Recommendations of the French Society for Rheumatology for managing rheumatoid arthritis

Cost-effectiveness analysis of upadacitinib as a treatment option for patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

AIM

To evaluate cost-effectiveness of upadacitinib (targeted synthetic-disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug [ts-DMARD]) as first-line (1 L) treatment versus current treatment among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), who had an inadequate response to prior conventional-synthetic (csDMARDs) and/or biologic-DMARDs (bDMARDs).

METHODS

This Excel-based model included patients with moderate (Disease Activity Score [DAS28]: >3.2 to ≤5.1) or severe RA (DAS28 > 5.1). Cost-effectiveness of current treatment (1 L: adalimumab-originator/biosimilar; second-line (2 L): other bDMARDs/tofacitinib) was compared against a new treatment involving two scenarios (1 L: upadacitinib, 2 L: adalimumab-biosimilar [scenario-1]/adalimumab-originator [scenario-2]) for a 10-year time-horizon from societal perspective. Model outcomes included direct and indirect costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), hospitalization days, number of orthopedic surgeries, and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) per QALY.

RESULTS

With the current pathway, estimated total societal costs for 100 RA patients over 10-year period were Saudi Riyal (SAR) 50,450,354 (United States dollars [USD] 13,453,428) (moderate RA) and SAR50,013,945 (USD13,337,052) (severe RA). New pathway (scenario-1) showed that in patients with moderate-to-severe RA, upadacitinib led to higher QALY gain (+8.99 and +15.63) at lower societal cost (cost difference: -SAR2,023,522 [-USD539,606] and -SAR3,373,029 [-USD899,474], respectively). Thus, as 1 L, upadacitinib projects "dominant" ICUR per QALY over current pathway. Moreover, in alternate pathway (scenario-2), upadacitinib also projects "dominant" ICUR per QALY for patient with severe RA (QALY gain: +15.63; cost difference: -SAR 164,536 [-USD43,876]). However, moderate RA was associated with additional cost of SAR1,255,696 (USD334,852) for improved QALY (+8.99) over current pathway (ICUR per QALY: SAR139,742 [USD37,264]). Both scenarios resulted in reduced hospitalization days (scenario-1: -14.83 days; scenario-2: -11.41 days) and number of orthopedic surgeries (scenario-1: -8.36; scenario-2: -6.54) for moderate-to-severe RA over the current treatment pathway.

CONCLUSION

Upadacitinib as 1 L treatment in moderate-to-severe RA can considerably reduce healthcare resource burden in KSA, majorly due to reduced drug administration/monitoring/hospitalization/surgical and indirect costs.

Rheumatoid Arthritis Has Won the Battle but Not the War: How Many Joints Will We Save Tomorrow?

Rheumatoid arthritis refers to joint diseases of unclear etiology whose final stages can lead to unbearable pain and complete immobility of the affected joints. As one of the most widely known diseases of the joints, it serves as a study target for a large number of research groups and pharmaceutical companies. Modern treatment with anti-inflammatory drugs, including janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, and botanicals (polyphenols, glycosides, alkaloids, etc.) has achieved some success and hope for improving the course of the disease. However, existing drugs against RA have a number of side effects which push researchers to elaborate on more selective and effective drug candidates. The avant-garde of research, which aims to develop treatment of rheumatoid arthritis using antisense oligonucleotides along with nonsteroidal drugs and corticosteroids against inflammation, increases the chances of success and expands the arsenal of drugs. The primary goal in the treatment of this disease is to find therapies that allow patients with rheumatoid arthritis to move their joints without pain. The main purpose of this review is to show the victories and challenges for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and the tortuous but promising path of research that aims to help patients experience the joy of freely moving joints without pain.

Suboptimal management of rheumatoid arthritis in France: a real-world study based on data from the French National Health Data System

OBJECTIVES

The emergence of targeted therapy is changing rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management, but real-world data remain limited. This study aimed to describe real-world RA treatment patterns using data from a French national claims database.

METHODS

This longitudinal study used the French Permanent Representative Sample (Echantillon Généraliste des Bénéficiaires) claims database. Patients with RA were identified between 2013 and 2017, with treatment patterns, persistence and adherence described.

RESULTS

The study population included 2553 patients with RA. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were prescribed for 1512 (59.2%) patients, of whom 721 (47.6%) did not require discontinuation or treatment switch. There were 377 (24.9%) treatment discontinuations and 114 patients (7.5%) switched to a targeted DMARD (biological and synthetic (Janus kinase inhibitor) DMARDs). Among the 2315 patients with RA in 2017, almost half (n=1102, 47.6%) were not treated with a DMARD. Most (85.7%) received symptomatic treatment (analgesics (81.0%), steroids (49.2%), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (39.5%)). Of the 1142 treatment initiations identified, 713 (62.4%) were conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs), with methotrexate being the most frequent (n=553, 48.45%). One-year persistence rates varied between 55.9% (49.2-62.0%) for tumour necrosis factor inhibitors, and 63.4% (59.6-67.0%) for csDMARDs. Treatment adherence, assessed through medication possession ratio, varied between 71.9% and 90.8%, with ≥80% being the adherence cut-off. Almost half of DMARD initiations were associated with long-term (>6 months), high-dose oral steroid use (~7 mg/day prednisone equivalent).

CONCLUSION

Despite a diverse therapeutic arsenal, there remains a medical need that is not covered by current RA management, which is frequently compensated for by overprescription of steroids.

Chikungunya: risks for travellers

RATIONALE FOR REVIEW

Chikungunya outbreaks continue to occur, with changing epidemiology. Awareness about chikungunya is low both among the at-risk travellers and healthcare professionals, which can result in underdiagnosis and underreporting. This review aims to improve awareness among healthcare professionals regarding the risks of chikungunya for travellers.

KEY FINDINGS

Chikungunya virus transmission to humans occurs mainly via daytime-active mosquitoes, Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus. The areas where these mosquitoes live is continuously expanding, partly due to climate changes. Chikungunya is characterized by an acute onset of fever with joint pain. These symptoms generally resolve within 1-3 weeks but at least one-third of the patients suffer from debilitating rheumatologic symptoms for months to years. Large outbreaks in changing regions of the world since the turn of the 21st century (e.g. Caribbean, La Réunion; currently Brazil, India) have resulted in growing numbers of travellers importing chikungunya, mainly to Europe and North America. Viremic travellers with chikungunya infection have seeded chikungunya clusters (France, United States of America) and outbreaks (Italy in 2007 and 2017) in non-endemic countries where Ae. albopictus mosquitoes are present. Community preventive measures are important to prevent disease transmission by mosquitoes. Individual preventive options are limited to personal protection measures against mosquito bites, particularly the daytime-active mosquitos that transmit the chikungunya virus. Candidate vaccines are on the horizon and regulatory authorities will need to assess environmental and host risk factors for persistent sequelae, such as obesity, age (over 40 years), and history of arthritis or inflammatory rheumatologic disease to determine which populations should be targeted for these chikungunya vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS

Travellers planning to visit destinations with active CHIKV circulation should be advised about the risk for chikungunya, prevention strategies, the disease manifestations, possible chronic rheumatologic sequelae, and if symptomatic, seek medical evaluation and report potential exposures.

Intensive therapy for moderate established rheumatoid arthritis: the TITRATE research programme

Background

Rheumatoid arthritis is a major inflammatory disorder and causes substantial disability. Treatment goals span minimising disease activity, achieving remission and decreasing disability. In active rheumatoid arthritis, intensive management achieves these goals. As many patients with established rheumatoid arthritis have moderate disease activity, the TITRATE (Treatment Intensities and Targets in Rheumatoid Arthritis ThErapy) programme assessed the benefits of intensive management.

