Incidence and management of inflammatory arthritis in England before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-level cohort study using OpenSAFELY

The safety of antivirals and neutralising monoclonal antibodies used in prehospital treatment of Covid-19

OBJECTIVE

This proof-of-principle pharmacovigilance study used Electronic Health Record (EHR) data to examine the safety of sotrovimab, paxlovid and molnupiravir in prehospital treatment of Covid-19.

METHOD

With NHS England approval, we conducted an observational cohort study using OpenSAFELY-TPP, a secure software-platform which executes analyses across EHRs for 24 million people in England. High-risk individuals with Covid-19 eligible for prehospital treatment were included. Adverse events (AEs) were categorised into events in the drug's Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), drug-reactions and immune-mediated. Cox models compared risk across treatments. A pre-pandemic record analysis was performed for comparative purposes.

RESULTS

Between 2021-2023, 37,449 patients received sotrovimab, paxlovid or molnupiravir whilst 109,647 patients made up an eligible-but-untreated population. The 28-day rates of AEs were low: SmPC 0.34 per 1000 patient-years (95% CI 0.32-0.36); drug-reactions 0.01 (95% CI 0.01-0.02) and immune-mediated 0.03 (95% CI 0.03-0.04), and similar or lower than the pre-pandemic period. Compared with the eligible but untreated population, sotrovimab and paxlovid associated with a risk of SmPC AE [adjHR 1.36 (95% CI 1.15-1.62) and 1.28 (95% CI 1.05-1.55), respectively], whilst sotrovimab associated with a risk of drug-reactions [adjHR 2.95 (95% CI 1.56-5.55)] and immune-mediated events [adjHR 3.22 (95% CI 1.86-5.57)].

CONCLUSION

Sotrovimab, paxlovid and molnupiravir demonstrate acceptable safety profiles. Although the risk of AEs was greatest with sotrovimab, event rates were lower than comparative pre-pandemic period.

Disease-Modifying Medications in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in the USA: Trends from 2016 to 2021

BACKGROUND

Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), since their introduction in 1990, have revolutionized the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Newer DMARDs have recently been approved, influencing treatment patterns and clinical guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To update the current prescribing patterns of DMARDs in the pharmacotherapy of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to include the pandemic era.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cross-sectional multi-year study. Using Optum's Clinformatics® Data Mart Database, we summarized trends in the prevalence of DMARD use in the USA from 2016 to 2021 by year for adult patients ≥ 18 years old with at least one medical RA claim and one pharmacy/medical claim of a DMARD medication. Trends included type of DMARD, class of DMARD (conventional (csDMARDs), biologics [tumor necrosis factor (TNFi) and Non-TNFi), and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKs)], and triple therapy [methotrexate (MTX), hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), sulfasalazine (SUL)] used.

RESULTS

The total sample from 2016 to 2021 was 670,679 commercially insured patients. The average age was 63.7 years (SD 13.6), and 76.7% were female and 70% were White. csDMARDs remain the most prescribed (ranging from 77.2 to 79.2%). Although JAKs were the least prescribed DMARD class, their proportion more than doubled from 2016 (1.5%) to 2021 (4%). MTX utilization declined from 40% in 2016 to 34% in 2021. In contrast, HCQ use increased during the pandemic era from < 25% in 2018 to 30% in 2021. Although there is evidence of the therapeutic benefit of triple therapy, its use was very low (~ 1%) compared to biologics only (~ 17%) or biologics+MTX (~ 10%).

CONCLUSION

About half of patients with RA were on DMARDs. As expected, csDMARDs were highly used consistently. The COVID-19 pandemic might have influenced the use of HCQ and infusion DMARDs. Triple therapy use remains low.

The protocol of a clinical effectiveness trial comparing standard step-up care, early combination DMARD therapy and early use of TNF inhibitors for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriatic arthritis: the 3-arm parallel group SPEED randomized controlled trial

Objectives

The aim of the Severe Psoriatic arthritis - Early intervEntion to control Disease trial is to compare outcomes in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients with poor prognostic factors treated with standard step-up conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), combination csDMARDs or a course of early biologics.

Design

This multicentre UK trial was embedded within the MONITOR-PsA cohort, which uses a trial within cohort design.

Methods and analysis

Patients with newly diagnosed PsA and at least one poor prognostic factor (polyarthritis, C-reactive protein >5 mg/dL, health assessment questionnaire >1, radiographic erosions) were randomized equally and open-label to either standard care with 'step-up' csDMARD therapy, initial therapy with combination csDMARDs (methotrexate with either sulfasalazine or leflunomide) or to early biologics induction therapy (adalimumab plus methotrexate). The primary outcome is the PsA disease activity score at week 24.

Ethics

Ethical approval for the study was granted by the South Central Research Ethics Committee (ref 18/SC/0107).

