically manifest. While several placebo-controlled trials are still ongoing, to date there is no firm evidence that this hypothesis truly holds. Therefore, it is important to reflect on the current status of arthralgia preceding clinical arthritis. Inherent to every new field of research, attitudes are conflicting, with opinions propagating innovation (based on the fear of undertreatment) on the one hand, and critical sounds pleading for more restraint (fear of overtreatment) on the other hand. In this Viewpoint, we will examine these divergent opinions, relate them to a preferred ultimate scenario and provide considerations for future studies and daily practice.

Preferences of Patients and At-risk Individuals for Preventive Approaches to Rheumatoid Arthritis

Effective treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are available and can lead to remission for some patients, but most patients remain on potentially toxic and expensive medications in the long term. Interest is increasingly turning to the disease phases preceding the development of RA that represent opportunities for preventive interventions. At-risk target populations include individuals with genetic and environmental risk factors, those who have developed systemic autoimmunity, and those who have developed clinically suspect symptoms (eg, arthralgias without synovitis, or an early arthritis). Ongoing prospective studies will inform the development of increasingly accurate predictive tools to identify individuals at risk of developing RA. Furthermore, a range of preventive approaches has been suggested, including lifestyle modification (eg, smoking cessation) and pharmacologic interventions (eg, hydroxychloroquine, methotrexate, abatacept, rituximab) that are currently the subject of randomized controlled trials. As prediction and prevention of RA evolve, it is increasingly likely that individuals at risk (including asymptomatic individuals) may be faced with complex decisions about whether to accept assessment of their risk status or to take a preventive intervention associated with risk of serious adverse events and uncertain benefit. Acceptance of preventive medication in other contexts can be low. For example, <25% of women at high risk of breast cancer are willing to take preventive hormonal treatments. Actual uptake is lower still. Patients' beliefs and preferences predict treatment uptake and adherence. Before the dream of preventing RA can become reality, health care providers need to understand the perspectives of individuals in the target population and to identify barriers and facilitators for this approach. This commentary reviews what is currently known about the perspectives of patients and individuals at risk about predictive and preventive approaches for RA and identifies gaps to be addressed to inform the development of efficient preventive strategies.