Established rheumatoid arthritis: clinical assessments

Genetic, social, and environmental risk factors in rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease

OBJECTIVE

MUC5B and TOLLIP single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and cigarette smoking were associated with rheumatoid arthritis-interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD) in a predominantly Northern European population. We evaluated whether RA-ILD is associated with these genetic variants and HLA-DRB1 shared epitope (SE) alleles in a large RA cohort stratified by race and smoking history.

METHODS

HLA-DRB1 SE alleles and MUC5B rs35705950 and TOLLIP rs5743890 SNPs were genotyped in U.S. veterans with RA. ILD was validated through medical record review. Genetic associations with ILD were assessed in logistic regression models overall and in subgroups defined by race and smoking status, with additive interactions assessed by the relative excess risk of interaction (RERI).

RESULTS

Of 2,556 participants (88% male, 77% White), 238 (9.3%) had ILD. The MUC5B variant was associated with ILD (OR 2.25 [95% CI 1.69, 3.02]), whereas TOLLIP and HLA-DRB1 SE were not. The MUC5B variant was less frequent among Black/African American participants (5.8% vs. 22.6%), though its association with RA-ILD was numerically stronger (OR 4.23 [1.65, 10.86]) compared to all other participants (OR 2.32 [1.70, 3.16]). Those with the MUC5B variant and a smoking history had numerically higher odds of ILD (OR 4.18 [2.53, 6.93]) than non-smokers (OR 2.41 [1.16, 5.04]). Additive interactions between MUC5B-race and MUC5B-smoking were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

In this large RA cohort, the MUC5B promoter variant was associated with >2-fold higher odds of RA-ILD. While this variant is less common among Black/African American patients, its presence in this population carried >4-fold higher odds of RA-ILD.

Validity of 7-Joint Versus Simplified 12-Joint Ultrasonography Scoring Systems in Assessment of Rheumatoid Arthritis Activity

INTRODUCTION

Musculoskeletal ultrasonography (US) is an objective tool for the evaluation of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. There is no consensus on the exact number of joints that should be examined. Examination of reduced joint count is more practical than the comprehensive one.

OBJECTIVES

This is a cross-sectional study investigated the validity of a 7-joint US score (US7) in assessment of joint inflammation in RA patients compared with a simplified 12-joint US score (US12) and correlated both to composite disease activity indices.

METHODS

The activity status of 50 RA patients was assessed clinically and ultrasonographically. The disease activity was calculated using 3 composite indices. Ultrasonography was performed by 1 blinded rheumatologist, using power Doppler (PD) and gray-scale (GS) US examination. The US7 and simplified US12 were performed as originally described. However, the GS synovitis and PD synovitis of US12 were computed in 2 separate scores instead of 1. Two sum US7 scores were added, sum (GS) US7 and sum (PD) US7 after summating synovitis and tenosynovitis scores. Ultrasonography interobserver/intraobserver reliability was evaluated on 40 stored images.

RESULTS

Correlation coefficient between the different ultrasonographic scores showed no difference. The GS scores showed no correlation with disease activity parameters; however, the PD scores did. The sum (PD) US7 was the only score that showed significant correlation with the 3 different composite disease indices.

CONCLUSIONS

All studied US scores proved valid in assessment of disease activity status in RA. This is in favor of using the less-time-consuming US7 scores. The strongest correlation found with sum (PD) US7 confirmed the importance of incorporating the tendon in the disease activity assessment.

Randomised controlled trial of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors against combination intensive therapy with conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in established rheumatoid arthritis: the TACIT trial and associated systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is initially treated with methotrexate and other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Active RA patients who fail such treatments can receive tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis), which are effective but expensive.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed whether or not combination DMARDs (cDMARDs) give equivalent clinical benefits at lower costs in RA patients eligible for TNFis.

DESIGN

An open-label, 12-month, pragmatic, randomised, multicentre, two-arm trial [Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors Against Combination Intensive Therapy (TACIT)] compared these treatment strategies. We then systematically reviewed all comparable published trials.

SETTING

The TACIT trial involved 24 English rheumatology clinics.

PARTICIPANTS

Active RA patients eligible for TNFis.

INTERVENTIONS

The TACIT trial compared cDMARDs with TNFis plus methotrexate or another DMARD; 6-month non-responders received (a) TNFis if in the cDMARD group; and (b) a second TNFi if in the TNFi group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The Heath Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) was the primary outcome measure. The European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), joint damage, Disease Activity Score for 28 Joints (DAS28), withdrawals and adverse effects were secondary outcome measures. Economic evaluation linked costs, HAQ changes and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