Discussion

Treatment recommendations for PsA suggest more intensive therapy for those with poor prognostic factors but there are no studies that have previously used prognostic factors to guide therapy. Applying initial intensive therapy has shown improved outcomes in other inflammatory arthritides but has never been tried in PsA. Combination csDMARDs have shown some superiority over single therapies but there are limited data and concerns about side effects. Early use of biologics has also been shown to be superior to methotrexate but these drugs are costly and not usually funded first line. However, if a short course of biologics can rapidly suppress inflammation allowing treatment to be withdrawn and response maintained on methotrexate, this may be a cost-effective model for early use.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03739853) and EudraCT (2017-004542-24).

Trust performance in managing inflammatory arthritis over time in England and Wales: a latent class analysis approach

Objectives

To evaluate trust-level performance in time to initiation of DMARD therapy in patients with early inflammatory arthritis (EIA), with identification of the change in performance trajectories over time and investigation of trust characteristics associated with this change.

Methods

We included 130 trusts from the UK contributing to the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit (NEIAA) from 2018 to 2020. The primary outcome was days from referral to initiation of DMARD therapy in patients with EIA. Latent class growth mixture models were applied to identify distinct groups of trusts with similar trajectories of performance change over time. We used mixed effects linear and multinomial logistic regression models to evaluate the association between delay in treatment and trust-level characteristics.

Results

The mean time to DMARD initiation was 53 days (s.d. 18), with an average 0.3-day decrease with each month over time. Four latent trajectories were identified in our cohort, with >77% of individual trusts showing ongoing improvements in decreasing treatment waiting times. Prior to separating by latent class, time to DMARD initiation was shorter in trusts with higher rheumatology staffing, a local EIA treatment pathway and those with access to musculoskeletal ultrasound. Trusts with more nurses in the rheumatology department were less likely to be in the worst performance group [odds ratio 0.69 (95% CI 0.49, 0.93)].

Conclusion

In this cohort study, we observed a reduction in treatment waiting time over time. Trusts with better staffed and improved EIA clinical structure are likely to initiate definitive treatment earlier in patients with EIA.

Platelets are a major player and represent a therapeutic opportunity in systemic lupus erythematosus

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disease characterized by immune dysregulation and organ injury with a premature mortality due to cardiovascular diseases. Platelets, that are primarily known for their role in hemostasis, have been shown to play an active role in the pathogenesis and in the progression of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Here we summarize the evidence of their roles in SLE pathogenesis which supports the development of targeted treatments. Platelets and their precursors, the megakaryocytes, are intrinsically different in SLE patients compared with healthy controls. Different triggers related to innate and adaptive immunity activate platelets which release extracellular vesicles, soluble factors and interact with immune cells, thereby perpetuating inflammation. Platelets are involved in organ damage in SLE, especially in lupus nephritis and participate in the heightened cardiovascular mortality. They also play a clear role in antiphospholipid syndrome which can be associated with both thrombocytopenia and thrombosis. To tackle platelet activation and their interactions with immune cells now constitute promising therapeutic strategies in SLE.

Comparison of Rheumatoid Arthritis Information Recorded in UK CPRD Aurum and CPRD GOLD Databases (Companion Paper 3)

Purpose

To report distribution of codes associated with a rheumatoid arthritis (RA) diagnosis recorded in Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum compared to the previously validated CPRD GOLD database as a critical step toward making decisions about CPRD Aurum's suitability for medical research.

Patients and Methods

We analyzed the distribution of codes for RA diagnoses, labs, and treatments in the new CPRD Aurum database, compared to the CPRD GOLD database by selecting relevant indicators of RA diagnosis, treatment, and clinical care. We included all patients in England in CPRD Aurum and CPRD GOLD with an incident diagnosis code for RA on or after 1 January 2005 and at least two years recorded data before first RA diagnosis.

Results

We found 53,083 and 18,167 patients with a new diagnosis code for RA in CPRD Aurum and CPRD GOLD, respectively. In both databases approximately 67% were female with similar mean ages at first diagnosis. There were few differences in RA-related recording patterns between the two data sources. Before first RA diagnosis, CPRD Aurum patients had more RA-specific labs and other supporting clinical codes. After diagnosis, CPRD Aurum patients had more RA diagnoses coded and more often had 10+ general RA labs than patients in CPRD GOLD. More CPRD GOLD patients had 10+ prescriptions for conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARD) compared to CPRD Aurum. Otherwise, the distribution of drugs used to treat RA was similar between databases. The standardized incidence of RA was similar between databases.

Conclusion

Overall, among patients with a diagnosis code for RA, recording of diagnoses, prescription drugs, and labs were similar between CPRD Aurum and CPRD GOLD. Slight differences were found for a few variables, but overall, we found consistency between the databases. In addition, standardized incidence of RA was similar between databases.

Gout incidence and management during the COVID-19 pandemic in England, UK: a nationwide observational study using OpenSAFELY

BACKGROUND

Gout is the most prevalent inflammatory arthritis, yet one of the worst managed. Our objective was to assess how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted incidence and quality of care for people with gout in England, UK.

