Rheumatoid arthritis: Is imaging needed to define remission in rheumatoid arthritis?

Photoacoustic/ultrasonic dual-mode imaging for monitoring angiogenesis and synovial erosion in rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by the formation of new vessels, synovial proliferation and destruction of articular cartilage. However, characteristic early diagnostic and therapeutic monitoring methods are still lacking. We report a study using a photoacoustic/ultrasound (PA/US) dual-mode imaging for RA disease. By establishing a collagen-induced (CIA) RA mouse model to classify disease states based on a subjective grading system, PA/US imaging allows real-time assessment of synovial erosion and vascular opacification within the knee joint in different disease states at high spatial resolution. The system also quantitatively monitors subcutaneous vascular physiology and morphology in the hind paw of mice, measuring the area and photoacoustic signal intensity of vascular proliferation and showing a positive correlation with disease grading. Compared to traditional subjective scoring of arthritis severity, the PA/US imaging is more sensitive i.e., vascular signals and synovial erosion can be observed early in the course of arthritis.

Relationship between the prevalence of subclinical tenosynovitis and treatment in patients with RA in clinical remission: STARTER study

OBJECTIVE

This study is a sub-analysis from the patient cohort of the STARTER (Sonographic Tenosynovitis Assessment in RheumaToid arthritis patiEnts in Remission) study. The aim was to evaluate differences in ultrasound-detected joint and/or tendon involvement between patients receiving therapies based on a combination of csDMARDs and bDMARDs and those who were treated with either csDMARDs or bDMARDs in monotherapy.

METHODS

427 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis were recruited between October 2013 and June 2014.They were divided into 3 subgroups based on their therapy at baseline: patients with bDMARDs in monotherapy, patients with csDMARDs in monotherapy, patients in combination therapy (csDMARD+bDMARD). At baseline, 6 months and 12 months, a clinical examination (28 joint count), an ultrasound evaluation were performed in each patient. A score of Grey Scale (GS) and Power Doppler (PD)-synovitis and -tenosynovitis, was calculated based on the OMERACT scoring systems.

RESULTS

256 patients completed the observation period: 48 patients from the bDMARDs group (19.7%), 152 patients from the csDMARDs group (59.1%) and 56 pts from csDMARD+bDMARD group (21.8%).The analysis has shown that GS-tenosynovitis and PD-tenosynovitis are better controlled in combination therapy than they are with csDMARDs alone (p:0.025 and p:0.047, respectively); for PD synovitis, there was a better response in those who were treated with the combination therapy when compared to the patients in csDMARD (p:0.01) and those in bDMARD (p:0.02).

CONCLUSION

The analysis showed a lower prevalence of subclinical inflammatory manifestations detected with ultrasound imaging in those patients treated with the combination therapy than in those in monotherapy.

Conventional versus ultrasound treat to target: no difference in magnetic resonance imaging inflammation or joint damage over 2 years in early rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether an ultrasound-guided treat-to-target strategy for early RA would lead to reduced MRI inflammation or less structural damage progression compared with a conventional treat-to-target strategy.

METHODS

A total of 230 DMARD-naïve early RA patients were randomized to an ultrasound tight control strategy targeting DAS <1.6, no swollen joints and no power Doppler signal in any joint or a conventional strategy targeting DAS <1.6 and no swollen joints. Patients in both arms were treated according to the same DMARD escalation strategy. MRI of the dominant hand was performed at six time points over 2 years and scored according to the OMERACT RA MRI scoring system. A total of 218 patients had baseline and one or more follow-up MRIs and were included in the analysis. The mean MRI score change from baseline to each follow-up and the 2 year risk for erosive progression were compared between arms.

RESULTS

MRI bone marrow oedema, synovitis and tenosynovitis improved over the first year and was sustained during the second year of follow-up, with no statistically significant differences between the ultrasound and the conventional arms at any time point. The 2 year risk for progression of MRI erosions was similar in both treatment arms: ultrasound arm 39%, conventional arm 33% [relative risk 1.16 (95% CI 0.81, 1.66), P = 0.40].

