Early response to JAK inhibitors on central sensitization and pain catastrophizing in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis

Nociplastic pain in axial spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis: role of JAK kinases in immunopathology and therapeutic impact of JAK inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

Pain in both peripheral and axial joints is a major symptom in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Emerging evidence demonstrates pain mechanisms, beyond those related to inflammation or joint damage, based on aberrant processing of nociceptive stimuli peripherally as well as centrally. The Janus kinase/signal transducers and activators of transcription (JAK-STAT) signaling pathway has been implicated in the processing of pain beyond its role in mediating inflammation and inhibitors of this pathway approved for the treatment of axSpA and PsA have been shown to alleviate a broad array of pain outcomes in both axial and peripheral joints.

AREAS COVERED

We review recent definitions and standardization of the nomenclature for categorizing chronic pain according to causality, assessment tools to evaluate nociplastic pain, the pathophysiologic role of JAK-STAT signaling in nociplastic pain, evidence for the presence of nociplastic pain in axSpA and PsA, and the impact of JAK inhibitors (JAKi) on pain outcomes in clinical trials (PubMed: 01/01/2019-04/01-2024).

EXPERT OPINION

Nociplastic pain assessment has been confined almost entirely to the use of a limited number of questionnaires in cross-sectional studies of these diseases. Though effective for alleviating pain, it is unclear if JAKi specifically impact nociplastic pain.

Pain catastrophizing in rheumatic diseases: prevalence, origin, and implications

Pain is a crucial factor in rheumatic disorders, and reducing it is a primary goal of successful treatment. Adaptive pain-coping strategies can enhance this improvement, but maladaptive approaches such as pain catastrophizing may worsen overall patient well-being. This narrative review aims to provide a concise overview of the existing knowledge on pain catastrophizing in the most prevalent specific rheumatic disorders. The objective of this study was to improve understanding of this phenomenon and its implications, as well as to pinpoint potential directions for future research. We conducted searches in the MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS, and DOAJ bibliography databases to identify articles related to pain catastrophizing in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondylarthritis, systemic sclerosis, systemic lupus erythematosus, Sjögren's syndrome, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and osteoarthritis (non-surgical treatment). Data extraction was performed on November 1, 2023. The investigators screened the identified articles to determine their relevance and whether they met the inclusion criteria. Following a bibliography search, which was further expanded by screening of citations and references, we included 156 records in the current review. The full-text analysis centred on pain catastrophizing, encompassing its prevalence, pathogenesis, and impact. The review established the role of catastrophizing in amplifying pain and diminishing various aspects of general well-being. Also, potential treatment approaches were discussed and summarised across the examined disorders. Pain catastrophizing is as a significant factor in rheumatic disorders. Its impact warrants further exploration through prospective controlled trials to enhance global patient outcomes.

Comparative analysis of centrally mediated and inflammatory pain experiences amongst patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis: A multimethods study

BACKGROUND

The identification of pain originating from distinct biological processes may lead to individualised pain treatment. In this study, we aimed to explore the pain experiences of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), differentiating between those predominantly exhibiting features of peripheral inflammatory versus centrally mediated pain.

METHODS

Through a multimethods approach we (i) quantitatively analysed the differences in pain descriptors between patients diagnosed with RA experiencing peripheral inflammatory and centrally mediated pain, utilising the Short Form-McGill Pain Questionnaire which includes the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and (ii) qualitatively explored their subjective pain experiences grounded in the biopsychosocial model, commonly applied in chronic pain.

RESULTS

Participants with centrally mediated pain reported higher pain scores on the VAS, used a wider range of pain descriptors, and a higher proportion selected each descriptor compared to those with inflammatory pain (p < .001). The qualitative analysis revealed the centrally mediated pain group's experiences were overwhelming and relentless, struggling to precisely articulate the nature of their pain. In contrast, individuals with inflammatory pain expressed their pain in more tangible terms and shared their adaptive and coping strategies. Importantly, both groups revealed the substantial psychological, functional and social impacts of their pain, highlighting the often 'invisible' and misunderstood nature of their symptoms.

CONCLUSION

This study has gained a deeper insight into the pain experiences of patients living with RA, particularly in differentiating between centrally mediated and inflammatory types of pain, potentially facilitating a more individualised approach to pain treatment.

PATIENT CONTRIBUTION

Patients actively participated in the study conception and design. This engagement includes collaboration with key stakeholders, such as members of the National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society and Patient Research Partners (PRPs), who provided continuous feedback and guidance throughout the research process. Specifically, the qualitative element was coproduced with two PRPs, who were involved in co-leading the focus groups and data analysis.

