Treat to target (drug-free) inactive disease in DMARD-naive juvenile idiopathic arthritis: 24-month clinical outcomes of a three-armed randomised trial

Increasing the etanercept dose in a treat-to-target approach in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: does it help to reach the target? A post-hoc analysis of the BeSt for Kids randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Etanercept has been studied in doses up to 0.8 mg/kg/week (max 50 mg/week) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients. In clinical practice higher doses are used off-label, but evidence regarding the relation with outcomes is lacking. We describe the clinical course of JIA-patients receiving high-dose etanercept (1.6 mg/kg/week; max 50 mg/week) in the BeSt for Kids trial.

METHODS

92 patients with oligoarticular JIA, RF-negative polyarticular JIA or juvenile psoriatic arthritis were randomised across three treat-to-target arms: (1) sequential DMARD-monotherapy (sulfasalazine or methotrexate (MTX)), (2) combination-therapy MTX + 6 weeks prednisolone and (3) combination therapy MTX + etanercept. In any treatment-arm, patients could eventually escalate to high-dose etanercept alongside MTX 10mg/m2/week.

RESULTS

32 patients received high-dose etanercept (69% female, median age 6 years (IQR 4-10), median 10 months (7-16) from baseline). Median follow-up was 24.6 months. Most clinical parameters improved within 3 months after dose-increase: median JADAS10 from 7.2 to 2.8 (p = 0.008), VAS-physician from 12 to 4 (p = 0.022), VAS-patient/parent from 38.5 to 13 (p = 0.003), number of active joints from 2 to 0.5 (p = 0.12) and VAS-pain from 35.5 to 15 (p = 0.030). Functional impairments (CHAQ-score) improved more gradually and ESR remained stable. A comparable pattern was observed in 11 patients (73% girls, median age 8 (IQR 6-9)) who did not receive high-dose etanercept despite eligibility (comparison group). In both groups, 56% reached inactive disease at 6 months. No severe adverse events (SAEs) occurred after etanercept dose-increase. In the comparison group, 2 SAEs consisting of hospital admission occurred. Rates of non-severe AEs per subsequent patient year follow-up were 2.27 in the high-dose and 1.43 in the comparison group.

CONCLUSIONS

Escalation to high-dose etanercept in JIA-patients who were treated to target was generally followed by meaningful clinical improvement. However, similar improvements were observed in a smaller comparison group who did not escalate to high-dose etanercept. No SAEs were seen after escalation to high-dose etanercept. The division into the high-dose and comparison groups was not randomised, which is a potential source of bias. We advocate larger, randomised studies of high versus regular dose etanercept to provide high level evidence on efficacy and safety.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register; NTR1574; 3 December 2008; https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/26585 .

Treatment of non-systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis

In the past two decades, the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) has evolved markedly, owing to the availability of a growing number of novel, potent and relatively safe therapeutic agents and the shift of management strategies towards early achievement of disease remission. However, JIA encompasses a heterogeneous group of diseases that require distinct treatment approaches. Furthermore, some old drugs, such as methotrexate, sulfasalazine and intraarticular glucocorticoids, still maintain an important therapeutic role. In the past 5 years, information on the efficacy and safety of drug therapies for JIA has been further enriched through the accomplishment of several randomized controlled trials of newer biologic and synthetic targeted DMARDs. In addition, a more rational therapeutic approach has been fostered by the promulgation of therapeutic recommendations and guidelines. A multinational collaborative effort has led to the development of the recommendations for the treat-to-target strategy in JIA. There is currently increasing interest in establishing the optimal time and modality for discontinuation of treatment in children with JIA who achieve sustained clinical remission. The aim of this Review is to summarize the current evidence and discuss the therapeutic approaches to the management of non-systemic phenotypes of JIA, including oligoarthritis, polyarthritis, enthesitis-related arthritis and psoriatic arthritis.

Methotrexate for juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic disease in childhood. Methotrexate has broad immunomodulatory properties and is the most commonly used disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD). This is an update of a 2001 Cochrane review. It supports a living guideline for children and young people with JIA.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of methotrexate for children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