CONCLUSION

Incorporating ultrasound information in treatment decisions did not lead to reduced MRI inflammation or less structural damage compared with a conventional treatment strategy. The findings support that systematic use of ultrasound does not provide a benefit in the follow-up of patients with early RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01205854.

MR and ultrasound of the hands and wrists in rheumatoid arthritis. Part II. Added clinical value

Advanced imaging has become just as vital for diagnosing, staging, and monitoring disease in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients as it is for cancer patients. Part 1 of this review discussed synovitis, tenosynovitis, erosions, and osteitis-key imaging findings that occur in patients with RA. Part 2 will now show how these features, in combination with clinical and serologic data, can assist clinical decision-making at various stages of a patient's disease course. Specifically, assessing current disease activity and prognosticating future aggressiveness inform treatment decisions at initial presentation, during medical treatment, and at clinical remission. In addition to summarizing the current literature on advanced imaging in RA, clinical examples from different stages throughout the disease course will illustrate practical approaches for applying these research results. Last, this review will describe potential future roles of imaging in RA patients.

The Utility and Limitations of CRP, ESR and DAS28-CRP in Appraising Disease Activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Introduction: Identifying and quantifying inflammatory disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis remains a challenge. Many studies have suggested that a large proportion of patients may have active inflammation, but normal inflammatory markers. Although various disease activity scores have been validated, most rely to a large degree on biomarkers such as CRP and ESR. In this study, we examine the utility and limitations of these biomarkers, as well as the DAS28-CRP in appraising disease activity in RA.

Methods: Two hundred and twenty three consecutive rheumatoid arthritis reporting knee arthralgia underwent synovial sampling of the affected knee via needle arthroscopy. The synovium was examined by microscopy with H+E staining as well as immunohistochemistry, and related to the ESR, CRP and DAS28-CRP on blood samples taken immediately before arthroscopy.

Results: Although a statistically significant positive correlation was observed between CRP and the level of inflammation in the biopsy retrieved (n = 197, rho = 0.43, CI 0.30–0.54, p < 0.0001), there was histological evidence of inflammation in the synovium in 49.4% of the patients who had a normal CRP. A positive correlation was also observed between ESR and the level of inflammation in the biopsy retrieved (n = 188, rho = 0.29, CI 0.15–0.42 p < 0.0001). A statistically significant but weak positive correlation was observed between the DAS28-CRP and synovial inflammation (n = 189, rho = 0.23, CI 0.09–0.37, p = 0.0011). Only the CD19 infiltrate in the synovium correlated with serum CRP (n = 70, rho = 0.32, CI 0.08–0.52, p = 0.0068).

Conclusion: CRP has a moderately strong relationship with disease activity, but there are significant pitfalls in the use of this biomarker in RA, and therefore a need interpret CRP results judiciously. The results of this study underline the heterogeneity of RA, and the need to develop improved panels of biomarkers, to better stratify RA, and to identify the cohort for whom inflammatory activity cannot be measured accurately with CRP.

What is the added value of ultrasound joint examination for monitoring synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis and can it be used to guide treatment decisions? A systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Synovitis (inflamed joint synovial lining) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be assessed by clinical examination (CE) or ultrasound (US).

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the added value of US, compared with CE alone, in RA synovitis in terms of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane databases were searched from inception to October 2015.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review sought RA studies that compared additional US with CE. Heterogeneity of the studies with regard to interventions, comparators and outcomes precluded meta-analyses. Systematic searches for studies of cost-effectiveness and US and treatment-tapering studies (not necessarily including US) were undertaken.