Objectives

To (1) define how to deliver intensive therapy in moderate established rheumatoid arthritis; (2) establish its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in a trial; and (3) evaluate evidence supporting intensive management in observational studies and completed trials.

Design

Observational studies, secondary analyses of completed trials and systematic reviews assessed existing evidence about intensive management. Qualitative research, patient workshops and systematic reviews defined how to deliver it. The trial assessed its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in moderate established rheumatoid arthritis.

Setting

Observational studies (in three London centres) involved 3167 patients. These were supplemented by secondary analyses of three previously completed trials (in centres across all English regions), involving 668 patients. Qualitative studies assessed expectations (nine patients in four London centres) and experiences of intensive management (15 patients in 10 centres across England). The main clinical trial enrolled 335 patients with diverse socioeconomic deprivation and ethnicity (in 39 centres across all English regions).

Participants

Patients with established moderately active rheumatoid arthritis receiving conventional disease-modifying drugs.

Interventions

Intensive management used combinations of conventional disease-modifying drugs, biologics (particularly tumour necrosis factor inhibitors) and depot steroid injections; nurses saw patients monthly, adjusted treatment and provided supportive person-centred psychoeducation. Control patients received standard care.

Main outcome measures

Disease Activity Score for 28 joints based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR)-categorised patients (active to remission). Remission (DAS28-ESR < 2.60) was the treatment target. Other outcomes included fatigue (measured on a 100-mm visual analogue scale), disability (as measured on the Health Assessment Questionnaire), harms and resource use for economic assessments.

Results

Evaluation of existing evidence for intensive rheumatoid arthritis management showed the following. First, in observational studies, DAS28-ESR scores decreased over 10–20 years, whereas remissions and treatment intensities increased. Second, in systematic reviews of published trials, all intensive management strategies increased remissions. Finally, patients with high disability scores had fewer remissions. Qualitative studies of rheumatoid arthritis patients, workshops and systematic reviews helped develop an intensive management pathway. A 2-day training session for rheumatology practitioners explained its use, including motivational interviewing techniques and patient handbooks. The trial screened 459 patients and randomised 335 patients (168 patients received intensive management and 167 patients received standard care). A total of 303 patients provided 12-month outcome data. Intention-to-treat analysis showed intensive management increased DAS28-ESR 12-month remissions, compared with standard care (32% vs. 18%, odds ratio 2.17, 95% confidence interval 1.28 to 3.68; p = 0.004), and reduced fatigue [mean difference –18, 95% confidence interval –24 to –11 (scale 0–100); p < 0.001]. Disability (as measured on the Health Assessment Questionnaire) decreased when intensive management patients achieved remission (difference –0.40, 95% confidence interval –0.57 to –0.22) and these differences were considered clinically relevant. However, in all intensive management patients reductions in the Health Assessment Questionnaire scores were less marked (difference –0.1, 95% confidence interval –0.2 to 0.0). The numbers of serious adverse events (intensive management n = 15 vs. standard care n = 11) and other adverse events (intensive management n = 114 vs. standard care n = 151) were similar. Economic analysis showed that the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £43,972 from NHS and Personal Social Services cost perspectives. The probability of meeting a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 was 17%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio decreased to £29,363 after including patients’ personal costs and lost working time, corresponding to a 50% probability that intensive management is cost-effective at English willingness-to-pay thresholds. Analysing trial baseline predictors showed that remission predictors comprised baseline DAS28-ESR, disability scores and body mass index. A 6-month extension study (involving 95 intensive management patients) showed fewer remissions by 18 months, although more sustained remissions were more likley to persist. Qualitative research in trial completers showed that intensive management was acceptable and treatment support from specialist nurses was beneficial.

Limitations

The main limitations comprised (1) using single time point remissions rather than sustained responses, (2) uncertainty about benefits of different aspects of intensive management and differences in its delivery across centres, (3) doubts about optimal treatment of patients unresponsive to intensive management and (4) the lack of formal international definitions of ‘intensive management’.

Conclusion

The benefits of intensive management need to be set against its additional costs. These were relatively high. Not all patients benefited. Patients with high pretreatment physical disability or who were substantially overweight usually did not achieve remission.

Future work

Further research should (1) identify the most effective components of the intervention, (2) consider its most cost-effective delivery and (3) identify alternative strategies for patients not responding to intensive management.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN70160382.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Retention rate of a second line with a biologic DMARD after failure of a first-line therapy with abatacept, tocilizumab, or rituximab: results from the Italian GISEA registry

OBJECTIVES

EULAR recommendations do not suggest which biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (bDMARD) should be preferred after failure of a first bDMARD in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In particular, few data are available regarding the effectiveness of a second-line bDMARD after failure of abatacept (ABA), tocilizumab (TCZ), and rituximab (RTX). The aim of this study was to analyze the retention rate of a second line with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or other mechanisms of action (MoAs), after the failure of either RTX, TCZ, or ABA.

METHODS

Two hundred and seventy-eight RA patients from the Italian GISEA registry were included in the study. RTX was the first bDMARD in 18% of patients, ABA in 45.7%, and TCZ in 36.3%, while the second bDMARD was a TNFi (group 1) in 129 patients and an agent with a different MoA (group 2) in 149.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 22 months (IQR 68), 129 patients discontinued their treatment; patients of group 1 discontinued the treatment more frequently than patients of group 2 (p<0.001) with retention rates of 33.6±5.7% and 63.6±4.6% after 104 weeks for group 1 and group 2, respectively (p<0.001). At multivariate analysis, the mechanism of action was the only predictor for the maintenance in therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our data, ABA, RTX, and TCZ seem to maintain a good retention rate also when used as a second-line therapy, suggesting their use after the failure of a non-TNFi as first-line therapy. However, specifically designed studies are needed to evaluate the more appropriate therapeutic strategies in RA, according to the first-line drug, including new targeted synthetic DMARDs. Key Points • A large proportion of rheumatoid arthritis patients fail the first biologic DMARD. • Few data are available about the efficacy of biologic DMARD after the failure of a non-TNF inhibitor. • Abatacept, rituximab, or tocilizumab seem to maintain a good retention rate after the failure of a first-course therapy with a non-TNF inhibitor.

Impact of disease activity and treatments on ovarian reserve in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the ESPOIR cohort

OBJECTIVES

Patients with RA have a higher prevalence of infertility than the general population. This study sought to examine the impact of RA disease activity and treatments on ovarian reserve measured by serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels in the ESPOIR cohort. We sought to better define the indications for fertility preservation.

METHODS

Patients and serum analysis data were derived from the French national cohort ESPOIR. Enrolled patients (n = 102; 18-37-year-olds) fulfilled ACR/EULAR 2010 criteria for RA. Serum AMH levels were measured at T0, T6, T12, T24 and T36 months post-diagnosis. The impacts of RA activity (DAS28 and CRP level) and treatments (MTX only or with other medications) were evaluated at each study visit.

RESULTS

A gradual decrease in patients' serum AMH levels was observed over time, in line with the descending curve described for healthy women. Serum AMH levels of RA patients in comparison with the values considered normal for age did not reveal any significant differences (P > 0.05). We did not observe any impact of RA treatments. We demonstrated an inverse correlation between AMH variation and disease activity (DAS28: r = -0.27, P = 0.003; CRP: r = -0.16, P = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to determine serum AMH levels of a large cohort of RA patients over 36 months. Rapid disease activity control appears to be required to limit changes in the ovarian reserve. Fertility preservation is not likely to be necessary if inflammation is promptly controlled.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03666091.

2018 Chinese Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

A multidisciplinary guideline development group was established to formulate this evidence-based diagnosis and treatment guidelines for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in China. The grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) system was used to rate the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations, which were derived from research articles and guided by the analysis of the benefits and harms as well as patients' values and preferences. A total of 10 recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of RA were developed. This new guideline covered the classification criteria, disease activity assessment and monitoring, and the role of disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologics, small molecule synthetic targeting drugs, and glucocorticoids in the treat-to-target approach of RA. This guideline is intended to serve as a tool for clinicians and patients to implement decision-making strategies and improve the practices of RA management in China.