METHODS

With the approval of National Health Service England, we did a population-level cohort study using primary care and hospital electronic health record data for 17·9 million adults registered with general practices using TPP health record software, via the OpenSAFELY platform. The study period was from March 1, 2015, to Feb 28, 2023. Individuals aged 18-110 years were defined as having incident gout if they were assigned index diagnostic codes for gout, were registered with TPP practices in England for at least 12 months before diagnosis, did not receive prescriptions for urate-lowering therapy more than 30 days before diagnosis, and had not been admitted to hospital or attended an emergency department for gout flares more than 30 days before diagnosis. Outcomes assessed were incidence and prevalence of people with recorded gout diagnoses, incidence of gout hospitalisations, initiation of urate-lowering therapy, and attainment of serum urate targets (≤360 μmol/L).

FINDINGS

From a reference population of 17 865 145 adults, 246 695 individuals were diagnosed with incident gout. The mean age of individuals with incident gout was 61·3 years (SD 16·2). 66 265 (26·9%) of 246 695 individuals were female, 180 430 (73·1%) were male, and 189 035 (90·9%) of 208 050 individuals with available ethnicity data were White. Incident gout diagnoses decreased by 30·9% in the year beginning March, 2020, compared with the preceding year (1·23 diagnoses vs 1·78 diagnoses per 1000 adults). Gout prevalence was 3·07% in 2015-16, and 3·21% in 2022-23. Gout hospitalisations decreased by 30·1% in the year commencing March, 2020, compared with the preceding year (9·6 admissions vs 13·7 admissions per 100 000 adults). Of 228 095 people with incident gout and available follow-up, 66 560 (29·2%) were prescribed urate-lowering therapy within 6 months. Of 65 305 individuals who initiated urate-lowering therapy with available follow-up, 16 790 (25·7%) attained a serum urate concentration of 360 μmol/L or less within 6 months of urate-lowering therapy initiation. In interrupted time-series analyses, urate-lowering therapy prescribing improved modestly during the pandemic, compared with pre-pandemic, whereas urate target attainment was similar.

INTERPRETATION

Using gout as an exemplar disease, we showed the complexity of how health care was impacted during the COVID-19 pandemic. We observed a reduction in gout diagnoses but no effect on treatment metrics. We showed how country-wide, routinely collected data can be used to map disease epidemiology and monitor care quality.

FUNDING

None.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on referrals to musculoskeletal services from primary care and subsequent incidence of inflammatory rheumatic musculoskeletal disease: an observational study

Objective

The aim was to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic upon referral patterns and incident diagnosis of inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (iRMDs).

Methods

UK primary care data were used to describe referral patterns for patients with musculoskeletal conditions. Trends in referrals to musculoskeletal services and incident diagnoses of iRMDs (specifically, RA and JIA) were described using Joinpoint Regression and comparisons made between key pandemic time periods.

Results

The incidence of RA and JIA reduced by -13.3 and -17.4% per month, respectively, between January 2020 and April 2020, then increased by 1.9 and 3.7% per month, respectively, between April 2020 and October 2021. The incidence of all diagnosed iRMDs was stable until October 2021. Referrals decreased between February 2020 and May 2020 by -16.8% per month from 4.8 to 2.4% in patients presenting with a musculoskeletal condition. After May 2020, referrals increased significantly (16.8% per month) to 4.5% in July 2020. The time from first musculoskeletal consultation to RA diagnosis and from referral to RA diagnosis increased in the early pandemic period [rate ratio (RR) 1.11, 95% CI 1.07, 1.15 and RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.17, 1.30, respectively] and remained consistently higher in the late pandemic period (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.11, 1.16 and RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.23, 1.32, respectively), compared with the pre-COVID-19 pandemic period.

Conclusion

Patients with underlying RA and JIA that developed during the pandemic might be yet to present or might be in the referral and/or diagnostic process. Clinicians should remain alert to this possibility, and commissioners should be aware of these findings, enabling the appropriate planning and commissioning of services.

Barriers to the Diagnosis of Early Inflammatory Arthritis: A Literature Review

The early identification of patients with inflammatory arthritis and their referral to rheumatologists in order to establish a diagnosis and to start treatment plays a crucial role in patient outcomes. However, it is recognized that a large proportion of patients with inflammatory arthritis are diagnosed very late, losing the opportunity to start treatment in the very early stages of disease, resulting in a worse prognosis. This delay depends on several factors related to the patient, the disease, socio-demographic and health system aspects. Over time, several strategies have been developed and implemented at different levels aiming to overcome such barriers and to reduce the time from the onset of the symptoms until the diagnosis and start of adequate treatment. In this non-systematic comprehensive review, we will describe the main barriers in the identification of patients with inflammatory arthritis at different levels. We will also discuss the different strategies that have been implemented with the objective to overcome the recognized barriers and their impact in the reduction of delays.