SEARCH METHODS

The Australian JIA Living Guideline Working Group created a registry of all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of JIA by searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registries. The date of the most recent search of online databases was 1 February 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for RCTs that compared methotrexate with placebo, no treatment, or another DMARD (with or without concomitant therapies) in children and young people (aged up to 18 years) with JIA.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. The main comparison was methotrexate versus placebo. Our outcomes were treatment response, sustained clinically inactive disease, function, pain, participant global assessment of well-being, serious adverse events, and withdrawals due to adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three new trials in this update, bringing the total number of included RCTs to five (575 participants). Three trials evaluated oral methotrexate versus placebo, one evaluated methotrexate plus intra-articular glucocorticoid (IAGC) therapy versus IAGC therapy alone, and one evaluated methotrexate versus leflunomide. Doses of methotrexate ranged from 5 mg/m2/week to 15 mg/m2/week in four trials, and participants in the methotrexate group of the remaining trial received 0.5 mg/kg/week. Trial size varied from 31 to 226 participants. The average age of participants ranged from four to 10 years. Most participants were females and most had nonsystemic JIA. The study that evaluated methotrexate plus IAGC therapy versus IAGC therapy alone recruited children and young people with the oligoarticular disease subtype of JIA. Two placebo-controlled trials and the trial of methotrexate versus leflunomide were adequately randomised and blinded, and likely not susceptible to important biases. One placebo-controlled trial may have been susceptible to selection bias due to lack of adequate reporting of randomisation methods. The trial investigating the addition of methotrexate to IAGC therapy was susceptible to performance and detection biases. Methotrexate versus placebo Methotrexate compared with placebo may increase the number of children and young people who achieve treatment response up to six months (absolute difference of 163 more per 1000 people; risk ratio (RR) 1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21 to 2.31; I2 = 0%; 3 trials, 328 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, methotrexate compared with placebo may have little or no effect on pain as measured on an increasing scale of 0 to 100 (mean difference (MD) -1.10 points, 95% CI -9.09 to 6.88; 1 trial, 114 participants), improvement in participant global assessment of well-being (absolute difference of 92 more per 1000 people; RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.72; 1 trial, 176 participants), occurrence of serious adverse events (absolute difference of 5 fewer per 1000 people; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.04 to 8.97; 3 trials, 328 participants), and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 3.46, 95% CI 0.60 to 19.79; 3 trials, 328 participants) up to six months. We could not estimate the absolute difference for withdrawals due to adverse events because there were no withdrawals in the placebo group. All outcomes were reported within six months of randomisation. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to low for all outcomes due to indirectness (suboptimal dosing of methotrexate and diverse outcome measures) and imprecision (few participants and low event rates). No trials reported function or the number of participants with sustained clinically inactive disease. Serious adverse events included liver derangement, abdominal pain, and inadvertent overdose. Methotrexate plus intra-articular corticosteroid therapy versus intra-articular corticosteroid therapy alone Methotrexate plus IAGC therapy compared with IAGC therapy alone may have little or no effect on the probability of sustained clinically inactive disease or the rate of withdrawals due to adverse events up to 12 months in children and young people with the oligoarticular subtype of JIA (low-certainty evidence). We could not calculate the absolute difference in withdrawals due to adverse events because there were no withdrawals in the control group. We are uncertain if there is any difference between the interventions in the risk of severe adverse events, because none were reported. The study did not report treatment response, function, pain, or participant global assessment of well-being. Methotrexate versus an alternative disease-modifying antirheumatic drug Methotrexate compared with leflunomide may have little or no effect on the probability of treatment response or on function, participant global assessment of well-being, risk of serious adverse events, and rate of withdrawals due to adverse events up to four months. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes to low due to imprecision. The study did not report pain or sustained clinically inactive disease.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oral methotrexate (5 mg/m2/week to 15 mg/m2/week) compared with placebo may increase the number of children and young people achieving treatment response but may have little or no effect on pain or participant global assessment of well-being. Oral methotrexate plus IAGC injections compared to IAGC injections alone may have little or no effect on the likelihood of sustained clinically inactive disease among children and young people with oligoarticular JIA. Similarly, methotrexate compared with leflunomide may have little or no effect on treatment response, function, and participant global assessment of well-being. Serious adverse events due to methotrexate appear to be rare. We will update this review as new evidence becomes available to inform the living guideline.

[Protocols in pediatric rheumatology (PROKIND): treat-to-target in polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis]

BACKGROUND

The aims of the PROKIND protocols are improvement and harmonization of the diagnostics, monitoring, treatment decision and prognosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This article reports the results of a prospective treat-to-target observational study of patients with polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) during the first year of treatment. Disease activity was assessed with the 10-joint juvenile arthritis disease activity score (JADAS-10), functional limitation with the childhood health assessment questionnaire disability index (CHAQ-DI) and with information on overall well-being, on pain, on fatigue and on global estimation of disease activity.

RESULTS

Overall, 129 patients with polyarticular JIA (rheumatoid factor, RF, positive (+) polyarthritis n = 22, RF negative (-) polyarthritis n = 133 from 23 pediatric rheumatology institutions in Germany and Austria were recruited. Patients with initial treatment with methotrexate formed cohort 1, patients with additional repeated intravenous corticosteroid pulse therapy formed cohort 2 and patients with concomitant intra-articular corticosteroid administration in at least 5 joints formed cohort 3. The mean JADAS10 showed a decrease in disease activity from 16.4 ± 6.1 to 2.8 ± 3.6 and the decrease in the CHAQ-DI from 1.0 ± 0.8 to 0.3 ± 0.5 showed the improvement in functional capacity. Similarly, improvements in quality of life, pain and fatigue were demonstrable. A JADAS inactive disease was achieved by 18.1% at month 3, 47.7% at month 6 and 66.7% at month 12. In cohort 1 a JADAS remission was achieved by 72.4%, by 50% in cohort 2 and by 69.2% in cohort 3. An escalation to treatment with biologics was necessary in 38% of patients in cohort 1, 60% in cohort 2 and 46% in cohort 3.

CONCLUSION

Using a treat-to-target approach a dramatic improvement in disease activity, functional capacity and quality of life in polyarticular JIA could be achieved. Even after 12 months an inactive disease was achieved in the majority of cases.

Towards stratified treatment of JIA: machine learning identifies subtypes in response to methotrexate from four UK cohorts

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate (MTX) is the gold-standard first-line disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), despite only being either effective or tolerated in half of children and young people (CYP). To facilitate stratified treatment of early JIA, novel methods in machine learning were used to i) identify clusters with distinct disease patterns following MTX initiation; ii) predict cluster membership; and iii) compare clusters to existing treatment response measures.

METHODS

Discovery and verification cohorts included CYP who first initiated MTX before January 2018 in one of four UK multicentre prospective cohorts of JIA within the CLUSTER consortium. JADAS components (active joint count, physician (PGA) and parental (PGE) global assessments, ESR) were recorded at MTX start and over the following year. Clusters of MTX 'response' were uncovered using multivariate group-based trajectory modelling separately in discovery and verification cohorts. Clusters were compared descriptively to ACR Pedi 30/90 scores, and multivariate logistic regression models predicted cluster-group assignment.

