Screening and referral for axial spondyloarthritis—need of the hour

Comparison of Clinical Manifestations in Rheumatoid Arthritis vs. Spondyloarthritis: A Systematic Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Misclassification of spondyloarthritis (SpA) as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may lead to delayed SpA diagnosis and suboptimal therapeutic outcomes. Here, we evaluate the literature on clinical manifestations in patients with SpA and RA, particularly seronegative RA, to understand the potential overlap, distinctions, and most reliable approaches to accurate diagnosis.

METHODS

In this systematic literature review, conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, we searched key biomedical databases for English-language publications of original research articles (up to July 23, 2020) and rheumatology conference abstracts (January 1, 2018-July 31, 2020) reporting key SpA clinical presentations in patients with SpA or RA. Publications were assessed for eligibility by two independent reviewers; discrepancies were resolved by a third. Studies were evaluated for publication quality using the Downs and Black checklist.

RESULTS

Of 4712 records retrieved, 79 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Of these, 54 included study populations with SpA and RA, and 25 with seropositive and/or seronegative RA. Entheseal abnormalities were more frequently reported among patients with SpA than RA and with seronegative vs. seropositive RA. Psoriasis, nail psoriasis, and dactylitis were exclusively seen in SpA vs. RA. In most publications (70 of 79), advanced imaging techniques allowed for more accurate distinction between SpA and RA. Overlapping clinical characteristics occur in SpA and RA, including inflammation and destruction of joints, pain, diminished functional ability, and increased risk for comorbidities. However, of 54 studies comparing SpA and RA populations, only seven concluded that no distinction can be made based on the SpA manifestations and outcomes examined.

CONCLUSIONS

Typical SpA-related clinical symptoms and signs were observed in patients with RA, suggesting that misclassification could occur. Availability of advanced imaging modalities may allow for more prompt and comprehensive evaluation of peripheral manifestations in SpA and RA, reducing misclassification and delayed diagnosis.

Axial Spondyloarthritis in the Chiropractic Care Setting: A Systematic Literature Review

ABSTRACT

Diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), an immune-mediated inflammatory disease, is commonly associated with chronic inflammatory back pain (IBP) and often occurs years after initial onset of clinical symptoms. Recognition of IBP is important for timely referral of patients with suspected axSpA to a rheumatologist. Patients with all types of back pain are treated in chiropractic care, but the proportion of patients with undiagnosed axSpA is unknown. This systematic literature review investigated the presence of axSpA in patients treated by chiropractors and identified the chiropractor's role in axSpA diagnosis, referral, and management. A PubMed search was conducted using the following search strings: "chiropract*" AND ("sacroiliac" OR "back pain" OR "spondyloarthritis" OR "ankylosing spondylitis"); English language, since 2009; and (chiropractic OR chiropractor) AND (ankylosing spondylitis OR axial spondyloarthritis), with no date limits. Of 652 articles identified in the searches, 27 met the inclusion criteria. Although back pain was identified as a common reason for patients seeking chiropractic care, there was no mention of axSpA, ankylosing spondylitis, or the distinction between mechanical and IBP. Data from relevant articles suggested that the majority of patients seeking chiropractic care have lower back pain, whereas no articles reported axSpA in this patient population. The near absence of any identified articles on axSpA in chiropractic care may be due to underrecognition of axSpA, resulting in delayed rheumatology referral and appropriate management. Better awareness and increased use of validated screening tools could reduce diagnostic delay of axSpA in chiropractic care.

Early identification of axial spondyloarthritis in a multi-ethnic Asian population

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

To address the diagnostic delay in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), we have cross-culturally adapted the Hamilton axSpA questionnaire, a self-administered screening questionnaire, in the Singapore population. In this study, we compared the performance of various scoring methods for this questionnaire in detecting axSpA.

METHOD

The questionnaire was self-administered by eligible subjects. Scoring methods included method A, the original questionnaire scoring, and methods B-E, scoring developed based on the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) criteria for inflammatory back pain (IBP) and the referral, classification and both referral and classification of axSpA, respectively. The reference standard was diagnosis by a rheumatologist. Since the ASAS criteria-based scoring methods were mainly based on clinical axSpA features, self-report and rheumatologist-assessment of clinical axSpA features were also compared in subjects with axSpA.

