Survey on management strategies of rheumatoid arthritis in Saudi Arabia: a Saudi Society for Rheumatology Initiative

Knowledge of Common Symptoms of Rheumatic Diseases and Causes of Delayed Diagnosis in Saudi Arabia

Purpose

The aim of this study is to determine the general population's knowledge on the different symptoms of rheumatic diseases, the key factors for diagnosis delays from the patient's perspective, the length of delay from the onset of symptoms to the diagnosis, and the effect this holds on the disease activity, response to therapy, and the development of complications and nonreversible deformities in patients diagnosed with rheumatic diseases.

Patients and Methods

This is a cross-sectional study. Our target study population were the residents of Saudi Arabia. Data were collected via an online questionnaire and analyzed with SPSS.

Results

The overall prevalence of rheumatic disease in our cohort was 8.7%. Joint pain (75.7%), joint swelling (47.1%) and morning stiffness (32.9%) were the first and most common presenting symptom. Persistence of symptoms (N=32, 45.7%) and symptom worsening (N=21, 30.0%) was the predominant cause to visit rheumatologist. The duration between first symptom and rheumatic disease diagnosis is significantly longer for patients aged <50 years compared to that of those with ≥50 years of age. Results show that 36.4% of patients aged ≥50 years had delayed diagnosis due to late appointment compared with 5.7% of patients aged <50 years. In addition, patients with longer duration of symptoms were likely to have more visits to the rheumatologist. Most of the participants of <50 years significantly agreed that rheumatologists treat autoimmune diseases, only a few approved that they treat muscle problems.

Conclusion

Most participants in our study have lesser knowledge about their symptoms and they did not know where to consult for the treatment of their disease. This caused unnecessary delays and worsening and aggravation of the symptoms. There is an increased need to organize an awareness campaign in the general population regarding autoimmune and rheumatic diseases.

Methodology for the adolopment of recommendations for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are no guidelines for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) tailored to the context of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Adaptation of guidelines accounts for contextual factors and becomes more efficient than de novo guideline development when relevant, good quality, and up-to-date guidelines are available. The objective of this study is to describe the methodology used for the adolopment of the 2021 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guidelines for the treatment of RA in the KSA.

METHODS

We followed the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation' (GRADE)-ADOLOPMENT methodology. The adolopment KSA panel included relevant stakeholders and leading contributors to the original guidelines. We developed a list of five adaptation-relevant prioritization criteria that the panelists applied to the original recommendations. We updated the original evidence profiles with newly published studies identified by the panelists. We constructed Evidence to Decision (EtD) tables including contextual information from the KSA setting. We used the PanelVoice function of GRADEPro Guideline Development Tool (GDT) to obtain the panel's judgments on the EtD criteria ahead of the panel meeting. Following the meeting, we used the PANELVIEW instrument to obtain the panel's evaluation of the process.

RESULTS

The KSA panel prioritized five recommendations, for which one evidence profile required updating. Out of five adoloped recommendations, two were modified in terms of direction, and one was modified in terms of certainty of the evidence. Criteria driving the modifications in direction were valuation of outcomes, balance of effects, cost, and acceptability. The mean score on the 7-point scale items of the PANELVIEW instrument had an average of 6.47 (SD = 0.18) across all items.

CONCLUSION

The GRADE-ADOLOPMENT methodology proved to be efficient. The panel assessed the process and outcome positively. Engagement of stakeholders proved to be important for the success of this project.

Recommendations for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Saudi Arabia: adolopment of the 2021 American College of Rheumatology guidelines

BACKGROUND

The 2021 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) guideline considers the specific context of the United States which differs from that of Saudi Arabia in many aspects that may impact recommendations. The objective of this project was to adapt a set of prioritized recommendations from the 2021 ACR guideline for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis RA for the context of Saudi Arabia, by the Saudi Society for Rheumatology (SSR).

