Impact of patient-reported flares on radiographic progression and functional impairment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a cohort study based on the AMBRA trial

Definitions of rheumatoid arthritis flare and how they relate to patients' perspectives: A scoping review of qualitative and quantitative evidence

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is characterized by intermittent flares of disease activity with a significant impact on patients' lives. However, distinguishing flare from daily symptom variation may be approached differently by patients and healthcare providers, potentially hampering shared decision-making when treating RA.

OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive overview of RA flare definitions reported in the published literature, and to compare these with patients' perceptions of the flare concept according to qualitative evidence.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted on August 30th, 2022, and updated on September 30th, 2023, for both quantitative and qualitative studies reporting "flare" or related terms in the context of RA. We searched the following databases: Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. Definitions of RA flare reported in quantitative studies were summarized descriptively. In parallel, a thematic synthesis of qualitative studies was performed to outline patients' views on the concept of flare, and to compare these with the currently used definitions.

RESULTS

Among 32,864 potentially eligible records, 304 studies were included, 5 of which used qualitative/mixed methods to study patients' perceptions of flare. Remarkably, 62 different definitions for RA flare were reported, with many studies reporting more than one. The most commonly used definitions (54 %) were based on disease activity indices, with DAS28-based definitions the most widely applied (84 %). For each of the disease activity indices, several different cutoffs to define flares were used. Various definitions based on physician report were applied in 24 % of cases, while patient-reported criteria represented only 15 % of the applied definitions. Thematic synthesis of the qualitative/mixed-methods studies highlighted the multidimensional impact of flares on patients' lives, resulting in five sequential overarching themes: "Living with RA: a balancing act", "Flare: a disturbance of this balance", "The biopsychosocial impact of flares", "Self-management: the first line of defense", and "Medical help: the last resort". In turn, these five themes were underpinned by a central theme of "Uncertainty and variability".

CONCLUSION

We found a striking heterogeneity regarding the conceptualization and measurement of RA flare in the published literature. Although qualitative evidence highlighted the considerable impact of flares on patients' wellbeing, the majority of reported flare definitions were not based on patient report. There is a need to bridge this gap by aligning patients' and healthcare professionals' views on what distinguishes a flare from acceptable symptom variability when living with RA.

Classifying Self-Reported Rheumatoid Arthritis Flares Using Daily Patient-Generated Data From a Smartphone App: Exploratory Analysis Applying Machine Learning Approaches

BACKGROUND

The ability to predict rheumatoid arthritis (RA) flares between clinic visits based on real-time, longitudinal patient-generated data could potentially allow for timely interventions to avoid disease worsening.

OBJECTIVE

This exploratory study aims to investigate the feasibility of using machine learning methods to classify self-reported RA flares based on a small data set of daily symptom data collected on a smartphone app.

METHODS

Daily symptoms and weekly flares reported on the Remote Monitoring of Rheumatoid Arthritis (REMORA) smartphone app from 20 patients with RA over 3 months were used. Predictors were several summary features of the daily symptom scores (eg, pain and fatigue) collected in the week leading up to the flare question. We fitted 3 binary classifiers: logistic regression with and without elastic net regularization, a random forest, and naive Bayes. Performance was evaluated according to the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve. For the best-performing model, we considered sensitivity and specificity for different thresholds in order to illustrate different ways in which the predictive model could behave in a clinical setting.

RESULTS

The data comprised an average of 60.6 daily reports and 10.5 weekly reports per participant. Participants reported a median of 2 (IQR 0.75-4.25) flares each over a median follow-up time of 81 (IQR 79-82) days. AUCs were broadly similar between models, but logistic regression with elastic net regularization had the highest AUC of 0.82. At a cutoff requiring specificity to be 0.80, the corresponding sensitivity to detect flares was 0.60 for this model. The positive predictive value (PPV) in this population was 53%, and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 85%. Given the prevalence of flares, the best PPV achieved meant only around 2 of every 3 positive predictions were correct (PPV 0.65). By prioritizing a higher NPV, the model correctly predicted over 9 in every 10 non-flare weeks, but the accuracy of predicted flares fell to only 1 in 2 being correct (NPV and PPV of 0.92 and 0.51, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Predicting self-reported flares based on daily symptom scorings in the preceding week using machine learning methods was feasible. The observed predictive accuracy might improve as we obtain more data, and these exploratory results need to be validated in an external cohort. In the future, analysis of frequently collected patient-generated data may allow us to predict flares before they unfold, opening opportunities for just-in-time adaptative interventions. Depending on the nature and implication of an intervention, different cutoff values for an intervention decision need to be considered, as well as the level of predictive certainty required.