FINDINGS

The discovery cohorts included 657 CYP and verification cohorts 1241 CYP. Six clusters were identified: Fast improvers (11%), Slow Improvers (16%), Improve-Relapse (7%), Persistent Disease (44%), Persistent PGA (8%) and Persistent PGE (13%), the latter two characterised by improvement in all features except one. Factors associated with clusters included ethnicity, ILAR category, age, PGE, and ESR scores at MTX start, with predictive model area under the curve values of 0.65-0.71. Singular ACR Pedi 30/90 scores at 6 and 12 months could not capture speeds of improvement, relapsing courses or diverging disease patterns.

INTERPRETATION

Six distinct patterns following initiation of MTX have been identified using methods in artificial intelligence. These clusters demonstrate the limitations in traditional yes/no treatment response assessment (e.g., ACRPedi30) and can form the basis of a stratified medicine programme in early JIA.

FUNDING

Medical Research Council, Versus Arthritis, Great Ormond Street Hospital Children's Charity, Olivia's Vision, and the National Institute for Health Research.

Risk of flare in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Is it related to the methotrexate treatment strategy or patient characteristics?

Objectives

The study aimed to determine the factors that increase the risk of disease flare in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis who stopped methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy following inactive disease (ID).

Patients and methods

In the retrospective study, files of all juvenile idiopathic arthritis cases between April 1992 and June 2022 were examined. Patients who stopped MTX monotherapy following ID were evaluated. Patients with disease flare and persistent ID were compared. Juvenile idiopathic arthritis subgroup, age of symptom onset, autoantibodies, acute phase reactants, MTX method of use, and withdrawal strategy were recorded. Systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis patients were excluded from the study due to different clinical symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment methods.

Results

Files of 1,036 patients were evaluated, and 107 patients (88 females, 19 males; mean age: 5.9±4.2 years; range, 0.8-16.5 years) were included in the study. The median age at symptom onset was 4.8 (interquartile range [IQR]: 2-7.6) years. In terms of juvenile idiopathic arthritis subgroups, 52 (48.6%) had oligoarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis, 43 (40.2%) had polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and 12 (11.2%) had juvenile psoriatic arthritis. The patients reached ID in nine (IQR: 4.8-17.7) months after starting MTX, and MTX treatment was discontinued after one (IQR: 0.7-1.3) year following ID. The disease flare developed in 59 (55%) of the cases. The ID continued in 48 (45%) patients. In multivariate analysis, the risk of flare was associated with younger symptom onset (odds ratio [OR]=2.2, p=0.006), antinuclear antibody positivity (OR=1.6, p=0.03), higher erythrocyte sedimentation rate (OR=1.01, p=0.04), and C-reactive protein (OR=1, p=0.02) at the MTX onset. No difference was observed between the two groups regarding MTX dose, route of administration, prior and concomitant treatments, time to reach ID, and time and method of MTX discontinuation.

Conclusion

In this study, the risk of flare was associated with patient's characteristics, rather than the administration and discontinuation method of MTX.

Treat-to-Target in Pediatric Rheumatic Diseases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the current evidence on the adoption of the treat-to-target (T2T) strategy in pediatric rheumatic diseases (PRD).

RECENT FINDINGS

The recent advances in the management of PRD have markedly increased the ability to achieve disease remission. Complete disease quiescence is regarded as the ideal therapeutic goal because its attainment leads to lesser long-term damage and physical disability, and to optimization of quality of life. Studies in adult rheumatic diseases have shown that patient outcomes are improved if complete suppression of the inflammatory process is aimed for by frequent adjustments of therapy according to quantitative indices. This approach, which underlies the T2T concept, has been applied in strategic trials in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Furthermore, recommendations for the T2T have been issued for RA and other adult rheumatic diseases. There is currently a growing interest for the introduction of T2T in PRD, and recommendations for treating juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) to target were promulgated. A similar initiative has been undertaken for childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus. Preliminary therapeutic studies have explored the T2T design in JIA. The T2T strategy is a modern therapeutic approach that holds the promise of improving the outcomes in patients with PRD.

The clinical and experimental treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common chronic rheumatic disease in children and comprises of multiple subtypes. The most relevant disease subtypes, grouped upon current insight in disease mechanisms, are nonsystemic (oligo- and polyarticular) JIA and systemic JIA (sJIA). In this review, we summarize some of the main proposed mechanisms of disease in both nonsystemic and sJIA and discuss how current therapeutic modalities target some of the pathogenic immune pathways. Chronic inflammation in nonsystemic JIA is the result of a complex interplay between effector and regulatory immune cell subsets, with adaptive immune cells, specifically T-cell subsets and antigen-presenting cells, in a central role. There is, however, also innate immune cell contribution. SJIA is nowadays recognized as an acquired chronic inflammatory disorder with striking autoinflammatory features in the first phase of the disease. Some sJIA patients develop a refractory disease course, with indications for involvement of adaptive immune pathways as well. Currently, therapeutic strategies are directed at suppressing effector mechanisms in both non-systemic and sJIA. These strategies are often not yet optimally tuned nor timed to the known active mechanisms of disease in individual patients in both non-systemic and sJIA. We discuss current treatment strategies in JIA, specifically the 'Step-up' and 'Treat to Target approach' and explore how increased insight into the biology of disease may translate into future more targeted strategies for this chronic inflammatory disease at relevant time points: preclinical disease, active disease, and clinically inactive disease.

Biologic switching patterns among children with non-systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

In juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) clinical remission is unattainable in some patients despite modern biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) therapy and switching bDMARD is required. The best choice of second-line bDMARD remains unclear. This retrospective observational study aims to describe the pattern, timing, frequency, and reasons for bDMARD switching among children diagnosed with non-systemic JIA.