METHODS

The process followed the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT methodology, and the reporting adhered to the RIGHT-Ad@pt checklist. Working groups included a coordination group and a 19-member panel representing different stakeholder groups. The Evidence to Decision (EtD) tables included evidence on health effects from the source guideline and contextual information from the Saudi setting.

RESULTS

The panel prioritized and adapted five recommendations from the source guideline. The process led to modifying two out of the five prioritized recommendations, all listed here. In naive patients with low disease activity, methotrexate (MTX) is conditionally recommended over sulfasalazine (SSZ) (modified direction); hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is conditionally recommended over SSZ (unmodified). Initiation of csDMARDs with short-term glucocorticoids is conditionally recommended over csDMARDs alone in naive patients with moderate to high disease activity (modified direction). Switch to subcutaneous MTX is conditionally recommended over addition/switch to alternative DMARD(s) in patients taking oral MTX who are not at target (unmodified). Discontinuation of MTX is conditionally recommended over gradual discontinuation of the bDMARD or tsDMARD for patients taking MTX plus a bDMARD or tsDMARD who wish to discontinue a DMARD (unmodified).

CONCLUSION

Rheumatologists practicing in Saudi Arabia can use the adoloped recommendations generated by this project while adopting the rest of the recommendations from the 2021 ACR guidelines.

The burden of rheumatoid arthritis in the Middle East and North Africa region, 1990-2019

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic systemic autoimmune disease. The present study reported the burden of RA in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region from 1990 to 2019 by age, sex, and socio-demographic index (SDI). Publicly available data from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2019 study was used to report the modelled point prevalence, annual incidence, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) of RA, as counts and age-standardised rates with their corresponding 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). In 2019, RA had an age-standardised point prevalence of 120.6 per 100,000 population (107.0-135.7) and an annual incidence rate of 5.9 (5.2-6.6) in MENA, which have increased 28.3% and 25.2%, respectively, since 1990. In 2019, the number of DALYs due to RA in the region was 103.6 thousand (74.2-136.7), with an age-standardised rate of 19.0 (13.9-24.9) DALYs per 100,000 population, which has increased by 18.6% since 1990 (6.7-28.2). The highest point prevalence was found in females aged 50-54, and in males aged 45-49. The highest number of DALYs was observed in the 50-54 age group. The MENA DALY rate was lower than the global rate (19.0 vs. 39.6 per 100,000), but the rate was higher in all age groups in 2019, when compared with 1990. In addition, from 1990 to 2019 an increased burden from RA was associated with an increase in SDI. In line with global trends, the burden of RA in the MENA region showed a steady increase from 1990 to 2019. This highlights the increasing need for updating the available health data to design more accurate guidelines to enable the early detection and treatment of RA in the MENA countries.

Perception of Biosimilar Biologics and Non-Medical Prescription Switching among Rheumatologists: A Saudi Society for Rheumatology Initiative

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate rheumatologists’ perceptions of biosimilar biologics and Non-Medical Switching (NMS).

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among registered members of the Saudi Society for Rheumatology. The questionnaire focused on biosimilars and NMS. Logistic regression was performed to ascertain the effect of demographics and practice characteristics on the use of biosimilars and NMS.

Results

Out of 249 SSR members, 143 completed the survey, generating a response rate of 57.4%. Of those (59.44%) were men with a mean (±SD) age and years of practice of 42.3 ± 9.13 and 10.3 ± 8.9, respectively. Rheumatologists managing adult patients (81.82%) and Ministry of Health practice (43.36 %) were the majority of respondents. Previous experience in prescribing a biosimilar was reported by 43 (30.07%) participants, with a higher probability among women (p = 0.015). A total of 26 (18.18%) participants had performed NMS on eligible patients. Adequate knowledge on biosimilars was reported by 69 (48.25%) participants. The adequacy of evidence to grant biosimilar approval for the studied indication and extrapolation to treat other conditions was reported by 88 (61.5%) and 69 (48.3%), respectively. The concept of totality-of-the-evidence was well understood by 37.1%. Biosimilars had been previously used by 43 (30.07) participants in their practice. NMS had been attempted by 26 (18.18), while 86 (60.1%) participants believed that NMS might harm patients.