RESULTS

Of 1418 subjects (age: 54 ± 14 years, female: 73%) recruited, 46 were diagnosed with axSpA by a rheumatologist. Sensitivities of methods A-E were 35%, 61%, 63%, 48% and 83%, respectively. Self-report of clinical axSpA features exceeded rheumatologist-assessment for arthritis (83 vs 26%), good response to NSAIDs (37 vs 30%), enthesitis (35 vs 30%), dactylitis (20 vs 2%) and family history for axSpA (13 vs 4%). The reverse was true for IBP (41 vs 63%) and uveitis (4 vs 15%).

CONCLUSIONS

A self-administered questionnaire using the ASAS referral and classification criteria-based scoring yielded relatively high sensitivity in detecting axSpA in subjects newly referred to rheumatology clinics. This supports its evaluation as a screening and referral tool in the general population in future studies. Key Points • A self-administered questionnaire could be used as a screening and referral tool. • ASAS referral and classification criteria-based scoring yielded relatively high sensitivity. • Inaccurate perception of clinical axSpA features was observed in axSpA patients.

Physiotherapists' awareness, knowledge and confidence in screening and referral of suspected axial spondyloarthritis: A survey of UK clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is an inflammatory disease associated with significant diagnostic delays and is commonly missed in assessments of persistent back pain.

OBJECTIVE

To explore musculoskeletal physiotherapists' awareness, knowledge and confidence in screening for signs, symptoms and risk factors of suspected axSpA and criteria for rheumatology referral.

DESIGN

An online UK survey was undertaken combining back pain vignettes (reflecting axSpA, non-specific back pain and radicular syndrome) and questioning on features of suspected axSpA. Recruitment utilised online professional forums and social media. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and conceptual content analysis for free text responses.

RESULTS

132 survey responses were analysed. Only 67% (88/132) of respondents identified inflammatory pathologies as a possible cause of persistent back pain. Only 60% (79/132) recognised the axSpA vignette compared to non-specific low back pain (94%) and radicular syndrome (80%). Most suspecting axSpA would refer for specialist assessment (77/79; 92%). Awareness of national referral guidance was evident in only 50% of 'clinical reasoning' and 20% of 'further subjective screening' responses. There was misplaced confidence in recognising clinical features of axSpA (≥7/10) compared to knowledge levels shown, including high importance given to inflammatory markers and human leucocyte antigen B27 (median = 8/10).

CONCLUSIONS

Musculoskeletal physiotherapists may not be giving adequate consideration to axSpA in back pain assessments. Awareness of national referral guidance was also limited. Professional education on screening and referral for suspected axSpA is needed to make axSpA screening and referral criteria core knowledge in musculoskeletal clinical practice, supporting earlier diagnosis and better outcomes.

A single center experience: physician related diagnostic delay and demographic and clinical differences between patients with ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis

Background. A large number of comparative studies have been conducted for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA), including disease burden, treatment modalities and patient characteristics. The aim of this study was to compare physician related diagnostic delay time between patients with AS and nr-axSpA. Methods. In our retrospective study we included 266 patients with axSpA. Patients were classified into two subgroups, AS and nr-axSpA. The time from back pain onset until diagnosis of axSpA was defined as the diagnostic delay. The first specialist referred to and the first diagnosis for each patient was noted in detail. Patient characteristics, clinical manifestations and laboratory and imaging results at diagnosis were also compared between subgroups. Results. The diagnostic delay time was significantly longer for AS patients [6 ± 8.14 years vs 1.62 ± 2.54 years]. 40.9% of all patients were initially consulted by specialists in physical therapy and rehabilitation, followed by 29.7% consulted by a neurosurgeon and 19.9% by a rheumatologist. The most common initial diagnosis was fibromyalgia, 52.6% (140), followed by ankylosing spondylitis, 28.9% (77), and lumbar disc hernia, 12.7% (34). Conclusion. The vast majority of patients were initially evaluated by healthcare providers other than rheumatologists and mostly diagnosed with fibromyalgia. Efforts to increase awareness and to educate first healthcare providers may shorten the diagnostic delay time.