METHODS

Patients were identified by combining unique personal identification numbers, the International Code of Diagnosis (ICD10) for JIA and biologic therapy. Clinical characteristics were collected retrospectively from the electronic medical records. Included were 200 children diagnosed with non-systemic JIA initiating their first biologic drug between January 1st, 2012, and March 1st, 2021. We compared characteristics of non-switchers vs switchers and early switchers (≤ 6 months) vs late switchers (> 6 months).

RESULTS

The median age at diagnosis was 7.7 years. We found that 37% switched to a different bDMARD after a median age of 6.3 years after diagnosis. In total, and 17.5% of patients switched at least twice, while 6% switched three or more times. The most common reason for switching was inefficacy (57%) followed by injection/infusion reactions (15%) and uveitis (13%). 77% were late switchers, and switched primarily due to inefficacy. All patients started a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) as initial bDMARD (Etanercept (ETN): 49.5%, other TNFis: 50.5%). The patients who started ETN as first-line bDMARD were more likely to be switchers compared to those who started another TNFi.

CONCLUSION

During a median 6.3-year follow-up biologic switching was observed in more than one third, primarily due to inefficacy.

When to stop medication in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have dramatically improved patient outcomes in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). However, these medications may also result in physical, psychologic, and economic burden, which must be balanced with risk of flare off treatment. Although some children remain in remission after medication discontinuation, evidence is sparse for if, when, and how medications should be de-escalated once achieving clinically inactive disease (CID). We review the data on medication discontinuation and the role of serologic and imaging biomarkers in JIA.

RECENT FINDINGS

The literature uniformly supports early biologic DMARD initiation, although the optimal timing and strategy for medication withdrawal in patients with sustained CID remains unclear. In this review, we present the current data on flare frequency and time to flare, clinical factors associated with flare, and recapture data for each JIA category. We also summarize the current knowledge on the role of imaging and serologic biomarkers in guiding these treatment decisions.

SUMMARY

JIA is a heterogenous disease for which prospective clinical trials are needed to address the question of when, how, and in whom to withdraw medication. Research investigating the roles of serologic and imaging biomarkers may help improve the ability to ascertain which children can successfully de-escalate medications.

Significant pain decrease in children with non-systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis treated to target: results over 24 months of follow up

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare pain-scores in three targeted treatment-strategies in JIA-patients and to identify characteristics predicting persistent pain.

METHODS

In the BeSt-for-Kids-study 92 DMARD-naïve JIA-patients were randomized in 3 treatment-strategies: 1) initial sequential DMARD-monotherapy 2) initial methotrexate (MTX)/prednisolone-bridging or 3) initial MTX/etanercept. Potential differences in VAS pain scores (0-100 mm) over time between treatment-strategies were compared using linear mixed models with visits clustered within patients. A multivariable model was used to assess the ability of baseline characteristics to predict the chance of high pain-scores during follow-up.

RESULTS

Pain-scores over time reduced from mean 55.3 (SD 21.7) to 19.5 (SD 25.3) mm after 24 months. On average, pain-scores decreased significantly with β -1.37 mm (95% CI -1.726; -1.022) per month. No significant difference was found between treatment-strategies (interaction term treatment arm*time (months) β (95% CI) arm 1: 0.13 (-0.36; 0.62) and arm 2: 0.37 (-0.12; 0.86) compared to arm 3). Correction for sex and symptom duration yielded similar results. Several baseline characteristics were predictive for pain over time. Higher VAS pain [β 0.44 (95% CI 0.25; 0.65)] and higher active joint count [0.77 (0.19; 1.34)] were predictive of higher pain over time, whereas, low VAS physician [ -0.34 (-0.55; -0.06)], CHQ Physical [ -0.42 (-0.72; -0.11)] and Psychosocial summary Score [ -0.42 (-0.77; -0.06)] were predictive of lower pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment-to-target seems effective in pain-reduction in non-systemic JIA-patients irrespective of initial treatment-strategy. Several baseline-predictors for pain over time were found, which could help to identify patients with a high risk for development of chronic pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Registry number 1574.

"Neuroimmunoendocrinology" in Children with Rheumatic Diseases: How Glucocorticoids Are the Orchestra Director

The neural, the endocrine, and the immune systems are studied as distinct districts in physiological and pathological settings. However, these systems must be investigated with an integrative approach, while also considering that therapeutic agents, such as glucocorticoids, can induce a reversible or irreversible change of this homeostasis. Children and adolescents affected by rheumatic diseases frequently need treatment with corticosteroids, and the treatment must sometimes be continued for a long time. In the biological era, the treat-to-target strategy allowed a real revolution in treatment, with significant steroid dose sparing or, in many patients, steroid treatment withdrawal. In this review, the impact of glucocorticoids on endocrine, immune, and neurologic targets is analyzed, and the crosstalk between these systems is highlighted. In this narrative review, we explore the reasoning as to why glucocorticoids can disrupt this homeostasis, we summarize some of the key results supporting the impact of glucocorticoids treatment on endocrine, immune, and neurologic systems, and we discuss the data reported in the international literature.

Towards development of treat to target (T2T) in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus: PReS-endorsed overarching principles and points-to-consider from an international task force

OBJECTIVES

Application of 'treat-to-target' (T2T) in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) may improve care and health outcomes. This initiative aimed to harmonise existing evidence and expert opinion regarding T2T for cSLE.