Insights Into the Concept of Rheumatoid Arthritis Flare

Identification of a pathological change in the course of systemic chronic immune-inflammatory diseases is key to delivering effective treatment strategies. In this context, one of the most compelling issues is the concept of flare. The multifaceted expression of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) makes it challenging to provide an omni-comprehensive definition of flare, encompassing the pathology's different objective and subjective domains. Our incomplete understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying this process contributes to the partial comprehension of its potential clinical expression. This review focuses on the proposed pathophysiological processes underlying disease recrudescence in RA and the variable definitions adopted to capture flare in clinical practice through its objective, subjective, and temporal domains. Overall, what emerges is a complex landscape far from being unraveled.

Using patient-reported data from a smartphone app to capture and characterise real-time patient-reported flares in rheumatoid arthritis

Objective

We aimed to explore the frequency of self-reported flares and their association with preceding symptoms collected through a smartphone app by people with RA.

Methods

We used data from the Remote Monitoring of RA study, in which patients tracked their daily symptoms and weekly flares on an app. We summarized the number of self-reported flare weeks. For each week preceding a flare question, we calculated three summary features for daily symptoms: mean, variability and slope. Mixed effects logistic regression models quantified associations between flare weeks and symptom summary features. Pain was used as an example symptom for multivariate modelling.

Results

Twenty patients tracked their symptoms for a median of 81 days (interquartile range 80, 82). Fifteen of 20 participants reported at least one flare week, adding up to 54 flare weeks out of 198 participant weeks in total. Univariate mixed effects models showed that higher mean and steeper upward slopes in symptom scores in the week preceding the flare increased the likelihood of flare occurrence, but the association with variability was less strong. Multivariate modelling showed that for pain, mean scores and variability were associated with higher odds of flare, with odds ratios 1.83 (95% CI, 1.15, 2.97) and 3.12 (95% CI, 1.07, 9.13), respectively.

Conclusion

Our study suggests that patient-reported flares are common and are associated with higher daily RA symptom scores in the preceding week. Enabling patients to collect daily symptom data on their smartphones might, ultimately, facilitate prediction and more timely management of imminent flares.

Flares in rheumatoid arthritis: do patient-reported swollen and tender joints match clinical and ultrasonography findings?

OBJECTIVES

To investigate how patient-reported flares in RA are related to clinical joint examination and inflammation detected by US.

METHODS

Eighty RA patients with DAS28-CRP <3.2 and no swollen joints at baseline were followed for 1 year. In case of patient-reported hand flare with swollen and tender joints (SJ and TJ, respectively), patients underwent clinical examination for SJ/TJ and US of bilateral wrists, MCP and PIP 1st-5th, six extensor tendon compartments and wrist flexor tendons for synovitis/tenosynovitis. Percentage agreement and kappa were calculated between patient-reported SJ and TJ, clinical examination for SJ/TJ and US findings indicative of inflammation. With US as reference, sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive value and accuracy of patient-reported and clinically examined joints were determined.

RESULTS

Hand flare was reported by 36% (29/80) of patients. At time of flare, all clinical and ultrasonographic measures of disease activity deteriorated compared with baseline. Agreement between patient-reported SJ/TJ, clinically examined SJ/TJ and US was slight (kappa = 0.02-0.20). Patients and clinicians agreed in 79-93% of joints, more frequently on SJ than TJ. With US as reference, specificities were 86-100% and 88-100%, and sensitivities 12-34% and 4-32% for patient-reported SJ/TJ and clinically examined SJ/TJ, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Over 12 months of follow-up, hand flare was reported by every third RA patient. Self-reported flares were associated with increased disease activity as determined by clinical examination and US. Patient-reported joint assessment may aid in capturing flares between routine clinical visits.

Serial magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound examinations demonstrate differential inflammatory lesion patterns in soft tissue and bone upon patient-reported flares in rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography (US) are more sensitive than clinical evaluation in assessing inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Data is scarce regarding potential link between patient-reported flares and inflammation on imaging. The aim of the study was to explore the pattern and longitudinal associations of inflammatory lesions detected by serial MRI and US in relation to patient-reported flares in patients with RA.