Significance of serum albumin and derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio score in assessment of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis patients

Background

Albumin and derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (dNLR) are known biomarkers that can reflect systemic inflammation and it has been hypothesized that combination of both markers in one score (albumin-dNLR score) can be useful in monitoring rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. The current study intended to measure albumin -dNLR score in patients with RA in the order to find whether these new biomarkers could reflect the activity of the disease and the articular activity detected by ultrasonography. We measured serum albumin and dNLR in blood samples obtained from 100 RA patients and from 100 apparently healthy controls (HC). Albumin -dNLR score was calculated according to the presence of hypoalbuminemia (≤ 3.76 gm/dl) and/or raised dNLR (>1.37).

Results

RA patients had a significantly elevated dNLR (p< 0.001) and albumin-dNLR score (p< 0.001) compared to their levels in HC, while serum albumin was significantly decreased (p< 0.001) in RA patients than its level in HC. In RA patients, albumin-dNLR score correlated significantly with DAS28 (p< 0.001), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (p< 0.001), C-reactive protein (p< 0.001), grey scale (p< 0.001), power Doppler (p< 0.001) and total ultrasound score (p< 0.001). Also, tender joint count, ESR and albumin-dNLR score were significant predictors of DAS28 in multivariate regression analysis.

Conclusions

Our study settled that albumin - dNLR score is increased in RA patients than in healthy subjects. The score correlated well with DAS28, acute phase reactants, and ultrasonographic synovitis scores implying that it could be an easy valuable biomarker to monitor RA disease activity.

Systematic Review of Recommendations on the Use of Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis and Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate consensus recommendations regarding management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients with cancer.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases, guideline registries, and relevant web sites for cancer-specific recommendations on RA management. Reviewers independently selected and appraised the recommendations according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. We identified similarities and discrepancies among recommendations.

RESULTS

Of 4,077 unique citations, 39 recommendations were identified, of which half described their consensus process. Average scores for the AGREE II domains ranged from 33% to 87%. Cancer risk in RA was addressed in 79% of recommendations, with acknowledgement of increased overall cancer risk. Recommendations did not agree on the safety of using disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in RA patients with cancer, except for the contraindication of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in patients at risk for lymphoma. Most recommendations agreed that RA treatment should be stopped and re-evaluated with a new diagnosis of cancer. Recommendations for patients with a history of cancer differed depending on the drug, cancer type, and time since cancer diagnosis. Few recommendations addressed all issues.

CONCLUSION

Recommendations for the treatment of RA in patients with cancer often fail to meet expected methodologic criteria. There was agreement on the need for caution when prescribing DMARDs to these patients. However, several areas continue to lack consensus, and given the paucity of evidence, there is an urgent need for research and expert opinion to guide and standardize the management of RA in patients with cancer.

ANCA-associated vasculitides: Recommendations of the French Vasculitis Study Group on the use of immunosuppressants and biotherapies for remission induction and maintenance

Treatment of vasculitides associated with anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibodies (ANCA) (AAVs) has evolved dramatically in recent years, particularly since the demonstration of rituximab efficacy as remission induction and maintenance therapy for granulomatosis with polyangiitis and microscopic polyangiitis. In 2013, the French Vasculitis Study Group (FVSG) published recommendations for its use by clinicians. Since then, new data have made it possible to better specify and codify prescription of rituximab to treat AAVs. Herein, the FVSG Recommendations Committee, an expert panel comprised of physicians with extensive experience in the treatment and management of vasculitides, presents its consensus guidelines based on literature analysis, the results of prospective therapeutic trials and personal experience.

A simplified radiographic score effectively predicts radiographic progression of early arthritis in a large nationwide French cohort

OBJECTIVE

Evaluating radiographic progression is a key component of the follow-up of patients with RA. Existing scores are ill-suited to everyday clinical practice. The objective here was to validate a new simplified radiographic score (SRS) for evaluating radiographic progression in patients with early arthritis.

METHODS

Patients with arthritis of <6 months' duration were included in the large, prospective, nationwide, French ESPOIR cohort. Radiographs of the hands and feet were obtained at inclusion then 1 and 5 years later. The modified Sharp scores and SRS were determined by blinded readers. Interobserver reliability and intraobserver repeatability of each score, as well as agreement between the two scores, were assessed by computing the intraclass correlation coefficients. The rates of progression over the first year and the next 4 years were determined.

RESULTS

The 506 patients with complete data for the first 5 years were included. At inclusion, the intraclass correlation coefficient between the two scores was good for erosions (0.715, P < 0.001), joint space narrowing (0.892, P < 0.001) and the total score (0.896, P < 0.001). Agreement between the two scores was also good for radiographic progression after 1 year (0.781, P < 0.001). The SRS had good positive and negative predictive values for slow and for rapid progression. SRS determination was less time consuming.

CONCLUSION

The SRS is effective for monitoring radiographic progression in early arthritis and is easier to use and less time-consuming than the Sharp score. The usefulness of the SRS in clinical practice deserves further evaluation.

Prevalence of Migraine and Neuropathic Pain in Rheumatic Diseases

To investigate the physiopathology of pain in chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (CIRDs), we assessed the prevalence of migraine and neuropathic pain in 499 patients with CIRDs. We studied 238 patients with rheumatoid arthritis, 188 with spondyloarthritis (SpA), 72 with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and 1 unclassified. Migraine was diagnosed according to IHS migraine diagnostic criteria. Neuropathic pain was diagnosed when patients scored at least 3 on the DN4 questionnaire. Participants completed a validated self-assessment questionnaire. Migraine prevalence was 34% (165/484), and it was highest in PsA. Risk factors for migraine were a high level of anxiety, female sex, young age, and TNF-alpha inhibitor treatment (OR = 1.90 (1.13–3.25)). Besides, high disease activity was a risk factor in SpA. Blood CRP level was not significantly associated with migraine. Of 493 patients with CIRDs, 21.5% had chronic pain with neuropathic characteristics. Compared to the French general population, these patients had significantly higher prevalences of migraine (two-fold) and neuropathic pain (three-fold). This study showed that migraine and neuropathic pain frequently occurred in patients with rheumatic diseases. Therefore, upon reporting residual pain, these patients should be checked for the presence of migraine or neuropathic pain, despite adequate clinical control of rheumatic disease.

Systematic Literature Review of Economic Evaluations of Biological Treatment Sequences for Patients with Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis Previously Treated with Disease-Modifying Anti-rheumatic Drugs

OBJECTIVE

This systematic literature review (SLR) had two objectives: to analyse published economic evaluations of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) for patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) previously treated with DMARDs and to assess the quality of those that included sequences of treatments.

METHODS

We performed an SLR on PubMed, Central, Cochrane, and French databases from January 2000 to December 2018. The search focused on cost-effectiveness/utility/benefit analyses. We extracted data on treatment sequences, outcomes (e.g. quality-adjusted life year) and choices of economic evaluation methods (e.g. model type, type of analysis, and method of utility estimation). We analysed the improvement of methods by comparing two sub-periods (2000-2009 and 2010-2018). The quality of reporting and the quality of the methods were assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and a set of eight key aspects for a reference case for economic evaluation of bDMARDs based on the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) and Drummond checklists. Data extraction and study assessment were performed independently by two health economists.