METHODS

An international T2T Task Force was formed of specialists in paediatric rheumatology, paediatric nephrology, adult rheumatology, patient and parent representatives. A steering committee formulated a set of draft overarching principles and points-to-consider, based on evidence from systematic literature review. Two on-line preconsensus meeting Delphi surveys explored healthcare professionals' views on these provisional overarching principles and points-to-consider. A virtual consensus meeting employed a modified nominal group technique to discuss, modify and vote on each overarching principle/point-to-consider. Agreement of >80% of Task Force members was considered consensus.

RESULTS

The Task Force agreed on four overarching principles and fourteen points-to-consider. It was agreed that both treatment targets and therapeutic strategies should be subject to shared decision making with the patient/caregivers, with full remission the preferred target, and low disease activity acceptable where remission cannot be achieved. Important elements of the points-to-consider included: aiming for prevention of flare and organ damage; glucocorticoid sparing; proactively addressing factors that impact health-related quality of life (fatigue, pain, mental health, educational challenges, medication side effects); and aiming for maintenance of the target over the long-term. An extensive research agenda was also formulated.

CONCLUSIONS

These international, consensus agreed overarching principles and points-to-consider for T2T in cSLE lay the foundation for future T2T approaches in cSLE, endorsed by the Paediatric Rheumatology European Society.

PReS-endorsed international childhood lupus T2T task force definition of childhood lupus low disease activity state (cLLDAS)

OBJECTIVE

To achieve a consensus-based definition of Low Disease Activity (LDA) for use in cSLE trials.

METHODS

The International cSLE T2T Task Force, comprising of paediatric rheumatologists/nephrologists, and adult rheumatologists undertook a series of Delphi surveys/consensus meetings to discuss, refine, and vote upon cSLE LDA criteria.

RESULTS

The Task Force agreed that LDA should be based upon the adult-SLE Lupus Low Disease Activity State definition (LLDAS), with modifications to make it applicable to cSLE (cLLDAS). They agreed upon five cLLDAS criteria: (1) SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI)-2 K ≤4, with no activity in major organ systems; (2) no new features of lupus disease activity compared with the last assessment; (3) Physician Global Assessment score of ≤1 (0-3 scale); (4) prednisolone dose of ≤0.15 mg/kg/day, 7.5 mg/day/maximum; while on (5) stable antimalarials, immunosuppressives, and biologics.

CONCLUSIONS

A cSLE-appropriate definition of cLLDAS has been generated, maintaining alignment with the adult-SLE definition to promote life-course research.

Withdrawal of biologic therapy in juvenile idiopathic arthritis due to remission: predictors of flare and outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To investigate patients who flared after discontinuation of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic agents (bDMARDs) and identify risk factors associated with flare.

METHODS

A multicenter study evaluating systemic and non-systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA and non-sJIA) patients whose bDMARDs were ceased after remission.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients whose bDMARDs were ceased after remission was evaluated. Children with sJIA had the lowest risk of flare and 11.1% of 36 sJIA patients experienced flare after a median of 9 (4-24) months of bDMARDs cessation with three of them flaring in the first year. High leukocyte counts in sJIA patients were associated with inactive disease at 1-year after the start of treatment (p = 0.004). In the non-sJIA group, 46.1% patients experienced flare after a median of 7 (1-32) months of biologic cessation, and of these, 25 flared in the first year. Antinuclear antibody positivity (p = 0.02), earlier disease onset (p = 0.03), long disease duration (p = 0.01), and follow-up (p = 0.02) and extended time from diagnosis to first biological onset (p = 0.03) were more common among patients with flare.

CONCLUSIONS

When considering discontinuation of bDMARDs, it should be kept in mind that the risk of exacerbation requiring re-initiation therapy is quite significant within the first year after discontinuation of therapy.

Patterns of clinical joint inflammation in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

OBJECTIVES

We studied patterns of joint inflammation in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) to assess whether joint activity recurs locally in the same joints.

METHODS

Joints of 91 patients of the BeSt for Kids study, a treat-to-target trial for children with recent-onset oligoarticular, rheumatoid factor-negative polyarticular and psoriatic JIA, were clinically assessed during 2 years (10 study visits). The association between joint inflammation at baseline and later inflammation in the same joint was assessed using a multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression model at joint level. With a Poisson model, the association between baseline joint inflammation and the number of study visits at which the same joint was recurrently inflamed was tested.

RESULTS

Of the 6097 joints studied, 15% (897) was clinically inflamed at baseline. In 42% (377/897) of those joints, inflammation recurred during follow-up. Joint inflammation at baseline was statistically significantly associated with joint inflammation during follow-up in the same joint (OR 3.9, 95% CI 3.5 to 4.4) and specifically with the number of episodes of recurrent joint inflammation (IRR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.1).

CONCLUSION

In JIA, joint inflammation has the tendency to recur multiple times in joints that are clinically inflamed at disease onset. This indicates that local factors might play a role in the processes contributing to the occurrence of JIA flares.

Trajectories of disease activity in patients with JIA in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Registry

OBJECTIVE

To describe 2-year trajectories of the clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score, 10 joints (cJADAS10) and associated baseline characteristics in patients with JIA.

METHODS

JIA patients in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Registry enrolled within 3 months of diagnosis from 15 June 2015 to 6 December 2017 with at least two cJADAS10 scores and 24 months of follow-up were included. Latent growth curve models of cJADAS10 were analysed; a combination of Bayesian information criterion, posterior probabilities and clinical judgement was used to select model of best fit.

