What is the optimal target for treat-to-target strategies in rheumatoid arthritis?

What is the best target in a treat-to-target strategy in rheumatoid arthritis? Results from a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

OBJECTIVES

A treat-to-target (T2T) strategy has been shown to be superior to usual care in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but the optimal target remains unknown. Targets are based on a disease activity measure (eg, Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28), Simplified Disease Activity Indices/Clinical Disease Activity Indices (SDAI/CDAI), and a cut-off such as remission or low disease activity (LDA). Our aim was to compare the effect of different targets on clinical and radiographic outcomes.

METHODS

Cochrane, Embase and (pre)MEDLINE databases were searched (1 June 2022) for randomised controlled trials and cohort studies after 2003 that applied T2T in RA patients for ≥12 months. Data were extracted from individual T2T study arms; risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Using meta-regression, we evaluated the effect of the target used on clinical and radiographic outcomes, correcting for heterogeneity between and within studies.

RESULTS

115 treatment arms were used in the meta-regression analyses. Aiming for SDAI/CDAI-LDA was statistically superior to targeting DAS-LDA regarding DAS-remission and SDAI/CDAI/Boolean-remission outcomes over 1-3 years. Aiming for SDAI/CDAI-LDA was also significantly superior to DAS-remission regarding both SDAI/CDAI/Boolean-remission (over 1-3 years) and mean SDAI/CDAI (over 1 year). Targeting DAS-remission rather than DAS-LDA only improved the percentage of patients in DAS-remission, and only statistically significantly after 2-3 years of T2T. No differences were observed in Health Assessment Questionnaire and radiographic progression.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeting SDAI/CDAI-LDA, and to a lesser extent DAS-remission, may be superior to targeting DAS-LDA regarding several clinical outcomes. However, due to the risk of residual confounding and the lack of data on (over)treatment and safety, future studies should aim to directly and comprehensively compare targets.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021249015.

MTX optimization or adding bDMARD equally improve disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis: results from the prospective study STRATEGE

Objectives

The STRATEGE (Therapeutic Strategy in Patients Treated With Methotrexate for Rheumatoid Arthritis) study aimed to describe treatment strategies in current practice in RA biologic DMARD (bDMARD)-naïve patients with an inadequate response to MTX therapy, and to compare clinical efficacy of the different therapeutic strategies on disease activity after 6 months.

Methods

The main inclusion criteria of this prospective, observational, multicentre study were confirmed RA diagnosis, treatment by MTX monotherapy and need for therapeutic management modification.

Results

The 722 patients included had a mean (s.d.) RA duration of 5.3 (6.7) years, a mean DAS28 of 4.0 (1.1); they were all receiving MTX monotherapy, 68% oral, at a mean dose of 15.0 (4.1) mg/week. Two major strategies were identified: (i) MTX monotherapy dose and/or route optimization (72%) and (ii) bDMARD initiation ± MTX (16%). MTX dosing was modified for 70% of patients, maintained (dose and route) for 28% of patients and interrupted for 2%. bDMARDs were started when the MTX mean dose was 17.4 mg/week, 56% parenterally; MTX was maintained concomitantly for 96% of patients. Six-month follow-up results adjusted by propensity score showed that both options were equally successful in improving disease activity and physical function, with 63 and 68% of good-to-moderate EULAR responses, respectively.

Conclusion

The STRATEGE study shows the importance of initial MTX treatment optimization before initiation of a biological treatment and emphasizes the importance of treat-to-target strategy.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02288520.

Sexual Dimorphism in the Expression of Pain Phenotype in Preclinical Models of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis is one of most frequent rheumatic diseases, affecting around 1% of the population worldwide. Pain impacting the quality of life for the patient with rheumatoid arthritis, is often the primary factor leading them to seek medical care. Although sex-related differences in humans and animal models of rheumatoid arthritis are described, the correlation between pain and sex in rheumatoid arthritis has only recently been directly examined. Here we review the literature and explore the mechanisms underlying the expression of the pain phenotype in females and males in preclinical models of rheumatoid arthritis.

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.

Mindfulness interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To explore the effect of mindfulness interventions in improving outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

Following the collective strategy of Cochrane Collaborative Group, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database were searched from the establishment of databases to September 2019. Reference lists were searched for additional studies. Risk of bias was assessed using Revman 5.3. Disagreement was resolved by discussion.

RESULTS

A total of 6 RCTs were included, including 337 patients. The results showed that the improvement of pain intensity in mindfulness group after intervention was better than that in the control group, and the difference was significant [WMD = 0.65, 95% CI (-1.11, - 0.18), P = 0.006]. There were significant differences in depression between the two groups [SMD = 0.47, 95% CI (- 0.86, - 0.07), P = 0.02]. The results showed that there were significant differences in DSA28 between the two groups [WMD = -0.29,95% CI (- 0.38, - 0.19), P ＜0.00001]. The results showed that there were no significant differences in anxiety and CPR between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

mindfulness interventions can significantly improve pain intensity, depression, and symptoms in patients with rheumatoid arthritis compared with conventional therapy. But the result still needs to be confirmed by more high-quality, large-sample randomized controlled trials.

Treat-to-Target Approach in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Quality Improvement Trial

OBJECTIVE

Using a quality improvement approach, our objective was to integrate a treat-to-target approach for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) through routine electronic collection of patient-reported disease activity scores and a multidisciplinary learning collaborative for rheumatologists.