METHODS

Eighty RA patients with baseline DAS28CRP < 3.2 and no swollen joints were examined at baseline and followed for 1 year. Patients were requested to contact the hospital in case of patient-reported hand flare accompanied by ≥ 1 tender and swollen joint. The 29 patients who reported hand flare had four extra visits within 4 months from flare onset comprising clinical examination, patient-reported outcomes, MRI, and US of wrists and hands. MRI synovitis/tenosynovitis/bone marrow edema (BME) and US synovitis/tenosynovitis were scored. MRI and US scores at and after the flare were compared to baseline before the flare, and associations were explored by linear mixed models for repeated measurements.

RESULTS

Synovitis and tenosynovitis by MRI/US increased significantly at flare onset. Synovitis waned quickly, as did US tenosynovitis. BME showed delayed increase yet persisted, once the patient-reported flare had resolved, as did MRI tenosynovitis. In univariate models, patient-reported flares were associated with all MRI and US inflammatory markers, except for BME, which was only associated with SJC28 and long-lasting flares > 14 days. Independent associations were observed between patient-reported flares and tenosynovitis by MRI and US (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-reported flares were linked to inflammation detected by serial MRI and US. Differential patterns of inflammatory lesion evolution were observed by serial imaging with early synovial and tenosynovial inflammation, followed by delayed-onset BME.

Pain and Self-reported Swollen Joints Are Main Drivers of Patient-reported Flares in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from a 12-month Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

To examine prospectively self-reported flare characteristics and their longitudinal association with disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Consecutive RA patients with 28-joint count Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) < 3.2 and no swollen joints were examined at baseline, Month 6, and Month 12. Assessments included joint counts, DAS28-CRP, visual analog scale-evaluator's global assessment (EGA), and PRO. Every third month, patients completed the Flare Assessment in Rheumatoid Arthritis and RA Flare Questionnaire, and disclosed self-management strategies. Flaring and non-flaring patients were compared and longitudinal associations between self-reported flare status (yes/no) and disease activity, PRO, and treatment escalation were explored.

RESULTS

Among 80 patients with RA [74% females, mean (SD) age 63 (10) yrs, disease duration 11 (7) yrs, and baseline DAS28-CRP 1.9 (0.6)], 64 (80%) reported flare at least once during 12 months. Fifty-five percent of flares lasted less than 1 week. Common self-management strategies were analgesics (50%) and restricted activities (38%). Patients who reported being in flare had consistently higher disease activity measures and PRO compared to patients without flare. In a partly adjusted model, all flare domains, patient-reported swollen and tender joint counts and disease activity measures were associated with flares. In fully adjusted analyses, present flare was independently associated with pain (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.34-2.60), patient-reported swollen joints (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.03-1.36), and higher EGA (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.04-1.28). Treatment escalation was associated with present flare (p ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In RA, self-reported flares were frequent, mainly managed by analgesics, substantiated by higher disease activity measures, independently associated with pain and patient-reported swollen joints, and related to treatment escalation.

Disease activity flares and pain flares in an early rheumatoid arthritis inception cohort; characteristics, antecedents and sequelae

Background

RA flares are common and disabling. They are described in terms of worsening inflammation but pain and inflammation are often discordant. To inform treatment decisions, we investigated whether inflammatory and pain flares are discrete entities.

Methods

People from the Early RA Network (ERAN) cohort were assessed annually up to 11 years after presentation (n = 719, 3703 person-years of follow up). Flare events were defined in 2 different ways that were analysed in parallel; DAS28 or Pain Flares. DAS28 Flares satisfied OMERACT flare criteria of increases in DAS28 since the previous assessment (≥1.2 points if active RA or ≥ 0.6 points if inactive RA). A ≥ 4.8-point worsening of SF36-Bodily Pain score defined Pain Flares. The first documented episode of each of DAS28 and Pain Flare in each person was analysed. Subgroups within DAS28 and Pain Flares were determined using Latent Class Analysis. Clinical course was compared between flare subgroups.