RESULTS

From the 824 records identified in the initial search, 51 publications were selected. Of these, 31 included sequences. Individual models such as discrete-event simulations were used in over two-fifths (22/51, 43%) of the selected studies. Few studies (7/51, 14%) used utility scores based on generic instruments (e.g. EQ-5D). Estimation of hospitalization costs was described in only approximately one-third of studies (19/51). Loss of quality of life (QoL) related to adverse events such as tuberculosis and pneumonia was included in one-tenth (5/51, 10%) of the studies. It was difficult to compare the results of the economic evaluations (i.e. incremental cost-effectiveness ratios) due to the high heterogeneity of studies in terms of disease stage, data sources, inputs, and methods of health outcome assessment used. For identified studies including sequences, the CHEERS assessment of reporting quality showed insufficient reporting of uncertainty analyses and utility weights in more than a third of the studies (11/31, 35%; 9/25, 36%). An in-depth assessment of the quality of the studies revealed that only seven, mostly conducted during the sub-period 2010-2018, addressed the majority of methodological quality assessment issues such as the simulation of patient sequence pathways, the use of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of comparative effectiveness, the choice of treatment sequence, and rules for switching.

CONCLUSION

Our SLR identified a lack of high-quality evaluations assessing bDMARD sequences, although some improvements were made in the reporting and modelling of patients' pathways in studies published after 2010. In order to improve economic evaluations of RA, clear health technology assessment guidance on RA health-related QoL instruments must be provided, and data including long-term disease progression must be made available.

Translating IL-6 biology into effective treatments

In 1973, IL-6 was identified as a soluble factor that is secreted by T cells and is important for antibody production by B cells. Since its discovery more than 40 years ago, the IL-6 pathway has emerged as a pivotal pathway involved in immune regulation in health and dysregulation in many diseases. Targeting of the IL-6 pathway has led to innovative therapeutic approaches for various rheumatic diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, adult-onset Still’s disease, giant cell arteritis and Takayasu arteritis, as well as other conditions such as Castleman disease and cytokine release syndrome. Targeting this pathway has also identified avenues for potential expansion into several other indications, such as uveitis, neuromyelitis optica and, most recently, COVID-19 pneumonia. To mark the tenth anniversary of anti-IL-6 receptor therapy worldwide, we discuss the history of research into IL-6 biology and the development of therapies that target IL-6 signalling, including the successes and challenges and with an emphasis on rheumatic diseases.

In this Perspective article, the authors recount the earliest stages of translational research into IL-6 biology and the subsequent development of therapeutic IL-6 pathway inhibitors for the treatment of autoimmune rheumatic diseases and potentially numerous other indications.

Inhibition of Osteoclastogenesis by the RNA-Binding Protein QKI5: a Novel Approach to Protect from Bone Resorption

Increased osteoclastogenesis is a common feature of bone erosion, notably in osteoporosis but also in inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarticular infections. Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) infection has been described to impair monocyte differentiation into macrophages and dendritic cells. However, its effect on monocyte-derived osteoclasts is yet to be determined. We showed here that in vitro HCMV infection is associated with an inhibition of osteoclastogenesis through decreased expression of colony stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF-1R) and RANK in monocytes, which was mediated by an upregulation of quaking I-5 protein (QKI-5), a cellular RNA-interacting protein. We found that deliberate QKI5 overexpression in the absence of HCMV infection is able to decrease CSF-1R and RANK expression, leading to osteoclastogenesis inhibition. Finally, by using lentiviral vectors in a calvarial bone erosion mouse model, we showed that QKI5 inhibits bone degradation. This work identifies QKI5 as a strong inhibitor of bone resorption. Future research will point out whether QKI5 could be a target for bone pathologies. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Economic Evaluation of Sequences of Biological Treatments for Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis and Inadequate Response or Intolerance to Methotrexate in France

OBJECTIVES

Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are prescribed sequentially in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Healthcare decision makers continue to debate their use, mainly because of their high costs. Our aim was to perform an economic evaluation for France of bDMARD sequences for treatment of moderate-to-severe RA after inadequate response or intolerance to conventional DMARDs (eg, methotrexate).

METHODS

A discretely integrated condition event simulation was developed to track the course of patients from first bDMARD through switches to further lines in a sequence. The model included 11 events, 91 conditions, and 21 controlling equations. Inputs were obtained from a meta-analysis of clinical trials, a French registry, national drug lists, and databases. Survival, time with minimal activity, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and total costs were output. Structural and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Sequences starting with etanercept biosimilars (ETB) cost less, with ETB-abatacept-infliximab the least expensive: the mean lifetime discounted total cost was €116 912 per patient, with a mean of 11.166 QALYs. Most other strategies were dominated or led to small QALY gains (0.0008-0.0329). Only ETB-tocilizumab-abatacept made it onto the efficiency frontier, but at €955 778 per QALY gained. These results were confirmed in several scenarios and uncertainty analyses.

CONCLUSION

Given minor differences in QALYs gained between bDMARD sequences with large cost differences, starting with biosimilars was more efficient than starting with branded products. Our model and findings should provide French and other decision makers with useful tools to address the challenges of comparing sequences of treatments for RA.

Adherence to Subcutaneous Anti-TNF Treatment in Chronic Inflammatory Rheumatism and Therapeutic Patient Education

OBJECTIVE

Poor patient adherence to anti-TNF treatment has proven to be a major roadblock to effective management. Therapeutic patient education (TPE) is now recognized as a crucial tool in managing conditions like chronic inflammatory rheumatism and in improving treatment adherence. This study aimed to assess whether different TPE programs might improve adherence to subcutaneous anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondyloarthritis (AS), and psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational, monocentric study of current care practices. We included 193 patients (124 women; mean age 53.3 ± 14.8 years). All patients received subcutaneous anti-TNF treatment and one of three TPE models, delivered by a nurse, from 2009 to 2013. The cohort was grouped according to different educational models: M1: information (N=92); M2: individual TPE (N=80); and M3: individual and group TPE sessions (N=21). Adherence was assessed with the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-4™). Scores were rated as follows: good adherence (MMAS-4 = 4), moderate adherence (MMAS-4 = 2-3), and poor adherence (MMAS-4 = 0-1).

RESULTS

The mean disease duration was 10 years [95% CI: 5 to 18]. The cohort comprised 113 patients with RA, 73 with AS, and seven with PsA. Overall, 146 (75.7%) patients displayed good adherence, 34 (17.6%) displayed moderate adherence, and 13 (6.7%) displayed poor adherence. The M3 group displayed less adherence than the M1 and M2 groups. Old age was the only factor correlated with good adherence (p=0.005). The level of knowledge had no significant impact on adherence.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated good adherence to anti-TNF treatment in patients that received TPE, particularly when it was delivered in individual sessions.

A systematic review of guidelines for managing rheumatoid arthritis

Background

We systematically reviewed current guidelines for managing rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to evaluate their range and nature, assess variations in their recommendations and highlight divergence in their perspectives.

Methods

We searched Medline and Embase databases using the terms 'clinical practice guidelines' and 'rheumatoid arthritis' from January 2000 to January 2017 together with publications of national and international bodies. We included guidelines providing recommendations on general RA management spanning a range of treatments and published in English. We undertook narrative assessments due to the heterogeneity of the guidelines.

Results

We identified 529 articles; 22 met our inclusion criteria. They were primarily developed by rheumatologists with variable involvement of patient and other experts. Three dealt with early RA, one established RA and 18 all patients. Most guidelines recommend regular assessments based on the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology core dataset; 18 recommended the disease activity score for 28 joints. Twenty recommended targeting remission; 16 suggested low disease activity as alternative. All guidelines recommend treating active RA; 13 made recommendations for moderate disease. The 21 guidelines considering early RA all recommended starting disease modifying drugs (DMARDs) as soon as possible; methotrexate was recommended for most patients. Nineteen recommended combination DMARDs when patients failed to respond fully to monotherapy and biologics were not necessarily indicated. Twenty made recommendations about biologics invariably suggesting their use after failing conventional DMARDs, particularly methotrexate. Most did not make specific recommendations about using one class of biologics preferentially. Eight recommended tapering biologics when patients achieved sustained good responses.