RESULTS

In total, 432 patients were screened; 104 started on cDMARDs and 101 started on TNFis. The initial demographic and disease assessments were similar between the groups. In total, 16 patients were lost to follow-up (nine in the cDMARD group, seven in the TNFi group) and 42 discontinued their intervention but were followed up (23 in the cDMARD group and 19 in the TNFi group). Intention-to-treat analysis with multiple imputation methods used for missing data showed greater 12-month HAQ score reductions with initial cDMARDs than with initial TNFis [adjusted linear regression coefficient 0.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.003 to 0.31; p = 0.046]. Increases in 12-month EQ-5D scores were greater with initial cDMARDs (adjusted linear regression coefficient -0.11, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.03; p = 0.009) whereas 6-month changes in HAQ and EQ-5D scores and 6- and 12-month changes in joint damage were similar between the initial cDMARD group and the initial TNFi group. Longitudinal analyses (adjusted general estimating equations) showed that the DAS28 was lower in the initial TNFi group in the first 6 months (coefficient -0.63, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.34; p < 0.001) but there were no differences between the groups in months 6-12. In total, 36 patients in the initial cDMARD group and 44 in the initial TNFi group achieved DAS28 remission. The onset of remission did not differ between groups (p = 0.085 on log-rank test). In total, 10 patients in the initial cDMARD group and 18 in the initial TNFi group experienced serious adverse events; stopping therapy because of toxicity occurred in 10 and six patients respectively. Economic evaluation showed that the cDMARD group had similar or better QALY outcomes than TNFi with significantly lower costs at 6 and 12 months. In the systematic reviews we identified 32 trials (including 20-1049 patients) on early RA and 19 trials (including 40-982 patients) on established RA that compared (1) cDMARDs with DMARD monotherapy; (2) TNFis/methotrexate with methotrexate monotherapy; and (3) cDMARDs with TNFis/methotrexate. They showed that cDMARDs and TNFis had similar efficacies and toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

Active RA patients who have failed methotrexate and another DMARD achieve equivalent clinical benefits at a lower cost from starting cDMARDs or from starting TNFis (reserving TNFis for non-responders). Only a minority of patients achieve sustained remission with cDMARDs or TNFis; new strategies are needed to maximise the frequency of remission.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Control Trials ISRCTN37438295.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 66. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Demonstrating disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Is 18F FDG PET a sensitive method?

AIM

We aimed to investigate the relationship of fluor-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F FDG PET/CT) with clinical, laboratory parameters and conventional radiographs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

PATIENTS, MATERIAL, METHODS

25 patients with RA diagnosis were evaluated by sociodemographic, clinical [duration of disease (year), the joints in which the complaints started, most recent joint involvement]; other parameters used in RA-specific clinical assessment [Steinbocker functional staging, disease activity score 28 (DAS 28 score), health assessment questionnaire score (HAQ score), general RA assessment (patients' and physicians' global assessment), patients' assessments of pain and general health condition (visual analog scale)], laboratory, radiological [conventional radiology of hand and foot joints], positron emission tomography [18F FDG PET visual total score and maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) total score] parameters.

RESULTS

No significant correlation was detected between the 18F FDG PET total score and SUVmax total score of the patients and clinical, laboratory, and radiological parameters (p > 0.05). There was no relationship between the cut-off values determined according to the disease activity and 18F FDG PET/SUVmax total values (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, no relationship was found between disease activity demonstrated by 18F FDG PET/CT in RA patients and clinical, laboratory, and radiological parameters. 18F FDG PET/CT appears to be a more sensitive method in demonstrating disease activity compared to other evaluated methods.

Usefulness of patients-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis focus group

Objective. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have become an essential part of the assessment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We aimed to evaluate the agreement and correlation between PROs and the physician's measurements. Methods. This was a cross-sectional analytical study in which 135 patients with RA were clinically evaluated during two different sessions of focus group interviews. Rheumatologist recorded 28 swollen (SJCs) and tender joint counts (TJCs). The patients filled out the PROs instruments (MDHAQ, RADAI, RAPID3, 4, and 5 and self-report articular index (SAI) diagram for pain and joint swelling). DAS28 was calculated (C-reactive protein). An adjusted multiple lineal regression model was done (DAS28 as dependent variable). Results. Highly significant agreements were found between SJC and TJC registered by the physician and patient. There was moderate correlation between DAS28 with patient SJC (r = 0.52), patient TJC (r = 0.55), RADAI (r = 0.56), RAPID3 (r = 0.52), RAPID4 (r = 0.56), RAPID5 (r = 0.66), and VAS-Global (r = 0.51). Likewise, we found moderate to high correlations between CDAI and SDAI with all variable measurements done by the patients. The resulting predictive equation was DAS28(CRP) = 2.02 + 0.037 × RAPID4 + 0.042× patient SJC. Conclusion. PROs applied in focus groups interview are a useful tool for managing patients with RA regardless of gender, educational level, and duration of disease.

Effects of a group-based exercise and educational program on physical performance and disease self-management in rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Evidence supports the use of educational and physical training programs for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of a group-based exercise and educational program on the physical performance and disease self-management of people with RA.

DESIGN

This was a randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

The study was conducted at a rehabilitation center in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-four people diagnosed with RA participated in the study. Participants were randomly assigned to either an intervention group (n=19) or a waiting list control group (n=15).

INTERVENTION

The intervention in this study was an 8-week, multidisciplinary, group therapy program for people with RA, consisting of physical exercise designed to increase aerobic capacity and muscle strength (force-generating capacity) together with an educational program to improve health status and self-efficacy for disease-self-management.

MEASUREMENTS

The main outcome measures were maximum oxygen uptake (Vo(2)max), muscle strength of the elbow and knee flexors and extensors, health status, and perceived self-efficacy. All data were recorded before intervention in week 1, after intervention in week 9, and at follow-up in week 22.

RESULTS

The intervention group showed significant improvement (12.1%) in Vo(2)max at week 9 compared with the control group (-1.7%). Although significant within-group changes were found over time for muscle strength of the upper and lower extremities and health status that favored the intervention group, no between-group changes were found regarding these outcomes.

LIMITATIONS

An important limitation was the small number of participants included in our study, which may have resulted in a lack of power.

CONCLUSIONS

The present group-based exercise and educational program for people with RA had a beneficial effect on aerobic capacity but not on muscle strength, health status, or self-efficacy.