Predictors for severe persisting pain in rheumatoid arthritis are associated with pain origin and appraisal of pain

OBJECTIVES

To determine the proportion of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with severe persisting pain and to identify predictive factors despite treatment-controlled disease activity.

METHODS

This prospective multicentre study included outpatients with RA scheduled for escalation of anti-inflammatory treatment due to active disease and severe pain (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)>3.2 and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)>50). At week 24, patients were stratified into reference group (DAS28 improvement>1.2 or DAS28≤3.2 and VAS pain score<50), non-responders (DAS28 improvement≤1.2 and DAS28>3.2, regardless of VAS pain score) and persisting pain group (DAS28 improvement>1.2 or DAS28≤3.2 and VAS pain score≥50). The former two subgroups ended the study at week 24. The latter continued until week 48. Demographic data, DAS28-C reactive protein, VAS for pain, painDETECT Questionnaire (PD-Q) to identify neuropathic pain (NeP) and the Pain Catastrophising Scale were assessed and tested for relation to persisting pain.

RESULTS

Of 567 patients, 337 (59.4%) were classified as reference group, 102 (18.0%) as non-responders and 128 (22.6%) as patients with persisting pain. 21 (8.8%) responders, 28 (35.0%) non-responders and 27 (26.5%) persisting pain patients tested positive for NeP at week 24. Pain catastrophising (p=0.002) and number of tender joints (p=0.004) were positively associated with persisting pain at week 24. Baseline PD-Q was not related to subsequent persisting pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Persisting and non-nociceptive pain occur frequently in RA. Besides the potential involvement of NeP, pain catastrophising and a higher number of tender joints coincide with persisting pain.

Assessing the effects of distinct biologic therapies on rheumatoid arthritis pain by nociceptive, neuropathic and nociplastic pain components: a randomised feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Pain management is a major unmet need in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Although many patients are treated with disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDS), including biologic therapies, many people with RA continue to experience significant pain. We aimed to determine whether performing a comprehensive pain evaluation is feasible in people with active RA receiving conventional DMARDs and biologic therapies.

METHODS

The BIORA-PAIN feasibility study was an open-label, randomised trial, which recruited participants suitable for treatment with biologic therapy. The primary feasibility outcomes were recruitment, randomisation and retention of eligible participants. All participants underwent pain assessment for nociceptive, neuropathic and nociplastic pain during the 12-month study period, with quarterly assessments for VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) pain, painDETECT and QST (quantitative sensory testing). This trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov NCT04255134.

RESULTS

During the study period, 93 participants were screened of whom 25 were eligible: 13 were randomised to adalimumab and 12 to abatacept. Participant recruitment was lower than expected due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Pain assessments were practical in the clinical trial setting. An improvement was observed for VAS pain from baseline over 12 months, with a mean (SEM) of 3.7 (0.82) in the abatacept group and 2.3 (1.1) in the adalimumab group. There was a reduction in painDETECT and improvement in QST measures in both treatment groups during the study. Participant feedback included that some of the questionnaire-based pain assessments were lengthy and overlapped in their content. Adverse events were similar in both groups. There was one death due to COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

This first-ever feasibility study of a randomised controlled trial assessing distinct modalities of pain in RA met its progression criteria. This study demonstrates that it is feasible to recruit and assess participants with active RA for specific modalities of pain, including nociceptive, neuropathic and nociplastic elements. Our data suggests that it is possible to stratify people for RA based on pain features. The differences in pain outcomes between abatacept and adalimumab treated groups warrant further investigation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04255134, Registered on Feb 5, 2020.

Impact of central sensitization on clinical parameters in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the effects of central sensitization (CS) on pain sensitivity, disease activity, neuropathic symptoms and quality of life (QoL) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Sixty patients diagnosed with RA according to the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) 2010 classification criteria were included in the study. Patient assessment tools included visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, algometer for pain pressure threshold (PPT), disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS-28) for disease activity (DA), central sensitization inventory (CSI) for CS and rheumatoid arthritis QoL questionnaire for QoL.

RESULTS

Central sensitization was identified in 29 (48.3%) patients. Although erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein and swollen joint count were comparable between patients with or without CS, higher VAS, tender joint count and DAS-28 scores were observed in patients with CS (all p<0.05). Pain pressure thresholds (PPT) at the wrist (PPTW) and the trapezius muscle (PPTT) were lower in patients with CS (p=0.004, p=0.001, respectively). It was found that neuropathic pain components increased and quality of life decreased as CSI scores increased (all p=0.000).