RESULTS

Five trajectories were identified among the 746 included patients: High, Rapidly Decreasing (HRD) (n = 199, 26.7%); High, Slowly Decreasing (HSD) (n = 154, 20.6%); High, Increasing (HI) (n = 39, 5.2%); Moderate, Persistent (MP) (n = 218, 29.2%); and Moderate, Decreasing (MD) (n = 136, 18.2%). Most patients spent a significant portion of time at moderate to high disease activity levels. At baseline, HSD patients were more likely to be older, have a lower physician global assessment, normal inflammatory markers, longer time to first biologic, and have taken systemic steroids compared with HRD. Those with a HI trajectory were more likely to be ANA negative, have a longer time to first biologic, and less likely to be taking a conventional synthetic DMARD compared with HRD. MP patients were more likely to be older with lower household income, longer time to diagnosis, and markers of higher disease activity than those with a MD trajectory.

CONCLUSIONS

Five trajectories of JIA disease activity, and associated baseline variables, were identified.

Discontinuation of biologic DMARDs in non-systemic JIA patients: a scoping review of relapse rates and associated factors

BACKGROUND

Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) have changed the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients notably, as bDMARDs enable substantially more patients to achieve remission. When sustained remission is achieved, tapering or even discontinuation of the bDMARD is advocated, to reduce side effects and costs. However, when and how to discontinue bDMARD therapy and what happens afterwards, is less known.

OBJECTIVES

With this scoping review we aim to collect available data in current literature on relapse rate, time to relapse (TTR) and possible flare associated variables (such as time spent in remission and method of discontinuation) after discontinuing bDMARDs in non-systemic JIA patients.

METHODS

We performed a literature search until July 2022 using the Pubmed database. All original studies reporting on bDMARD discontinuation in non-systemic JIA patients were eligible. Data on patient- and study characteristics, the applied discontinuation strategy, relapse rates and time to relapse were extracted in a standardized template.

RESULTS

Of the 680 records screened, 28 articles were included in this review with 456 non-systemic JIA patients who tapered and/or stopped bDMARD therapy. Relapse rate after discontinuation of bDMARDs, either abruptly or following tapering, were 40-48%, 36.8-45.0% and 60-78% at 6, 8 and 12 months respectively. Total relapse rate ranged from 26.3% to 100%, with mean time to relapse (TTR) of 2 to 8.4 months, median TTR 3 to 10 months. All studies stated a good response after restart of therapy after flare. JIA subtype, type of bDMARD, concomitant methotrexate use, treatment duration, tapering method, age, sex, and time in remission could not conclusively be related to relapse rate or TTR. However, some studies reported a positive correlation between flare and antinuclear antibodies positivity, younger age at disease onset, male sex, disease duration and delayed remission, which were not confirmed in other studies.

CONCLUSION

Flares seem to be common after bDMARD discontinuation, but little is known about which factors influence these flares in JIA patients. Follow up after discontinuation with careful registration of patient variables, information about tapering methods and flare rates are required to better guide tapering and/or stopping of bDMARDs in JIA patients in the future.

Economic evaluation of infliximab, synthetic triple therapy and methotrexate in the treatment of newly diagnosed juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of costs and short-term cost-effectiveness of infliximab plus methotrexate (IFX + MTX); triple therapy of hydroxychloquine, sulphasalazine, and methotrexate (TRIPLE); or methotrexate monotherapy (MTX) in patients with new-onset polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).

METHODS

In a prospective multicenter study (ACUTE-JIA), costs and health outcomes of 60 randomized patients with new-onset disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve polyarticular JIA were analyzed during the first year. A mapping algorithm was used to obtain utility values from Child Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ). Wallace criteriae were used to assess clinically inactive disease (CID). Linear regression with non-parametric bootstrapping was used to adjust imbalances at baseline.

RESULTS

Using prices for IFX biosimilar, adjusted annual mean (SD) costs of treatment (€) were 21,164 (4158), 12,136 (5286), and 18,300 (8635) on IFX + MTX, TRIPLE, and MTX, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for IFX + MTX as compared with TRIPLE or MTX were 3442 € or 678 € per additional month spent in CID. Mean (SD) quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for IFX + MTX, TRIPLE and MTX were 0.755 (0.065), 0.725 (0.062), and 0.686 (0.124). ICER for IFX + MTX vs TRIPLE was 294,433 €, and for IFX + MTX vs MTX 31,435 € per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

In short-term, biosimilar IFX + MTX can be considered cost-effective when compared with MTX alone. TRIPLE was cost-effective when compared with MTX and showed cost advantage when compared with IFX + MTX. Cost per time spent in CID showed similar results than ICER evaluations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was primarily registered with the Ethical Board of Helsinki District University Hospital ( https://www.hus.fi ), clinical trial number 211864, and later with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01015547.

Joint-Specific Memory and Sustained Risk for New Joint Accumulation in Autoimmune Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Inflammatory arthritides exhibit hallmark patterns of affected and spared joints, but in each individual, arthritis affects only a subset of all possible sites. The purpose of this study was to identify patient-specific patterns of joint flare to distinguish local from systemic drivers of disease chronicity.

METHODS

Patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis followed without interruption from disease onset into adulthood were identified across 2 large academic centers. Joints inflamed at each visit were established by medical record review. Flare was defined as physician-confirmed joint inflammation following documented inactive disease.

RESULTS

Among 222 adults with JIA, 95 had complete serial joint examinations dating from disease onset in childhood. Mean follow-up was 12.5 years (interquartile range 7.9-16.7 years). Ninety (95%) of 95 patients achieved inactive disease, after which 81% (73 patients) experienced at least 1 flare. Among 940 joints affected in 253 flares, 74% had been involved previously. In flares affecting easily observed large joint pairs where only 1 side had been involved before (n = 53), the original joint was affected in 83% and the contralateral joint in 17% (P < 0.0001 versus random laterality). However, disease extended to at least 1 new joint in ~40% of flares, a risk that remained stable even decades after disease onset, and was greatest in flares that occurred while patients were not receiving medication (54% versus 36% of flares occurring with therapy; odds ratio 2.09, P = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

Arthritis flares preferentially affect previously inflamed joints but carry an ongoing risk of disease extension. These findings confirm joint-specific memory and suggest that prevention of new joint accumulation should be an important target for arthritis therapy.