METHODS

RA patients completed a patient-reported outcome measure, the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), at check-in. Nine rheumatologists and their patients were allocated to a learning collaborative intervention group focused on a treat-to-target approach and 13 were allocated to a control group. The primary outcome was documentation of a treat-to-target implementation score: disease activity score, disease activity score used in the medication change decision, the presence of a treatment target, and an indication of shared decision-making. A primary analysis of patient visits with medication changes was conducted using an interrupted time-series analysis.

RESULTS

We studied 554 individual rheumatology patients with 709 patient visits. Treat-to-target implementation scores among intervention rheumatologists (mean ± SD 44.6% ± 1.63%) were 12.4% higher than in the control group (mean ± SD 32.2% ± 1.50%; P < 0.0001). We observed differences in treat-to-target implementation score components, comparing intervention group to control group rheumatologists: disease activity score present, 77.2% versus 68.0% (P = 0.02); disease activity score used in the medication change decision, 45.2% versus 30.0% (P < 0.01); treatment target, 9.0% versus 0.4% (P < 0.01); and shared decision-making, 46.9% versus 30.0% (P < 0.01). Secondary analysis of patient visits with high RAPID3 scores found that medication changes were 54% less likely in the intervention versus control group (odds ratio 0.46 [95% confidence interval 0.27-0.79], P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

This nonrandomized, interrupted time-series trial demonstrated a modest but significant impact of a learning collaborative intervention on rheumatologist documentation of a treat-to-target approach in RA.

Update of the Mexican College of Rheumatology Guidelines for the Pharmacological Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis, 2018

Therapeutic advances in rheumatoid arthritis require periodic review of treatment guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To update the Mexican College of Rheumatology guidelines on the pharmacological treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

METHOD

Board certified rheumatologists from different health institutions and regions of the country participated. Work teams were formed that reviewed the previous guidelines, elaborated new questions, reviewed the literature, and scored the evidence that was presented and discussed in plenary session. The conclusions were presented to infectologists, gynaecologists and patients. Recommendations were based on levels of evidence according to GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Updated recommendations on the use of available medications for rheumatoid arthritis treatment in Mexico up to 2017 are presented. The importance of adequate and sustained control of the disease is emphasized and relevant safety aspects are described. Bioethical conflicts are included, and government action is invited to strengthen correct treatment of the disease.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated recommendations of the Mexican College of Rheumatology on the pharmacological treatment of rheumatoid arthritis incorporate the best available information to be used in the Mexican health care system.

The frequency of remission and low disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and their ability to identify people with low disability and normal quality of life

OBJECTIVE

Treat-to-target in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) recommends targeting remission, with low disease activity (LDA) being an alternative goal. When deciding to target remission or LDA, important considerations are the likelihood of attaining them, and their impacts on function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We have addressed this by studying: (a) the frequency of remission and LDA/remission; (b) DAS28-ESR trends after remission; (c) ability of remission vs. LDA to identify patients with normal function (HAQ ≤ 0.5) and HRQoL (EQ-5D ≥ the normal population).

METHODS

We studied 571 patients in two clinical trials, and 1693 patients in a 10-year routine care cohort. We assessed the frequency and sustainability of remission and LDA/remission, variability in DAS28-ESR after remission, and sensitivity/specificity of remission and LDA/remission at identifying patients with low disability levels and normal HRQoL using Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

Point remission and remission/LDA were common (achieved by 35-58% and 49-74% of patients, respectively), but were rarely sustained (sustained remission and remission/LDA achieved by 5-9% and 9-16% of patients, respectively). Following attaining remission, DAS28-ESR levels varied substantially. Despite this, of those patients attaining point remission, the majority (53-61%) were in remission at study end-points. Whilst remission was highly specific at identifying patients with low disability (85-91%) it lacked sensitivity (51-57%); similar findings were seen for normal HRQoL (specificity 78-86%; sensitivity 52-59%). The optimal DAS28-cut-off to identify individuals with low disability and normal HRQoL was around the LDA threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support both the treat-to-target goals. Attaining remission is highly specific for attaining low disability and normal HRQoL, although many patients with more active disease also have good function and HRQoL. Attaining a DAS28-ESR ≤ 3.2 has a better balance of specificity and sensitivity for attaining these outcomes, with the benefit of being more readily achievable. Although sustaining these targets over time is rare, even attaining them on a one-off basis leads to better function and HRQoL outcomes for patients.

Liquid biopsies to guide therapeutic decisions in rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic, immune-mediated inflammatory disease that has transitioned from a debilitating disease to a chronic, controllable disease. This has been possible due to the introduction of new treatment strategies like "treat-to-target," in which the clinician treats the patient aggressively enough to reach low disease activity or remission, and the introduction of new therapeutic agents, such as biological therapies, which can lead to the prevention of damage by early diagnosis and initiation of treatment. Attention is now being directed toward identifying the optimal treatment for each patient, one that will be the most efficient and have the least number of side effects. Much work has been done to find serologic and synovial biomarkers of response to various RA treatments. Proteomics, genomics and, in the past few years, metabolomics, have all been used in the quest of identifying these biomarkers. Blood-based liquid biopsies provide a minimally invasive alternative to synovial biopsies to identify cellular and molecular signatures that can be used to longitudinally monitor response and allow for personalized medicine approach. Liquid biopsies are comprised of cell-free DNA, immune circulating cells, and extracellular vesicles, and are being increasingly and successfully used in the field of oncology for diagnosis, progression, prognosis, and prediction of response to treatment. Recently, researchers have also begun investigating the usefulness of liquid biopsies in the field of rheumatology; in this review, we will focus on the potential of liquid biopsy blood samples as biomarkers of response to treatment in patients with RA.