Interval between symptom onset and diagnosis among patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases in a multi-ethnic Asian population

AIM

The interval between symptom onset and diagnosis (pre-diagnosis interval) can at times be longer than is ideal in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs). In this study, we aimed to characterize this interval and to identify its associated factors.

METHOD

We characterized pre-diagnosis interval into 4 intervals: Interval #1 between symptom onset and first visit to healthcare professionals; Interval #2 between first visit to healthcare professionals and rheumatology referral; Interval #3 between rheumatology referral and first rheumatology assessment; and Interval #4 between first rheumatology assessment and diagnosis. Median regression models were used to identify factors associated with longer pre-diagnosis interval and Interval #1.

RESULTS

Among 259 patients (median age = 52.0 [41.6-61.9] years, 71% female, rheumatoid arthritis [n = 75], axial spondyloarthritis [axSpA] [n = 40] and psoriatic arthritis [n = 35]), median pre-diagnosis interval was 11.5 (4.7-36.0) months. Interval #1 (median = 4.9 months) was significantly longer than Intervals #2-#4 (median = 0.3, 1.5, and 0.0 months, respectively). Patients with axSpA had significantly longer pre-diagnosis interval (median = 38.7 months) and Interval #1 (median = 26.6 months) than patients with the other ARDs. Median regression suggested that patients referred from specialty care had significantly longer pre-diagnosis interval (median difference = 7.7 months) and Interval #1 (median difference = 6.4 months) compared to those referred from primary care.

CONCLUSION

A long pre-diagnosis interval was observed among patients with ARDs (especially axSpA), due largely to a long interval between symptom onset and the first visit to healthcare professionals. This highlights the importance of interventions targeting patients prior to their first visit to healthcare professionals in reducing pre-diagnosis interval.

Primary care physician perspectives on screening for axial spondyloarthritis: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Many patients with axial spondylarthritis (axSpA) experience lengthy diagnostic delays upwards of 14 years. (5-14 years). Screening tools for axSpA have been proposed for use in primary care settings, but whether this approach could be implemented into busy primary care settings remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To solicit feedback from primary care physicians regarding questions from the Inflammatory Back Pain Assessment: the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS) Expert Criteria and gain insight about barriers and facilitators for implementing axSpA screening in primary care.

METHODS

Guided by Consolidated Criteria for reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ-criteria), we recorded, transcribed, and analyzed in-depth interviews with eight family medicine physicians and ten internists (purposeful sampling) using immersion/crystallization techniques.

RESULTS

Few physicians reported awareness of existing classification criteria for axSpA, and many reported a lack of confidence in their ability to distinguish between inflammatory and mechanical back pain. From three domains, 10 subthemes emerged: 1) typical work-up of axSpA patients in primary care, with subthemes including the clues involved in work-up and role of clinical examinations for axSpA; 2) feedback on questions from the Inflammatory Back Pain Assessment: ASAS Expert Criteria, with subthemes to evaluate contents/questions of a potential screening tool for axSpA; and 3) implementation of the screening tool in primary care settings, with subthemes of perceived barriers including awareness, time, other conditions to screen, rare disease, and lack of structured questionnaire for back pain and perceived facilitators including workflow issues and awareness.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary care physicians believed that an improved screening instrument and a strong evidence-base to support the need for screening for axSpA are required. The implementation of axSpA screening into a busy primary care practice requires integration into the practice workflow, with use of technology suggested as a possible way to improve efficiency.

Harnessing the power of social media: how can it help in axial spondyloarthritis research?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is a chronic inflammatory rheumatic disease that is relatively unknown among the general public. Most patients with axSpA are young or middle-aged adults and more likely to use some social media. This review highlights trends in the application of social media and different ways in which these tools do already or may benefit clinical research, delivery of care, and education in rheumatology, particularly in the field of axSpA.