Treat to Target (Drug-Free) Inactive Disease in JIA: To What Extent Is This Possible?

Background: Treat to target (T2T) is a strategy that has been increasingly employed in the management of several chronic diseases, with demonstrated improved outcomes. The use of T2T in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), a common rheumatic disease of childhood, is still in its infancy, and the feasibility of its use in attaining drug-free clinical remission is unclear. Aims: We aim to explore the current literature of the use of T2T in JIA, and to review the potential benefits and limitations of this approach in regard to this chronic disease. Sources: A comprehensive PubMed search was conducted using relevant keywords, with full text articles in English included in the review. Content: T2T is an appealing strategy for improving outcomes of pediatric rheumatic diseases given the limited availability of therapeutics and potential cumulative effects of long-term immunosuppression. The application in a cohort of children, however, is limited by heterogeneity of disease, availability of high-quality evidence, and patient and parental preferences. Unlike adult rheumatoid arthritis, the 'window of opportunity' has not been definitively demonstrated in large scale trials, and although early studies of T2T in JIA have been favorable, the timing and means of escalation (especially with regard to biologics) need clarification. Implications: This review outlines several issues of implementing T2T in JIA, including the important extra-articular manifestations of disease and non-pharmacological management, that should be considered in future consensus guidelines.

Evaluation of flare rate and reduction strategies for bDMARDs in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: real world data from a single-centre cohort

This study aimed to determine the flare rate (FR) in a cohort of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) patients with tapered or abruptly discontinued biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and to identify predictors of flare. This retrospective observational study included 191 bDMARD dose-reduction events in patients with JIA followed-up at a referral hospital during the period 2000-2019. FR was analysed according to reduction strategies. To identify predictors of flare, Kaplan-Meier and Cox-regression models were plotted at 6 months (6 m), 12 months (12 m) and 24 months (24 m) following tapering (TP) or withdrawal (WD). 165 episodes of TP and 71 episodes of WD were included; 45 episodes where treatment was withdrawn after TP were included in both strategies. FR after TP was 13.4% at 6 m and increased up to 26.6% at 12 m and 51.4% at 24 m. After WD, FR was higher, 52.1% of events had a flare at 6 m and 67.6% at 12 m. Previous TP did not increase time in remission after WD of bDMARDs in the Kaplan-Meier analysis. Factors associated with flares were identified after TP at 6 m: female sex, higher number of previous bDMARDs and longer time on bDMARD treatment were positively associated with flares. Polyarticular subtype and younger age at diagnosis were associated with flares at 12 and 24 m after TP. No factors were identified in multivariable analysis after WD. TP is a successful strategy to maintain remission with lower bDMARD doses. Previous TP of bDMARDs does not seem to increase time in remission after WD.

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is an umbrella term for arthritis of unknown origin, lasting for >6 weeks with onset before 16 years of age. JIA is the most common chronic inflammatory rheumatic condition of childhood. According to the International League Against Rheumatism (ILAR) classification, seven mutually exclusive categories of JIA exist based on disease manifestations during the first 6 months of disease. Although the ILAR classification has been useful to foster research, it has been criticized mainly as it does not distinguish those forms of chronic arthritis observed in adults and in children from those that may be unique to childhood. Hence, efforts to provide a new evidence-based classification are ongoing. Similar to arthritis observed in adults, pathogenesis involves autoimmune and autoinflammatory mechanisms. The field has witnessed a remarkable improvement in therapeutic possibilities of JIA owing to the availability of new potent drugs and the possibility to perform controlled trials with support from legislative interventions and large networks availability. The goal of drug therapy in JIA is to rapidly reduce disease activity to inactive disease or clinical remission, minimize drug side effects and achieve a quality of life comparable to that of healthy peers. As JIA can influence all aspects of a child's and their family's life, researchers increasingly recognize improvement of health-related quality of life as a key treatment goal.

What Have We Learnt About the Treatment of Juvenile-Onset Systemic Lupus Erythematous Since Development of the SHARE Recommendations 2012?

Introduction

Juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematous (JSLE) is a rare multisystem autoimmune disorder. In 2012, the Single Hub and Access point for pediatric Rheumatology in Europe (SHARE) initiative developed recommendations for the diagnosis/management of JSLE, lupus nephritis (LN) and childhood-onset anti-phospholipid syndrome (APS). These recommendations were based upon available evidence informing international expert consensus meetings.

Objective

To review new evidence published since 2012 relating to the management of JSLE, LN and APS in children, since the original literature searches informing the SHARE recommendations were performed.

Method

MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were systematically searched for relevant literature (2012-2021) using the following criteria: (1) English language studies; (2) original research studies regarding management of JSLE, LN, APS in children; (3) adult studies with 3 or more patients <18-years old, or where the lower limit of age range ≤16-years and the mean/median age is ≤30-years; (4) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, case control studies, observational studies, case-series with >3 patients. Three reviewers independently screened all titles/abstracts against predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. All relevant manuscripts were reviewed independently by at least two reviewers. Data extraction, assessment of the level of evidence/methodological quality of the manuscripts was undertaken in-line with the original SHARE processes. Specific PUBMED literature searches were also performed to identify new evidence relating to each existing SHARE treatment recommendation.