Conclusions

Five general principles transcend most guidelines: DMARDs should be started as soon as possible after the diagnosis; methotrexate is the best initial treatment; disease activity should be regularly monitored; give biologics to patients with persistently active disease who have already received methotrexate; remission or low disease activity are the preferred treatment target.

Optimising low-dose methotrexate for rheumatoid arthritis-A review

Methotrexate at low doses (5-25 mg/week) is first-line therapy for rheumatoid arthritis. However, there is inter- and intrapatient variability in response, with contribution of variability in concentrations of active polyglutamate metabolites, associated with clinical efficacy and toxicity. Prescribing remains heterogeneous across population groups, disease states and regimens. This review examines current knowledge of dose-response of oral methotrexate in the setting of rheumatoid arthritis, and how this could help inform dosage regimens.

Biological Therapies in Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: Can Biosimilars Reduce Access Inequities?

Biological therapies are an effective treatment for a range of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), including rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, and inflammatory bowel diseases. However, due to their high costs, considerable differences in their utilization exist across the world, even among the various European countries, with many countries restricting access despite professional society guideline recommendations. Adoption of biologics by healthcare providers has been particularly poor in many Central and Eastern European countries. Differences in utilization have also been observed across medical specialties, healthcare providers, and at a regional and national level. The objective of this paper is to provide an overview of the different market access policies for biologics in Europe and to investigate reasons for such differences. One of the potential solutions for providing broader access to IMID patients, where cost is the major barrier, is to encourage the use of biosimilars in place of their reference products. Biosimilars are generally less expensive alternatives to already licensed biological therapies and are approved on the basis that they are similar to the reference product in terms of quality, safety, and efficacy. Budget impact models predict considerable cost savings following the introduction of biosimilars in the next few years. These savings could be used to increase access to biologics and other innovative therapies.

New alternative in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: clinical utility of baricitinib

Baricitinib is an innovative small-molecule drug that reversibly inhibits continuous activation of JAK/STAT pathway, thus reducing joint inflammation. The drug was approved for use as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in the treatment of adults with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of this paper was to review the studies on pharmacology, mode of action, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of baricitinib in patients with RA. Baricitinib provides an innovative approach to modulating the immune and inflammatory response in patients with RA, which is especially important in individuals who do not respond to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or standard biologic drugs (tumor necrosis factor inhibitors) or who lose response over time. Baricitinib therapy reduces symptoms of RA and improves the quality of life. Moreover, it has shown high efficacy and an acceptable safety profile in Phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and become another JAK inhibitor approved for RA treatment, providing a useful alternative option. RCTs have revealed a significant benefit of baricitinib over placebo, MTX, and adalimumab in terms of standard efficacy outcomes, especially the American College of Rheumatology ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates. Additionally, a clinically meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes, including the quality of life, compared with placebo has been reported. The safety profile seems acceptable, although some rare but potentially severe adverse events have been observed, such as serious infections, opportunistic infections (eg, herpes zoster), malignancies, and cardiac or hepatic disorders. Baricitinib administered at an approved dose of 2 or 4 mg once daily offers a novel and promising alternative to parenterally administered biologic drugs used in RA treatment.

Rheumatoid arthritis treated with 6-months of first-line biologic or biosimilar therapy: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to estimate the effectiveness of first-line biologic disease modifying drugs(boDMARDs), and their approved biosimilars (bsDMARDs), compared with conventional (csDMARD) treatment, in terms of ACR (American College of Rheumatology) and EULAR (European League against Rheumatism) responses.

METHODS

Systematic literature search, on eight databases to January 2017, sought ACR and EULAR data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of boDMARDs / bsDMARDs (in combination with csDMARDs, or monotherapy). Two adult populations: methotrexate (MTX)-naïve patients with severe active RA; and csDMARD-experienced patients with moderate-to-severe active RA. Network meta-analyses (NMA) were conducted using a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation using a random effects model with a probit link function for ordered categorical.

RESULTS

Forty-six RCTs met the eligibility criteria. In the MTX-naïve severe active RA population, no biosimilar trials meeting the inclusion criteria were identified. MTX plus methylprednisolone (MP) was most likely to achieve the best ACR response. There was insufficient evidence that combination boDMARDs was superior to intensive (two or more) csDMARDs. In the csDMARD-experienced, moderate-to-severe RA population, the greatest effects for ACR responses were associated with tocilizumab (TCZ) monotherapy, and combination therapy (plus MTX) with bsDMARD etanercept (ETN) SB4, boDMARD ETN and TCZ. These treatments also had the greatest effects on EULAR responses. No clear differences were found between the boDMARDs and their bsDMARDs.

CONCLUSIONS

In MTX-naïve patients, there was insufficient evidence that combination boDMARDs was superior to two or more csDMARDs. In csDMARD-experienced patients, boDMARDs and bsDMARDs were comparable and all combination boDMARDs / bsDMARDs were superior to single csDMARD.

Use of Auto-Injector for Methotrexate Subcutaneous Self-Injections: High Satisfaction Level and Good Compliance in SELF-I Study, a Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel Group Study

Introduction

The objective of the study was to compare compliance and acceptability of a new auto-injector (AI) versus syringe for administration of methotrexate (MTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

We conducted a randomized, open-label, parallel group study comparing AI to pre-filled syringe (PFS). Adult patients with RA (ACR/EULAR 2010) receiving MTX (orally or by injection) for at least 3 months were allocated to AI or PFS for 6 months and then were allocated to AI for 6 further months. Two co-primary endpoints were defined at M6: percentage of patients with compliance at least 80%; change in functional capacity assessed by Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Secondary endpoints included quality of life (RaQoL), RA activity (DAS28), and acceptability. Local safety at injection site was assessed at each visit.

Results

Two-hundred and sixty-five patients were randomized. The main analysis was conducted on per protocol set (99 AI and 98 PFS). Compliance was 96.2% in AI and 98.9% in PFS. Good complier rates were 89.9% and 94.9%, thus a difference of − 5.0% (− 18.9%; 8.9%). HAQ remained stable in both groups. No difference was found on RaQoL, change in RA activity, and safety profile. Autonomy, acceptability, and patient satisfaction were better with AI, and patients having had the experience of both AI and PFS preferred AI (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Although this study did not demonstrate non-inferiority of AI versus PFS, compliance was excellent in the two groups, and AI, which was preferred by patients, is a valuable alternative to PFS for administration of MTX.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02553018.

Funding

Nordic Pharma SAS.

Intensive therapy and remissions in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

We systematically reviewed the effectiveness of intensive treatment strategies in achieving remission in patients with both early and established Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA).

METHODS

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis evaluated trials and comparative studies reporting remission in RA patients treated intensively with disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologics and Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors. Analysis used RevMan 5.3 to report relative risks (RR) in random effects models with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

We identified 928 publications: 53 studies were included (48 superiority studies; 6 head-to-head trials). In the superiority studies 3013/11259 patients achieved remission with intensive treatment compared with 1211/8493 of controls. Analysis of the 53 comparisons showed a significant benefit for intensive treatment (RR 2.23; 95% CI 1.90, 2.61). Intensive treatment increased remissions in both early RA (23 comparisons; RR 1.56; 1.38, 1.76) and established RA (29 comparisons RR 4.21, 2.92, 6.07). All intensive strategies (combination DMARDs, biologics, JAK inhibitors) increased remissions. In the 6 head-to-head trials 317/787 patients achieved remission with biologics compared with 229/671 of patients receiving combination DMARD therapies and there was no difference between treatment strategies (RR 1.06; 0.93. 1.21). There were differences in the frequency of remissions between early and established RA. In early RA the frequency of remissions with active treatment was 49% compared with 34% in controls. In established RA the frequency of remissions with active treatment was 19% compared with 6% in controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive treatment with combination DMARDs, biologics or JAK inhibitors increases the frequency of remission compared to control non-intensive strategies. The benefits are seen in both early and established RA.