RECENT FINDINGS

This article discusses four areas in the biomedical field that social media has infused with novel ideas: (i) the use of patient-generated health data from social media to learn about their disease experience, (ii) delivering health education and interventions, (iii) recruiting study participants, and (iv) reform, transfer, and disseminate medical education. We conclude with promising studies in rheumatology that have incorporated social media and suggestions for future directions.

SUMMARY

Rheumatologists now have the opportunity to use social media and innovate on many aspects of their practice. We propose further exploration of multiple ways in which social media might help with the identification, diagnosis, education, and research study enrollment of axSpA patients. However, standardization in study design, reporting, and managing ethical and regulatory aspects will be required to take full advantage of this opportunity.

Use of machine learning techniques in the development and refinement of a predictive model for early diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis

OBJECTIVE

To develop a predictive mathematical model for the early identification of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) based on the medical and pharmacy claims history of patients with and without AS.

METHODS

This retrospective study used claims data from Truven databases from January 2006 to September 2015 (Segment 1) and October 2015 to February 2018 (Segment 2). Machine learning identified features differentiating patients with AS from matched controls; selected features were used as inputs in developing Model A/B to identify patients likely to have AS. Model A/B was trained and developed in Segment 1, and patients predicted to have AS in Segment 1 were followed up in Segment 2 to evaluate the predictive capability of Model A/B.

RESULTS

Of 228,471 patients in Segment 1 without any history of AS, Model A/B predicted 1923 patients to have AS. Ultimately, 1242 patients received an AS diagnosis in Segment 2; 120 of these were correctly predicted by Model A/B, yielding a positive predictive value (PPV) of 6.24%. The diagnostic accuracy of Model A/B compared favorably with that of a clinical model (PPV, 1.29%) that predicted AS based on spondyloarthritis features described in the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society classification criteria. A simplified linear regression model created to test the operability of Model A/B yielded a lower PPV (2.55%).

CONCLUSIONS

Model A/B performed better than a clinically based model in predicting a diagnosis of AS among patients in a large claims database; its use may contribute to early recognition of AS and a timely diagnosis.

Real-World Patient Experience on the Path to Diagnosis of Ankylosing Spondylitis

Introduction

We describe the journey to diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) from the patient perspective and examine differences in this journey by sex.

Methods

US adults aged ≥ 18 years with a self-reported AS diagnosis were recruited online through CreakyJoints, a patient support community, and ArthritisPower, a patient research registry. Respondents completed a web-based survey on sociodemographics, disease burden, and diagnosis history. Results were stratified by sex and time to diagnosis using two-sample t tests and χ² tests, respectively, to observe differences across the groups; P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Among 235 respondents, 174 (74.0%) were female. Mean (SD) ages of female and male respondents were 48.6 (10.6) and 53.1 (10.3) years, respectively. From the time respondents began seeking medical attention, 87 were diagnosed within ≤ 1 year, 71 in 2–9 years, and 77 after ≥ 10 years. Symptoms that led respondents to seek treatment were back pain (73.2%) and joint pain (63.8%); fatigue and difficulty sleeping were more common among respondents with longer times to diagnosis. During the diagnosis process, men with AS tended to receive quicker AS diagnosis compared with women. Overall, commonly reported initial diagnoses among respondents with longer time to AS diagnosis included back problems and psychosomatic disorders. Significantly more women reported misdiagnoses of fibromyalgia (20.7 vs. 6.6%) and psychosomatic disorders (40.8 vs. 23.0%) compared with men.

Conclusions

Diagnosis delays and misdiagnoses were common among respondents with AS. Increasing awareness about AS among referring providers may minimize diagnosis delay.

Funding

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Plain Language Summary

Plain language summary available for this article.

Electronic Supplementary Material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40744-019-0153-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Characterization of Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis Receiving Secukinumab and Reasons for Initiating Treatment: A US Physician Survey and Retrospective Medical Chart Review

Objectives

To characterize US patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) who were treated with secukinumab and to assess rheumatologist-reported reasons for prescribing treatment in clinical practice.