Conclusion

There is a clear knowledge gap about the biosimilar approval process among adult and pediatric rheumatologists who took part in the survey. In addition, a large number of participants reported having negative opinions about NMS. There is a need to organize SSR-led educational activities, and develop national guidelines regarding biosimilars and NMS.

Patterns of Response to Different Treatment Strategies in Seropositive Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients in a Tertiary Hospital in South-Western Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Study

Purpose

To study the pattern of response to different treatment strategies in seropositive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and to describe our clinical practice in RA management.

Patients and Methods

Over a period of two years from April 2018 to April 2020, we conducted a retrospective analysis of data for 288 consecutive seropositive RA patients attending rheumatology clinics and the daycare unit at Aseer Central Hospital. Data were collected on patient demographics, disease duration, extraarticular manifestations, comorbidities and treatment. Disease activity was assessed using the clinical disease activity index (CDAI).

Results

Out of the total 288 patients, 42% (120) are on csDMRADs, while 54% (162) are on bDMRADs and 4% (6) are on tsDMARDs. Of the patients on csDMARDS, 51%, 43% and 7% of them were on remission, low and moderate disease activity, respectively. However, of the patients on non-csDMARDS, 36.3%, 49.4% and 14.3% of them were on remission, low and moderate disease activity, respectively. Failure of csDMARDs was affected by the presence of high disease activity at baseline, extraarticular lung manifestations and coexistent fibromyalgia, with a significant effect of the latter on remission rate. Among patients on non-csDMARDs, 42 (25%) showed one or more therapy changes. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were the predominant first-line agents in biologically naive patients (65%) followed by abatacept (18%). Abatacept was the most frequently prescribed second biologic in 52% of cases followed by tocilizumab in 19%.

Conclusion

The current clinical practice in our hospital is consistent with the latest American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) guidelines. Treat-to-target strategy was achieved in the vast majority of our patients, while remission was observed in almost half of the patients.

Improving the understanding of originator and biosimilar biologics among healthcare providers in Saudi Arabia

The loss of patentability of many originator biologics has led to the rapid introduction of biosimilar agents. The anticipated economic benefit of introducing such agent has been accompanied by vagueness surrounding their biotechnology, approval requirements, positioning in treatment paradigms and potential for adverse events. The Second Symposium on Biologics and Biosimilars “Beyond Clinical Practice” was held on 24th-26th January 2020 aiming at improving the understanding of these new agents in a diverse interactive conference and to guide stakeholders how to introduce biosimilars into clinical practice. The symposium consisted of 4 tracks and 3 workshops. A total of 217 participants attended the meeting. The majority were pharmacists (78.8%) followed by physicians (18.9%) and other healthcare providers (2.3%). The workshops covered the following topics: basics of pharmacoeconomics, pharmacovigilance and patients’ perspective toward biosimilar biologics. While, the 4 main tracks included: Introduction to biosimilars, challenges in clinical practice, regulatory and pharmacoeconomic aspects and Challenges in biosimilar pharmacovigilance.

Cross-Cultural Validation of the 5-Item Compliance Questionnaire for Rheumatology to the Arabic Language in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

PURPOSE

A simple measure to assess drug adherence in Saudi patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is required. The aim of this study was to translate and validate the 5-Item Compliance Questionnaire for Rheumatology (CQR5) into Arabic.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The questionnaire was translated and culturally adapted to Arab patients in six steps: initial translation, synthesis of the translation, back translation, expert committee review, test of the pre-final version, and development of the Arabic CQR5 (ACQR-5). The resulting version was tested for validity in patients with RA.