Treatment patterns, health care resource utilization and costs of rheumatoid arthritis patients in Italy: findings from a retrospective administrative database analysis

Objectives

This study aimed to: 1) describe treatment patterns and drug utilization profile (in terms of therapeutic strategy used, switch, persistence and drug consumption variation) among adult patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and 2) estimate the health care resource utilization and its associated direct cost for the management of RA patients.

Methods

A retrospective cohort analysis, using administrative databases of six Local Health Units in Italy, was performed. All adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of RA between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2014 were enrolled. The date of the first RA diagnosis according to the study criteria during the study period represented the index date (ID) for each patient. Patients enrolled were observed from the ID for at least 12 months (follow-up period), and their clinical characteristics were investigated for 12 months prior to the ID.

Results

A total of 10,401 patients with a confirmed RA diagnosis were included. Mean age was 63.0 years and 25% were male; 67% of patients were untreated at ID. During the followup period, 67.8% of patients treated with biologic agents were persistent with initial therapy, compared to 45.7% for patients on conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), while 11% of patients treated with biologic agents switched during the follow-up period, compared to 17.6% of csDMARDs-treated ones. At the end of the follow-up period, 14.7% of all patients in the analysis had an increase and 12.6% of them had a decrease in their initial drug consumption. The mean cost per RA patient was €3,743.

Conclusion

Our study showed that there is still much that needs to be learned about the prescription of csDMARDs and biologics to RA patients in Italy and to identify areas for future research. The knowledge of RA management in a real-life clinical setting could offer an opportunity to improve the management of RA in Italy.

Lymphocytes as Biomarkers of Therapeutic Response in Rheumatic Autoimmune Diseases, Is It a Realistic Goal?

Many therapies are available for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) while biological therapies have limited effects in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS). In both cases, biomarkers predicting drug response would be very useful to guide clinicians in their choice. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the value of lymphocyte phenotyping as a marker of therapeutic response. Of the 1063 articles retrieved, 39 fulfilled inclusion criteria and were included in the present review (25 for RA, 10 for SLE, and 4 for pSS). Lymphocyte phenotyping was described as a biomarker of therapeutic response in many studies, but most results could not be confirmed by independent teams using multivariate analysis. The most consistent result might be the association between rituximab response and the levels of memory B cells before therapy, although some studies were controversial. Thus, lymphocyte phenotyping cannot yet be proposed as a biomarker of response in rheumatic autoimmune diseases. The lack of reproducibility between studies may be explained by technical issues influencing lymphocyte phenotyping so standardization procedures should be developed for future studies. The patients' characteristics vary between studies, and large population studies, including a wide range of patients' characteristics and biomarkers, are required to provide predictive models for clinical outcomes. The use of new flow cytometry techniques such as single-cell mass cytometry technology might also help finder reliable biomarkers in the future.

Development and application of a questionnaire to assess patient beliefs in rheumatoid arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis

Misinterpretation of patient beliefs may complicate shared decision-making in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The objective of this study was to develop a questionnaire to assess patients’ beliefs about their disease and its treatment, and to identify patient characteristics associated with these beliefs. All beliefs reported by > 5% of 50 patients in a previous study were reformulated with a partnering patient organization into statements with which participants could rate their agreement on a scale of 0–10 (totally disagree to totally agree). The resulting Questionnaire for Arthritis Dialogue (QuAD) was made available to patients with RA or axSpA. A score ≥ 7 was considered a strongly held belief. Associations between patient characteristics and individual lifestyle beliefs were assessed using multiple logistic regression. The 21-item QuAD was completed by 672 patients (432 RA, 240 axSpA; mean [±SD] age 54.2 [± 14.2]; 63.7% female). The most widely held beliefs were related to uncertainty about progression (n = 354, 54.0%), heredity (n = 309, 47.8%), and flare triggers (n = 283, 42.7%). The unwarranted belief that physical activity is deleterious to disease activity was associated with markers of psychological distress and lower educational levels. The beliefs of patients with RA or axSpA about their disease are wide-ranging. Since these may be unwarranted and may lead to inappropriate behaviors, physicians should discuss these beliefs with their patients. The QuAD may facilitate this dialogue, and may also be useful in population studies to standardize the assessment and evolution of beliefs over time. People with long-term inflammatory conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA; inflammation of the joints) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA; inflammation of the spine) may hold a number of beliefs about their disease, including some that are not supported by current scientific evidence (e.g., “I think that my disease was triggered by a vaccination”). Some beliefs, especially those relating to the role of lifestyle factors (such as exercise, diet, smoking, and drinking alcohol), may encourage people living with severe diseases to change their behavior in a way that has an effect on their disease. Within this project, we developed a questionnaire to identify the most common beliefs held by people living with RA or axSpA, which is called the “Questionnaire for Arthritis Dialogue (QuAD).” We also examined whether certain characteristics (or traits) of people living with RA or axSpA are linked to beliefs not currently supported by scientific evidence. A total of 672 people living with RA or axSpA in France were asked to complete the questionnaire (QuAD). The questionnaire included 21 opinion statements that they scored from 0 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree). A score of more than 7 was interpreted to mean that the person significantly agreed with the opinion. Based on the responses to specific opinion statements in the questionnaire, we were able to identify possible links between beliefs that are not supported by scientific evidence (e.g., “I think that flare-ups of my disease are triggered by physical effort”), and characteristics of people living with severe diseases. Our findings suggested that beliefs about lifestyle and inflammatory diseases varied from person to person, were sometimes inconsistent (the most widely held beliefs were sometimes contradictory), and were often not supported by scientific evidence. The belief that physical activity had negative effects on the disease was linked to poor education and psychological issues (such as anxiety and helplessness). People living with axSpA were more likely to believe their disease was a result of their genetic make-up, whereas those with RA more often believed their disease was caused by emotional issues. People living with axSpA were also more likely to believe that physical activity could be beneficial for their disease, and less likely to believe that their disease was caused by smoking. Our results suggest that doctors need to discuss with their patients how they might believe lifestyle is associated with their disease. This will help to dispel any unnecessary concerns, and to encourage their patients to take up healthy lifestyles and habits that are beneficial for their disease management. It may also be beneficial for health care providers to discuss the beliefs identified in this study during educational programs about inflammatory diseases, for the benefit of people living with RA or axSpA.

Conventional radiography in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Joint recommendations from the French societies for rheumatology, radiology and paediatric rheumatology

BACKGROUND

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) can cause structural damage. However, data on conventional radiography (CR) in JIA are scant.

OBJECTIVE

To provide pragmatic guidelines on CR in each non-systemic JIA subtype.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary task force of 16 French experts (rheumatologists, paediatricians, radiologists and one patient representative) formulated research questions on CR assessments in each non-systemic JIA subtype. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies providing detailed information on structural joint damage. Recommendations, based on the evidence found, were evaluated using two Delphi rounds and a review by an independent committee.

RESULTS

74 original articles were included. The task force developed four principles and 31 recommendations with grades ranging from B to D. The experts felt strongly that patients should be selected for CR based on the risk of structural damage, with routine CR of the hands and feet in rheumatoid factor-positive polyarticular JIA but not in oligoarticular non-extensive JIA.

CONCLUSION

These first pragmatic recommendations on CR in JIA rely chiefly on expert opinion, given the dearth of scientific evidence. CR deserves to be viewed as a valuable tool in many situations in patients with JIA.

KEY POINTS

• CR is a valuable imaging technique in selected indications. • CR is routinely recommended for peripheral joints, when damage risk is high. • CR is recommended according to the damage risk, depending on JIA subtype. • CR is not the first-line technique for imaging of the axial skeleton.