Methods

This descriptive analysis of data from a US retrospective medical chart review included patients aged ≥ 18 years diagnosed with AS who initiated secukinumab after 15 January 2016. Eligible rheumatologists used online forms to collect patient demographics, disease characteristics, co-morbidity profile, and treatment history prior to or on the index date, defined as the date of the first secukinumab prescription recorded in the medical chart. Information on physician-level characteristics and reasons for secukinumab prescription and dosing were also collected.

Results

Medical charts from 78 patients with AS who initiated secukinumab were reviewed by 25 rheumatologists between 7 July 2017 and 11 August 2017. Overall, 76.9% of patients were male, mean (SD) age was 39.8 (10.8) years, and 34.6% were biologic naïve. The most common reasons for secukinumab initiation among biologic-naïve and biologic-experienced patients, respectively, were efficacy/effectiveness (77.8%) and failure of other prior biologics (84.3%). Nearly all patients (94.9%) received a loading dose, including 150 mg every week (39.7%), 300 mg every week (53.8%), and other (1.3%). Overall, 73 patients (93.6%) received ≥ 1 maintenance secukinumab dose, of whom 56.2% and 43.8% received 150 mg and 300 mg, respectively, every 4 weeks.

Conclusions

In this US medical chart review of patients with AS who initiated secukinumab, approximately one-third were biologic naïve, and secukinumab efficacy/effectiveness and failure of other biologics were the most common reasons for initiating secukinumab.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40801-018-0146-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Gastrointestinal and Hepatic Disease in Spondyloarthritis

The association of inflammatory arthritis with intestinal pathology extends back more than 100 years. This association is now supported by epidemiologic studies demonstrating an elevated prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease in spondyloarthritis and vice versa, compared with the general population. Genetic and intestinal microbiome studies have further linked these diseases. Although diabetes and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease disproportionately affect individuals with psoriatic arthritis, diseases of the esophagus, stomach, pancreas, and liver are not particularly common in spondyloarthritis. Clinicians should be aware of the differential diagnosis and the appropriate diagnostic tools available when evaluating digestive and hepatic disorders in spondyloarthritis.

Fever as an initial manifestation of spondyloarthritis: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate a wide spectrum of clinical features of adult patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) whose initial manifestation was fever, using the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) classification criteria.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected the electronic medical records of hospitalized SpA patients who initially presented to the Severance Hospital (Seoul, Korea) with fever from January 2010 to May 2016. As a control group, we also recruited one-hundred consecutive patients who were diagnosed with SpA in our outpatient clinic. Clinical features and laboratory findings were compared in two patient groups.

RESULTS

There were 26 patients who had fever as initial presentation of SpA (reactive arthritis 50%, undifferentiated SpA 26.9%, ankylosing spondylitis 15.4%, enteropathic arthritis 3.8%, psoriatic arthritis 3.8%). Peripheral SpA was more common in febrile SpA patients than in control SpA patients (65.4% vs 24.0%, p<0.001). Febrile SpA patients were less frequently HLA-B27 positive than control SpA patients (52.2% vs 77.0%, p<0.05). At baseline, systemic inflammatory markers were significantly higher in the febrile SpA patients (white blood cell count, 11.57 vs 7.81 cells/μL, p<0.001; erythrocyte sedimentation rate, 69.2 vs 41.0 mm/h, p<0.001; C-reactive protein, 109.6 vs 15.3 mg/L, p<0.001). The proportion of patients treated with systemic steroids was significantly higher in febrile SpA patients (57.7% vs. 11.0%, p<0.001). The proportion of patients who visited rheumatology specialty was significantly lower in febrile SpA patients than in control SpA patients (7.7% vs 59.0%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Various subgroups of SpA can be presented with fever as an initial manifestation. Febrile SpA patients demonstrated higher systemic inflammation and a lower chance to visit rheumatology in early stage. When evaluating febrile patients with any clinical features of SpA, clinicians are advised to consider performing SpA-focused evaluation including HLA-B27 or a simple sacroiliac joint radiograph.