MATHEMATICAL MODEL

A model was constructed that estimated, for patients in whom drug tapering was considered, the reduction in costs of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and serious infections at which the addition of US had a cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained of £20,000 and £30,000. Furthermore, the reduction in the costs of DMARDs at which US becomes cost neutral was also estimated. For patients in whom dose escalation was being considered, the reduction in number of patients escalating treatment and in serious infections at which the addition of US had a cost per QALY gained of £20,000 and £30,000 was estimated. The reduction in number of patients escalating treatment for US to become cost neutral was also estimated.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight studies were included. Two randomised controlled trials compared adding US to a Disease Activity Score (DAS)-based treat-to-target strategy for early RA patients. The addition of power Doppler ultrasound (PDUS) to a Disease Activity Score 28 joints-based treat-to-target strategy in the Targeting Synovitis in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (TaSER) trial resulted in no significant between-group difference for change in Disease Activity Score 44 joints (DAS44). This study found that significantly more patients in the PDUS group attained DAS44 remission (p = 0.03). The Aiming for Remission in Rheumatoid Arthritis (ARCTIC) trial found that the addition of PDUS and grey-scale ultrasound (GSUS) to a DAS-based strategy did not produce a significant between-group difference in the primary end point: composite DAS of < 1.6, no swollen joints and no progression in van der Heijde-modified total Sharp score (vdHSS). The ARCTIC trial did find that the erosion score of the vdHS had a significant advantage for the US group (p = 0.04). In the TaSER trial there was no significant group difference for erosion. Other studies suggested that PDUS was significantly associated with radiographic progression and that US had added value for wrist and hand joints rather than foot and ankle joints. Heterogeneity between trials made conclusions uncertain. No studies were identified that reported the cost-effectiveness of US in monitoring synovitis. The model estimated that an average reduction of 2.5% in the costs of biological DMARDs would be sufficient to offset the costs of 3-monthly US. The money could not be recouped if oral methotrexate was the only drug used.

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity of the trials precluded meta-analysis. Therefore, no summary estimates of effect were available. Additional costs and health-related quality of life decrements, relating to a flare following tapering or disease progression, have not been included. The feasibility of increased US monitoring has not been assessed.

CONCLUSION

Limited evidence suggests that US monitoring of synovitis could provide a cost-effective approach to selecting RA patients for treatment tapering or escalation avoidance. Considerable uncertainty exists for all conclusions. Future research priorities include evaluating US monitoring of RA synovitis in longitudinal clinical studies.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015017216.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Can baseline ultrasound results help to predict failure to achieve DAS28 remission after 1 year of tight control treatment in early RA patients?

Background

At present, there are no prognostic parameters unequivocally predicting treatment failure in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. We investigated whether baseline ultrasonography (US) findings of joints, when added to baseline clinical, laboratory, and radiographical data, could improve prediction of failure to achieve Disease Activity Score assessing 28 joints (DAS28) remission (<2.6) at 1 year in newly diagnosed RA patients.

Methods

A multicentre cohort of newly diagnosed RA patients was followed prospectively for 1 year. US of the hands, wrists, and feet was performed at baseline. Clinical, laboratory, and radiographical parameters were recorded. Primary analysis was the prediction by logistic regression of the absence of DAS28 remission 12 months after diagnosis and start of therapy.

Results

Of 194 patients included, 174 were used for the analysis, with complete data available for 159. In a multivariate model with baseline DAS28 (odds ratio (OR) 1.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2–2.2), the presence of rheumatoid factor (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1–5.1), and type of monitoring strategy (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.05–0.85), the addition of baseline US results for joints (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.89–1.04) did not significantly improve the prediction of failure to achieve DAS28 remission (likelihood ratio test, 1.04; p = 0.31).

Conclusion

In an early RA population, adding baseline ultrasonography of the hands, wrists, and feet to commonly available baseline characteristics did not improve prediction of failure to achieve DAS28 remission at 12 months.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01752309. Registered on 19 December 2012.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13075-018-1514-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

What the Rheumatologist Is Looking for and What the Radiologist Should Know in Imaging for Rheumatoid Arthritis

This article outlines what the rheumatologist is looking for and wants to know in the clinical diagnosis and imaging of rheumatoid arthritis, and what the radiologist should know to facilitate this.

Diagnosis and management of rheumatoid arthritis; What is the current role of established and new imaging techniques in clinical practice?

Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have become established imaging techniques for the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Several publications have pointed out the advantages of these techniques for a more complete evaluation of the inflammation and structural damage at joint level. Recently new imaging techniques as the positron emission tomography (PET) associated with computed tomography (CT) or MRI scan, and the optical imaging have been introduced in the panorama. This article presents the advantages and limitations of each imaging techniques in light with the recent publications.