Results

DAS28 (45%) and Pain Flares (52%) were each common but usually discordant, with 60% of participants in DAS28 Flare not concurrently in Pain Flare, and 64% of those in Pain Flare not concurrently in DAS28 Flare. Three discrete DAS28 Flare subgroups were identified. One was characterised by increases in tender/swollen joint counts (14.4%), a second by increases in symptoms (13.1%), and a third displayed lower flare severity (72.5%). Two discrete Pain Flare subgroups were identified. One occurred following low disease activity and symptoms (88.6%), and the other occurred on the background of ongoing active disease and pain (11.4%). Despite the observed differences between DAS28 and Pain Flares, each was associated with increased disability which persisted beyond the flare episode.

Conclusion

Flares are both common and heterogeneous in people with RA. Furthermore our findings indicate that for some patients there is a discordance between inflammation and pain in flare events. This discrete flare subgroups might reflect different underlying inflammation and pain mechanisms. Treatments addressing different mechanisms might be required to reduce persistent disability after DAS28 and Pain Flares.

Patient Perceptions of Unmet Medical Need in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Cross-Sectional Survey in the USA

INTRODUCTION

Many rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients do not achieve their treatment goals and experience symptoms that affect psychosocial outcomes and daily activities. This study aimed to identify and quantify the unmet needs perceived by US patients with RA currently taking a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD).

METHODS

A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted with RA patients recruited through CreakyJoints, an online patient support community, and ArthritisPower®, an online patient research registry, from December 2017 to January 2018. Participant patients were aged ≥ 21 years, failed ≥ 1 DMARDs, and were receiving their current DMARD(s) for ≥ 6 months; they answered 50 questions about treatment history, RA symptoms, and flares and completed the Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease (RAID) questionnaire and the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM). Treatment satisfaction was defined by a TSQM global satisfaction score ≥ 80.

RESULTS

Of 415 patients screened, 258 (62%) were eligible and completed the survey; 87% were women, and 87% white, with mean (SD) age of 54.5 (11.4) years. A total of 232 patients (90%) had current or past biologic DMARD (bDMARD) use, with 67% currently on a bDMARD, 65% on ≥ 1 conventional synthetic DMARD, and 40% on methotrexate. Forty-three percent of patients reported daily/almost daily use of prescription pain medications, and 44% reported a current flare. Mean (SD) TSQM scores were 59 [20] for effectiveness, 59 [26] for side effects, 72 [18] for convenience, and 65 [21] for global satisfaction. The mean (SD) RAID overall score was 5.1 (2.0) on a 0-10 scale. Only 26% (67 patients) were satisfied with their RA treatment. Patients not satisfied with treatment reported higher RAID scores overall and by domain, and approximately half reported a current flare.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this real-world survey suggest that three-fourths of RA patients are not satisfied with treatments, which include bDMARDs. Patients continued to experience bothersome symptoms that impacted their daily activities and life. There remains a need for improved disease management among currently treated RA patients.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company (Indianapolis, IN, USA).

Impact of flare on radiographic progression after etanercept continuation, tapering or withdrawal in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Objectives

The structural consequences of flare after dose reduction/discontinuation of biologic DMARDs in patients with RA who achieve remission are unclear. We compared the incidence of radiographic progression in patients with RA who did and did not experience flare after etanercept (ETN) reduction/withdrawal.

Methods

Eligible adults with moderately active RA despite MTX received ETN 50 mg plus MTX weekly in a 36-week, open-label induction period; patients achieving sustained low disease activity by week 36 were randomized to ETN 50 mg plus MTX, ETN 25 mg plus MTX, or placebo plus MTX in a 52-week, double-blind maintenance period. In post hoc analyses, radiographic progression (Δ modified total Sharp score ⩾0.5 units/year) was compared in patients with and without flare [based on DAS28 relapse (main analysis), and clinical disease activity index and simplified disease activity index relapse (sensitivity analyses)]. Findings from patients receiving full- and reduced-dose combination therapy were pooled for comparison with those from patients receiving MTX only.

Results

Significantly more patients receiving MTX monotherapy experienced flare, defined as DAS28 relapse (62% vs 21%; P &lt; 0.0001) and radiographic progression (17% vs 9%; P &lt; 0.001), than patients receiving full-/reduced-dose combination therapy in the double-blind period. Patients with flare defined as clinical disease activity index and simplified disease activity index relapse had higher rates of radiographic progression than those without flare in the full-/reduced-dose combination therapy group (P &lt; 0.01).