Methotrexate treatment for rheumatoid arthritis in Poland: Retrospective analysis of patients in routine clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate methotrexate (MTX) treatment administered by Polish rheumatologists in everyday practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was based on a retrospective analysis of a cohort of 1957 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It was conducted among 100 rheumatologists, each of whom received 20 questionnaires and completed them based on the data from their rheumatoid arthritis patients.

RESULTS

Methotrexate was taken by 91% of patients, and 80% of them continued the treatment either as a monotherapy (65%) or concomitantly with other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. In 60% of the cases, therapy was initiated within six months of diagnosis. Dose modifications were observed in 76% of cases and were contingent on different factors, e.g. lack of efficacy, presence of adverse events. The most prevalent adverse events were nausea and vomiting, weakness, and elevated liver enzyme activity. The most common initial dose of MTX was 10 or 15 mg/week. An increase in dose to the maximum of 25 mg/week was observed in 36% of cases, with continuation for 27% of patients. Treatment interruption was noted in 21% of patients, predominantly due to MTX intolerance; however, in 13% of cases, it was due to patient choice.

CONCLUSIONS

Methotrexate is the most common agent used to treat rheumatoid arthritis. Dose modifications are often applied to maximise efficacy and reduce adverse reactions, which could lead to withdrawal. Methotrexate is an effective drug for treatment of RA when used according to current recommendations. To optimise MTX therapy, regular medical visits are required.

Physical Activity Assessment Using an Activity Tracker in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Axial Spondyloarthritis: Prospective Observational Study

Background

Physical activity can be tracked using mobile devices and is recommended in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) management. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends at least 150 min per week of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA).

Objective

The objectives of this study were to assess and compare physical activity and its patterns in patients with RA and axSpA using an activity tracker and to assess the feasibility of mobile devices in this population.

Methods

This multicentric prospective observational study (ActConnect) included patients who had definite RA or axSpA, and a smartphone. Physical activity was assessed over 3 months using a mobile activity tracker, recording the number of steps per minute. The number of patients reaching the WHO recommendations was calculated. RA and axSpA were compared, using linear mixed models, for number of steps, proportion of morning steps, duration of total activity, and MVPA. Physical activity trajectories were identified using the K-means method, and factors related to the low activity trajectory were explored by logistic regression. Acceptability was assessed by the mean number of days the tracker was worn over the 3 months (ie, adherence), the percentage of wearing time, and by an acceptability questionnaire.

Results

A total of 157 patients (83 RA and 74 axSpA) were analyzed; 36.3% (57/157) patients were males, and their mean age was 46 (standard deviation [SD] 12) years and mean disease duration was 11 (SD 9) years. RA and axSpA patients had similar physical activity levels of 16 (SD 11) and 15 (SD 12) min per day of MVPA (P=.80), respectively. Only 27.4% (43/157) patients reached the recommendations with a mean MVPA of 106 (SD 77) min per week. The following three trajectories were identified with constant activity: low (54.1% [85/157] of patients), moderate (42.7% [67/157] of patients), and high (3.2% [5/157] of patients) levels of MVPA. A higher body mass index was significantly related to less physical activity (odds ratio 1.12, 95% CI 1.11-1.14). The activity trackers were worn during a mean of 79 (SD 17) days over the 90 days follow-up. Overall, patients considered the use of the tracker very acceptable, with a mean score of 8 out 10.

Conclusions

Patients with RA and axSpA performed insufficient physical activity with similar levels in both groups, despite the differences between the 2 diseases. Activity trackers allow longitudinal assessment of physical activity in these patients. The good adherence to this study and the good acceptability of wearing activity trackers confirmed the feasibility of the use of a mobile activity tracker in patients with rheumatic diseases.

Various Types of Arthritis in the United States: Prevalence and Age-Related Trends From 1999 to 2014

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence trends of osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and other types of arthritis in the United States from 1999 to 2014.

METHODS

We analyzed data on 43 706 community-dwelling adults aged 20 years and older who participated in the 1999-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. We accounted for survey design and sampling weights so that estimates were nationally representative. We assessed temporal trends in age-standardized arthritis prevalence by using joinpoint regression.

RESULTS

Age-adjusted prevalence of arthritis was 24.7% (OA = 9.7%; RA = 4.2%; other arthritis = 2.8%; "don't know" type = 8.0%). Prevalence of OA increased from 6.6% to 14.3%, whereas RA prevalence decreased from 5.9% to 3.8%. Increase in OA prevalence was significant in both genders; in non-Hispanic Whites, non-Hispanic Blacks, and Hispanics; and in people with high socioeconomic status. Decrease in RA prevalence was more pronounced in men, non-Hispanic Blacks, and participants with low income or obesity.

CONCLUSIONS

Between 1999 and 2014, nearly one quarter of American adults reported arthritis. The prevalence of OA has more than doubled over time, whereas RA prevalence has declined.

Methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Spain: Subanalysis of the AR Excellence project

OBJECTIVE

The AR Excellence project evaluates clinical monitoring in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Spain. The aim of the study was to analyze the use of methotrexate (MTX) in the AR Excellence cohort and to compare it with current recommendations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We collected data from RA patients who initiated treatment with MTX. They included demographics, dose and routes of administration, switching among them, highest dose in each route, combinations with other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), time to combination with another DMARD (either conventional or biological) and adverse events.

RESULTS

Six hundred twenty-five patients with RA (mean age 55 years; 70.6% women) were included, with an average disease duration of 21 months. Ninety percent of the patients initiated treatment with MTX. Therapy was begun with a mean dose of 11mg per week; this initial dose was increased in 58% of the individuals. The average time to reach the full dose of MTX (20mg a week) was 6,67 months. Time to combination of MTX with another DMARD, either synthetic or biological, was 3 months. In all, 67.4% of the patients received oral MTX and the route was subcutaneous in 18.6%. In 12% of the cases, there was a change in the route of administration after a period of 6 months. In 544 patients, folate supplements were added to MTX; MTX-related adverse events were detected in 17.3% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

MTX is currently the pivotal treatment in RA. The subanalysis of the AR Excellence project demonstrates that MTX escalation to its full doses is not done with adequate speed. The subcutaneous route is used in a small proportion of patients.

Optimal methotrexate dose is associated with better clinical outcomes than non-optimal dose in daily practice: results from the ESPOIR early arthritis cohort

Background

Although methotrexate (MTX) is the consensual first-line disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), substantial heterogeneity remains with its prescription and dosage, which are often not optimal.

Objective

To evaluate the symptomatic and structural impact of optimal MTX dose in patients with early RA in daily clinical practice over 2 years.

Methods

Patients included in the early arthritis ESPOIR cohort who fulfilled the ACR-EULAR (American College of Rheumatology/European League against Rheumatism) criteria for RA and received MTX as a first DMARD were assessed. Optimal MTX dose was defined as ≥10 mg/week during the first 3 months, with escalation to ≥20 mg/week or 0.3 mg/kg/week at 6 months without Disease Activity Score in 28 joints remission. Symptomatic and structural efficacy with and without optimal MTX dose was assessed by generalised logistic regression with adjustment for appropriate variables.

Results

Within the first year of follow-up, 314 patients (53%) with RA received MTX as a first DMARD (mean dose 12.2±3.8 mg/week). Only 26.4% (n=76) had optimal MTX dose. After adjustment, optimal versus non-optimal MTX dose was more efficient in achieving ACR-EULAR remission at 1 year (OR 4.28 (95% CI 1.86 to 9.86)) and normal functioning (Health Assessment Questionnaire ≤0.5; OR at 1 year 4.36 (95% CI 2.03 to 9.39)), with no effect on radiological progression. Results were similar during the second year.

Conclusion

Optimal MTX dose is more efficacious than non-optimal dose for remission and function in early arthritis in daily practice, with no impact on radiological progression over 2 years.