CONCLUSION

The presence of CS leads to pain sensitivity as well as overestimation of disease activity in RA patients. The presence of CS should not be overlooked in RA patients to avoid overtreatment for inflammation and to determine the treatment need for nociplastic pain.

The steroid-sparing effect of JAK inhibitors across multiple patient populations

Introduction

JAK-inhibitors (JAK-i) represent an effective treatment in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA). Oral glucocorticoids (OGC) are commonly used in combination with JAK-i to reach therapeutic target. We aimed to assess, in a real-life setting, the reduction of OGC dose during JAK-i treatment in active RA and PsA patients.

Methods

We prospectively enrolled 103 patients (88 RA, 15 PsA) treated with JAK-i: 24% bio-naïve (b-naïve), 76% bDMARD-insufficient responders (bDMARD-IR) and 40% difficult to treat (D2T), defined as failure of ≥2 bDMARDs with different mechanism of action. Disease activity (DAS28 and DAPSA, VAS-pain, GH) and OGC dose was collected at baseline and after 3, 6 and 12 months (T3, T6, T12) of treatment.

Results

In all the cohort and in b-naïve patients we reported a reduction of OGC dose at all time-points; bDMARD-IR patients were able to reduce OGC dose at T3 and T12; D2T ones only at T3. We reported an improvement of disease activity and withdrawal of OGC as early as three months of therapy, at all time-points, regardless of line of bDMARD treatment.

Conclusion

Chronic OGC may cause detrimental bone, metabolic, cardiovascular side effects and infections; therefore JAK-i steroid-sparing effect may be beneficial for patients in long-term treatment.

Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Use and Its Effect on Long-term Opioid Use in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

The prevalence of chronic pain is high in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), increasing the risk for opioid use. The objective of this study was to assess disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) use and its effect on long-term opioid use in patients with RA.

METHODS

This cohort study included Medicare beneficiaries with diagnosis of RA who received at least 30-day consecutive prescription of opioids in 2017 (n = 23,608). The patients were grouped into non-DMARD and DMARD users, who were further subdivided into regimens set forth by the American College of Rheumatology. The outcome measured was long-term opioid use in 2018 defined as at least 90-day consecutive prescription of opioids. Dose and duration of opioid use were also assessed. A multivariable model identifying factors associated with non-DMARD use was also performed.

RESULTS

Compared with non-DMARD users, the odds of long-term opioid use were significantly lower among DMARD users (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.95). All regimens except non-tumor necrosis factor biologic + methotrexate were associated with lower odds of long-term opioid use relative to non-DMARD users. The mean total morphine milligram equivalent, morphine milligram equivalent per day, and total days of opioid use were lower among DMARD users compared with non-DMARD users. Older age, male sex, Black race, psychiatric and medical comorbidities, and not being seen by a rheumatologist were significantly associated with non-DMARD use.

CONCLUSION

Disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use was associated with lower odds of long-term opioid use among RA patients with baseline opioid prescription. Factors associated with non-DMARD use represent a window of opportunity for intervention to improve pain-related quality of life in patients living with RA.

Effect of biological DMARDs and JAK inhibitors in pain of chronic inflammatory arthritis

INTRODUCTION

The advent of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and, more recently, of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) has had a major impact on the long-term outcomes of chronic inflammatory arthritis (IA). However, the persistence of pain, even in patients with a complete pharmacological control of peripheral inflammation, represents an important clinical challenge in the treatment of IA.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we provide an overview of possible mechanisms underlying pain in IA and its assessment, as well as the effects of bDMARDs and JAKi on pain management.

EXPERT OPINION

The overall data showed a good effect of bDMARDs and JAKi on pain, more pronounced for JAKi. However, it is challenging to distinguish the effect on the different types of pain (nociceptive, neuropathic, and nociplastic).

Druggable Targets and Compounds with Both Antinociceptive and Antipruritic Effects

Pain and itch are both important manifestations of various disorders, such as herpes zoster, atopic dermatitis, and psoriasis. Growing evidence suggests that both sensations have shared mediators, overlapping neural circuitry, and similarities in sensitization processes. In fact, pain and itch coexist in some disorders. Determining pharmaceutical agents and targets for treating pain and itch concurrently is of scientific and clinical relevance. Here we review the neurobiology of pain and itch and discuss the pharmaceutical targets as well as novel compounds effective for the concurrent treatment of these sensations.