Conclusion

Radiographic progression may be a consequence of flare after biologic DMARD dose reduction/withdrawal in patients with RA. If these approaches are taken, careful monitoring for signs/symptoms of relapse is needed.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00565409.

Correlates of Successful Rheumatoid Arthritis Flare Management: Clinician-driven Treatment, Home-based Strategies, and Medication Change

OBJECTIVE

Describe strategies used to manage rheumatoid arthritis (RA) flares that contribute to a successful postflare outcome.

METHODS

Data were collected from the BRASS registry, including clinical and patient-reported outcomes, and a survey with a Likert scale assessing postflare symptoms (better, unchanged, or worse). A logistic regression analysis adjusting for age, sex, flare number in the past 6 months, flare pain severity, home management, clinical consultation, and medication change was performed to evaluate factors influencing flare outcome.

RESULTS

Of 503 participants, 185 reported at least 1 flare that had resolved in the past 6 months, with median (interquartile range) 28-joint count Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein 3 score 2.1 (1.7-2.8). Compared with RA symptoms before the flare, 22 (12%) patients felt worse, 125 (68%) were unchanged, and 38 (20%) felt better. To manage flares, 72% of patients used home-based remedies, 23% sought clinical consultation, and 56% made medication change. Of 103 patients who changed medication, 70% did so without seeking clinical advice. Making a medication change (OR 3.48, 95% CI 1.68-7.21) and having lower flare pain (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71-0.97) were associated with better flare outcome.

CONCLUSION

Flares occur frequently even in patients with low disease activity. Independent of home-based or clinically guided care, making a medication change and having less severe pain during a flare were associated with better flare outcomes. Of interest, the decision to change medications was frequently made without clinical advice. Future studies might address how best to intervene when patients experience flares and whether patient-initiated medication changes have adverse outcomes.

Effect of Magnetic Resonance Imaging vs Conventional Treat-to-Target Strategies on Disease Activity Remission and Radiographic Progression in Rheumatoid Arthritis: The IMAGINE-RA Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Whether using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to guide treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) improves disease activity and slows joint damage progression is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether an MRI-guided treat-to-target strategy vs a conventional clinical treat-to-target strategy improves outcomes in patients with RA in clinical remission.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Two-year, randomized, multicenter trial conducted at 9 hospitals in Denmark. Two hundred patients with RA in clinical remission (disease activity score in 28 joints-C-reactive protein [DAS28-CRP] <3.2 and no swollen joints) were enrolled between April 2012 and June 2015. The final follow-up visit was April 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to an MRI-guided vs a conventional treat-to-target strategy. In the MRI-guided group, the treatment goal was absence of MRI bone marrow edema combined with clinical remission, defined as DAS28-CRP of 3.2 or less and no swollen joints. In the conventional group, the treatment goal was clinical remission.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Co-primary outcomes were proportions of patients achieving DAS28-CRP remission (DAS28-CRP <2.6) and with no radiographic progression (no increase in total van der Heijde-modified Sharp score) at 24 months. Significance testing for the primary outcome was based on 1-sided testing. Secondary outcomes were clinical and MRI measures of disease activity, physical function, and quality of life.

RESULTS

Of 200 patients randomized (133 women [67%]; mean [SD] age, 61.6 [10.5] years; median baseline DAS28-CRP, 1.9 [interquartile range, 1.7-2.2]; van der Heijde-modified Sharp score, 18.0 [interquartile range, 7.0-42.5]), 76 patients (76%) in the MRI-guided group and 95 (95%) in the conventional group completed the study. Of these, 64 (85%) vs 83 (88%), respectively, reached the primary clinical end point (risk difference, -4.8% [1-sided 95% CI, -13.6% to + ∞; 1-sided P = .19]) and 49 (66%) vs 58 (62%), respectively, reached the primary radiographic end point (risk difference, 4.7% [1-sided 95% CI, -7.0% to + ∞; 1-sided P = .25). Of 10 key secondary end points, 8 were null and 2 showed statistically significant benefit for the MRI treat-to-target group. Seventeen patients (17%) in the MRI-guided treat-to-target group and 6 patients (6%) in the conventional treat-to-target group experienced serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with RA in clinical remission, an MRI-guided treat-to-target strategy compared with a conventional treat-to-target strategy did not result in improved disease activity remission rates or reduce radiographic progression. These findings do not support the use of an MRI-guided strategy for treating patients with RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01656278.