Ultrasound in management of rheumatoid arthritis: ARCTIC randomised controlled strategy trial

OBJECTIVE

 To determine whether a treatment strategy based on structured ultrasound assessment would lead to improved outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis, compared with a conventional strategy.

DESIGN

 Multicentre, open label, two arm, parallel group, randomised controlled strategy trial.

SETTING

 Ten rheumatology departments and one specialist centre in Norway, from September 2010 to September 2015.

PARTICIPANTS

 238 patients were recruited between September 2010 and April 2013, of which 230 (141 (61%) female) received the allocated intervention and were analysed for the primary outcome. The main inclusion criteria were age 18-75 years, fulfilment of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis, disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug naivety with indication for disease modifying drug therapy, and time from first patient reported swollen joint less than two years. Patients with abnormal kidney or liver function or major comorbidities were excluded.

INTERVENTIONS

 122 patients were randomised to an ultrasound tight control strategy targeting clinical and imaging remission, and 116 patients were randomised to a conventional tight control strategy targeting clinical remission. Patients in both arms were treated according to the same disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug escalation strategy, with 13 visits over two years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

 The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a combination between 16 and 24 months of clinical remission, no swollen joints, and non-progression of radiographic joint damage. Secondary outcomes included measures of disease activity, radiographic progression, functioning, quality of life, and adverse events. All participants who attended at least one follow-up visit were included in the full analysis set.

RESULTS

 26 (22%) of the 118 analysed patients in the ultrasound tight control arm and 21 (19%) of the 112 analysed patients in the clinical tight control arm reached the primary endpoint (mean difference 3.3%, 95% confidence interval -7.1% to 13.7%). Secondary endpoints (disease activity, physical function, and joint damage) were similar between the two groups. Six (5%) patients in the ultrasound tight control arm and seven (6%) patients in the conventional arm had serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

 The systematic use of ultrasound in the follow-up of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis treated according to current recommendations is not justified on the basis of the ARCTIC results. The findings highlight the need for randomised trials assessing the clinical application of medical technology.Trial registration Clinical trials NCT01205854.

Structural integrity versus radiographic progression in rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, progressive and inflammatory disease often leading to irreversible destruction of articular structures and consequent disability. The key steps of RA pathogenetic mechanisms are the break of immune tolerance and the production of autoantibodies, followed by systemic and local inflammation resulting in damage of both subchondral bone (erosion) and cartilage (joint space narrowing (JSN)). Evidences from clinical trials suggest that erosions and JSN are the result of inter-related but partly independent pathogenetic pathways, in both cases mediated by pro-inflammatory cytokines, even if a direct effect of cyclic citrullinated peptides (anticitrullinated protein antibodies, ACPAs) on bone damage had been postulated. As a consequence, the suppression of inflammation provided by synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs results in a decreased progression of bone and cartilage damage, supporting the effectiveness of the treat-to-target strategy. Nevertheless, radiographic progression may also be detected in patients achieving a sustained clinical remission. Two main reasons for this apparent uncoupling between clinical synovitis and damage progression should be considered. First, in some cases, the use of composite indices to define remission may not be completely adequate to identify residual disease activity, requiring the concomitant introduction of more sensible tools such as imaging. Second, the direct effect of biological drugs on bone destruction inducers, such as pro-inflammatory cytokines, may explain the suppression of radiographic progression despite the persistence of clinical synovitis. In this review, we discuss the link between autoimmunity, inflammation, joint damage and disability, focusing on how radiographic progression may predict functional disability.

Proceedings from the 7th Annual International Society for Musculoskeletal Imaging in Rheumatology (ISEMIR) conference

The International Society for Musculoskeletal Imaging in Rheumatology (ISEMIR) was founded in 2005 with the goal of discussing matters related to imaging in rheumatology, particularly, validation, education, and use in clinical practice and research. Because the field of musculoskeletal (MSK) imaging is rapidly evolving, continuous education in the field is imperative. ISEMIR's international faculty and world-renowned experts presented the newest information as it relates to the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) at the 7th annual ISEMIR meeting which took place on April 12-14, 2014 in Santa Monica, California. Presentations from the meeting can be viewed at www.isemir.org.