"Official View" on Glucocorticoids in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review of International Guidelines and Consensus Statements

OBJECTIVE

To describe the perception of the current role of systemic glucocorticoids in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by examining their importance and the current level of evidence in recent guidelines, and to identify open questions to be addressed in future guidelines and research projects.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review using the databases Ovid Embase, PubMed Medline, and Cochrane Library for guidelines on the pharmacologic treatment of RA. Retrieved articles were evaluated regarding their quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool and scrutinized for all relevant information concerning the use of glucocorticoids.

RESULTS

All guidelines agree that glucocorticoids, especially if given at low doses and for a short duration, are an appropriate option in the treatment of RA. However, many recommendations remain vague, as reliable and detailed evidence is scarce. Important aspects of glucocorticoid therapy are partially or completely neglected, and the existing nomenclature is not used uniformly. Quality evaluation revealed flaws in many articles, concerning not only glucocorticoid-specific recommendations but also guideline quality in general.

CONCLUSION

Current recommendations for use of glucocorticoids in the management of RA are suboptimal. More rigorous evaluation of doses, timing, and duration of their use is needed. Existing nomenclature on glucocorticoid therapy should be used uniformly.

Pre-silencing of genes involved in the electron transport chain (ETC) pathway is associated with responsiveness to abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis

Background

In the current context of personalized medicine, one of the major challenges in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is to identify biomarkers that predict drug responsiveness. From the European APPRAISE trial, our main objective was to identify a gene expression profile associated with responsiveness to abatacept (ABA) + methotrexate (MTX) and to understand the involvement of this signature in the pathophysiology of RA.

Methods

Whole human genome microarrays (4 × 44 K) were performed from a first subset of 36 patients with RA. Data validation by quantitative reverse-transcription (qRT)-PCR was performed from a second independent subset of 32 patients with RA. Gene Ontology and WikiPathways database allowed us to highlight the specific biological mechanisms involved in predicting response to ABA/MTX.

Results

From the first subset of 36 patients with RA, a combination including 87 transcripts allowed almost perfect separation between responders and non-responders to ABA/MTX. Next, the second subset of patients 32 with RA allowed validation by qRT-PCR of a minimal signature with only four genes. This latter signature categorized 81% of patients with RA with 75% sensitivity, 85% specificity and 85% negative predictive value. This combination showed a significant enrichment of genes involved in electron transport chain (ETC) pathways. Seven transcripts from ETC pathways (NDUFA6, NDUFA4, UQCRQ, ATP5J, COX7A2, COX7B, COX6A1) were significantly downregulated in responders versus non-responders to ABA/MTX. Moreover, dysregulation of these genes was independent of inflammation and was specific to ABA response.

Conclusion

Pre-silencing of ETC genes is associated with future response to ABA/MTX and might be a crucial key to susceptibility to ABA response.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-017-1319-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Triple Oral Therapy Versus Antitumor Necrosis Factor Plus Methotrexate (MTX) in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Inadequate Response to MTX: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVE

For patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX), the relative effectiveness of the combination of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) compared with the combination of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and MTX, as second-line therapy, is uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerance of triple oral DMARD therapy versus anti-TNF agents associated with MTX in patients with RA after MTX failure.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the literature up to November 2015 in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane library, and abstracts from the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) meetings from 2006 to 2015. Articles were included if they were of randomized controlled trials of patients receiving triple oral combination therapy (TT; MTX + sulfasalazine + hydroxychloroquine) compared with anti-TNF agents plus MTX. Treatment effects were examined by disease activity [Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28)], ACR and EULAR response criteria, structural damage by the modified total Sharp score, and functional disability by the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ).

RESULTS

Our search identified 263 articles; only 5 fulfilled the selection criteria. Analysis of ACR and EULAR response criteria, DAS28, and modified Sharp scores favored anti-TNF agents combined with MTX. Functional disability (HAQ) and rates of adverse events did not differ between treatments.

CONCLUSION

In patients with RA in whom MTX has failed, the addition of a TNF antagonist to MTX may be a valid option, with better clinical outcomes and better radiographic results in the presence of poor prognostic factors. In the absence of poor prognostic factors and/or with contraindications to biologic agents, TT retains its place in the therapeutic strategy for RA in a currently restricted economic context.

Poor prognostic factors guiding treatment decisions in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a review of data from randomized clinical trials and cohort studies

Prognostic factors are used for treatment decisions in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). High disease activity, the early presence of erosions, and autoantibody positivity are the most frequently used poor prognostic factors but other features, such as functional disability, extraarticular disease, or multibiomarkers, are also assessed. Prognostic factors are incorporated in current treatment recommendations for the management of RA and are used as inclusion criteria in randomized controlled trials. They are defined heterogeneously and the relevance of a single or combined presence of poor prognostic factors remains unclear. This review summarizes the current definitions of poor prognostic factors and their use in clinical research. Perspectives on future research are also outlined.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update

Recent insights in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) necessitated updating the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) RA management recommendations. A large international Task Force based decisions on evidence from 3 systematic literature reviews, developing 4 overarching principles and 12 recommendations (vs 3 and 14, respectively, in 2013). The recommendations address conventional synthetic (cs) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GC); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, clazakizumab, sarilumab and sirukumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (Janus kinase (Jak) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib). Monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and the targets of sustained clinical remission (as defined by the American College of Rheumatology-(ACR)-EULAR Boolean or index criteria) or low disease activity are discussed. Cost aspects were taken into consideration. As first strategy, the Task Force recommends MTX (rapid escalation to 25 mg/week) plus short-term GC, aiming at >50% improvement within 3 and target attainment within 6 months. If this fails stratification is recommended. Without unfavourable prognostic markers, switching to-or adding-another csDMARDs (plus short-term GC) is suggested. In the presence of unfavourable prognostic markers (autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions, failure of 2 csDMARDs), any bDMARD (current practice) or Jak-inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD or tsDMARD is recommended. If a patient is in sustained remission, bDMARDs can be tapered. For each recommendation, levels of evidence and Task Force agreement are provided, both mostly very high. These recommendations intend informing rheumatologists, patients, national rheumatology societies, hospital officials, social security agencies and regulators about EULAR's most recent consensus on the management of RA, aimed at attaining best outcomes with current therapies.

Early non-response to certolizumab pegol in rheumatoid arthritis predicts treatment failure at one year. Data from a randomised phase III clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare different early clinical criteria of non-response determined at three months as predictors of clinical failure at one year in patients with rheumatoid arthritis starting therapy with certolizumab pegol.

METHODS

Data were derived from a randomised Phase III clinical trial in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who failed to respond to methotrexate monotherapy. Patients included in this post-hoc analysis were treated with certolizumab pegol (400mg qd reduced to 200mg qd after one month) and with methotrexate. The study duration was twelve months. Response at three months was determined with the American College of Rheumatology-50, Disease Assessment Score-28 ESR, Health Assessment Questionnaire and the Clinical Disease Activity Index. The performance of these measures at predicting treatment failure at twelve months defined by the American College of Rheumatology-50 criteria was determined, using the positive predictive values as the principal evaluation criterion.

RESULTS

Three hundred and eighty two patients were available for analysis and 225 completed the twelve-month follow-up. At Week 52, 149 (38.1%) patients met the American College of Rheumatology-50 response criterion. Positive predictive values ranged from 81% for a decrease in Health Assessment Questionnaire- Disability index score since baseline >0.22 to 95% for a decrease in Disease Assessment Score-28 score since baseline≥1.2. Sensitivity was≤70% in all cases. Performance of these measures was similar irrespective of the definition of treatment failure at 12months.

CONCLUSIONS

Simple clinical measures of disease activity can predict future treatment failure reliably and are appropriate for implementing treat-to-target treatment strategies in everyday practice.