RESULTS

A total of 103 adult patients with RA were recruited from rheumatology clinics at a university hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. After extensive translation, the final tool (CQR) was piloted in 15 patients. The final validation was performed with 88 patients. Of these, 80 (90.9%) were female and 43.2% were seropositive. The mean (±SD) age and disease duration were 50 (±13) and 11.4 (±8.2) years, respectively. Cronbach's alpha reliability was 0.886, and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy for factor analysis was 0.870 (p<0.001). The mean ACQR-5 was 17.78 (2.70), with 14 (15.9%) classified as low adherents and the remaining 74 (84.1%) as high adherents. Binary logistic regression revealed that increasing age (odds ratio [OR] 1.082, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.025-1.142, p=0.005) and a trend toward the presence of other comorbidities (OR 3.111, 95% CI: 0.961-10.070, p=0.058) were associated with low adherence.

CONCLUSION

ACQR-5 is a simple and feasible tool for identifying adherence levels in patients with RA in Saudi Arabia. A high level of adherence was observed in this study. Additional studies are required to assess ACQR-5 validity and adherence levels in a larger, more diverse population.

Physical and Emotional Burden of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Saudi Arabia: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study

Purpose

The aim of this study was to better understand the physical and emotional impacts of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on the lives of patients in Saudi Arabia, and to determine whether there are any discrepancies between how healthcare providers (HCPs) perceive the feelings of patients with RA and how patients actually feel.

Patients and Methods

An online survey of adults with RA and HCPs was conducted in Saudi Arabia between January and June 2018. The survey used closed-ended questions with nominal and interval scales to cover relationships with others, ability to work and career progression, ability to perform normal activities, and aspirations for the future.

Results

In total, 85 patients and 24 HCPs were surveyed. Patients were more likely than HCPs to feel that the people around them understood the emotional and physical impacts of RA (emotional impact understood: 67% of patients vs 42% of HCPs; physical impact understood: 61% vs 38%, respectively). Additionally, a larger proportion of younger (aged <40 years) than older patients (aged 40-59 and ≥60 years) felt that these impacts were not understood by others. For patients, the greatest barrier to working was difficulty using hands (52% vs 41% of HCPs), whereas HCPs considered pain the greatest barrier (50% vs 38% of patients). Both patients (59%) and HCPs (81%) considered pain to be a common barrier to undertaking everyday activities. Regarding future aspirations, 40% of patients wished to accept their RA despite the barriers it caused.

Conclusion

Discrepancies between how HCPs perceived the feelings of patients with RA and how patients actually felt suggest that HCP-patient communication could be improved. This is the first study of its kind in Saudi Arabia and should help increase awareness of the difficulties and concerns of patients with RA in the Arabic world.

Biosimilars in Rheumatic Diseases: Regulatory Guidelines, Efficacy and Safety Implications in Saudi Arabia

Background:

Treatment with biologic drugs has enabled many patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease to achieve disease control. In some areas of the world, limited access to biologic therapies has created a demand for lower cost options such as biosimilars, which are highly similar, but not identical to originator biologics. The safe use of biosimilars requires a scientifically rigorous review process for their approval, and guidelines that aid rheumatologists in their use.

Discussion:

In Saudi Arabia, there are no national or regional guidelines to assist rheumatologists in the proper use of biosimilars in clinical practice, and this may potentially affect the quality of patient care. In this review, we discuss the importance of developing a guidance and the need for healthcare professionals and patients to receive education about biosimilars. We discuss the unique requirements for biosimilar approval, and the differences between biosimilars, originator biologics, and generics. We review important considerations related to biosimilar use, such as switching from originator biologics to biosimilars, switching between different biosimilars, interchangeability, automatic substitution, naming, and pharmacovigilance. We also provide recommendations based on the authors’ expert opinions as rheumatologists to help ensure the appropriate use of biosimilars in Saudi Arabia.

Conclusion:

The approval and use of biosimilars must be supported by scientifically sound evidence. Guidelines for the use of biosimilars are needed in Saudi Arabia to aid rheumatologists in making clinical decisions. Additionally, educational resources should be provided to healthcare professionals and patients.