Results

Six publications met the inclusion/exclusion criteria for JSLE: three RCTs, one feasibility trial, one case series. For LN, 16 publications met the inclusion/exclusion criteria: eight randomized trials, three open label prospective clinical trials, five observational/cohort studies. For APS, no publications met the inclusion criteria. The study with the highest evidence was an RCT comparing belimumab vs. placebo, including 93 JSLE patients. Whilst the primary-endpoint was not met, a significantly higher proportion of belimumab-treated patients met the PRINTO/ACR cSLE response to therapy criteria. New evidence specifically addressing each SHARE recommendation remains limited.

Conclusion

Since the original SHARE literature searches, undertaken >10-years ago, the main advance in JSLE treatment evidence relates to belimumab. Additional studies are urgently needed to test new/existing agents, and assess their long-term safety profile in JSLE, to facilitate evidence-based practice.

Efficacy of Pulse Dexamethasone in non-systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: a double-blind randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Early aggressive therapy using biologicals is increasingly being used in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) for early disease remission. Pulse-steroids are used in induction regimes for rheumatic disorders such as systemic lupus erythematosus and systemic JIA; however, no controlled studies demonstrate their use in non-systemic JIA. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pulse dexamethasone therapy in children with treatment-naive non-systemic JIA as early aggressive therapy in resource-limited settings.

METHODS

60 treatment-naive children with non-systemic JIA with an active joint count of ≥ 5 and/or involvement of hip or cervical joints were randomised to receive either pulse dexamethasone (3 mg/kg/day, max : 100 mg/d) or placebo (normal saline) for three consecutive days during each visit at 0, 6 ± 2, 12 ± 2 weeks; along with standard therapy (methotrexate and NSAIDs). The use of oral bridge steroids was permissible for persistent severe disease as per pre-defined criteria. The primary outcome was ACR-Pedi 70 response at 16 ± 2 weeks after enrolment in the two groups.

RESULTS

The proportion of children achieving ACR-Pedi 70 in the two groups, at last follow-up was 11/30 (36.7%) in pulse dexamethasone arm vs 11/28 (39.3%) in the placebo arm (p-value 0.837, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.48-1.80). We did not observe any significant difference in the proportion of children requiring bridge steroids. Adverse events were comparable in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The addition of pulse dexamethasone to standard treatment may not add any advantage in improving ACR-Pedi 70 scores at medium-term follow-up.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trial Registry-India www.ctri.nic.in CTRI/2018/08/015151.

Precision medicine in juvenile idiopathic arthritis-has the time arrived?

The introduction of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug therapies for treating children and adolescents with chronic arthritis (ie, juvenile idiopathic arthritis [JIA]) has revolutionised care and outcomes. The biologic revolution continues to expand, with ever-changing immunological targets coming to market after basic research and clinical trials. The first class of biologics that was beneficial for children with JIA was tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. If used early and aggressively, TNF inhibitors are capable of inducing disease remission for most of the seven subtypes of JIA, with the exception of systemic JIA (which more frequently responds to interleukin [IL]-1 or IL-6 inhibition). Nevertheless, there are still subsets of patients with JIA with disease that is difficult to treat or who develop extra-articular features that require a different therapeutic approach. Although finding an effective biological therapy for individual children with JIA can be trial and error, ongoing research and clinical trials are providing insight into a more personalised approach to care. In addition, redefining the JIA classification, in part based on shared similarities with various adult arthritides, could allow for extrapolation of knowledge from studies in adults with chronic arthritis.

Safety updates in novel therapeutics for pediatric rheumatic disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Biologics and novel targeted therapeutics have transformed the management of pediatric rheumatic diseases over the past two decades; however, questions about short-term and long-term safety remain. Safety data gathered from recent clinical trials, long-term extensions of prior trials, registries, and other real-world evidence are summarized here for biologics and novel therapeutics commonly prescribed for pediatric rheumatic diseases.

RECENT FINDINGS

With nearly 20 years of therapeutic experience, tumor necrosis inhibitors (TNFi) are generally well tolerated, although infections, malignancy, and development of new autoimmunity remain a concern. Risk of infections may be higher in IL-1 and IL-6 inhibitors, and lower in abatacept, compared with TNFi. Safety data for B-cell-targeted therapeutics and janus kinase inhibitors are emerging, but remain limited, especially in children.

SUMMARY

Biologic and novel targeted therapeutics offer a promising future for children with pediatric rheumatic disease. However, long-term safety data in children remain limited for several agents. With any therapeutic option, both short-term and long-term safety concerns must be weighed against individual clinical needs when choosing the optimal treatment for each child.

Update on the treatment of nonsystemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis including treatment-to-target: is (drug-free) inactive disease already possible?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review concerns the outcome for nonsystemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with emphasis on treatment-to-target (T2T) and treatment strategies aiming at inactive disease by giving an overview of recent articles.

RECENT FINDINGS

More efficacious therapies and treatment strategies/T2T with inactive disease as target, have improved the outcome for JIA significantly. Recent studies regarding treatment strategies have shown 47-68% inactive disease after 1 year. Moreover, probability of attaining inactive disease at least once in the first year seems even higher in recent cohort-studies, reaching 80%, although these studies included relatively high numbers of oligoarticular JIA patients. However, 26-76% of patients flare upon therapy withdrawal and prediction of flares is still difficult.

SUMMARY

Remission can be achieved and sustained in (some) JIA patients, regardless of initial treatment. Cornerstone principles in the management of nonsystemic JIA treatment are early start of DMARD therapy, striving for inactive disease and T2T by close and repeated monitoring of disease activity. T2T and tight control appear to be more important than a specific drug in JIA. Next to inactive disease, it is important that patients/parents are involved in personal targets, like reduction of pain and fatigue. Future studies should focus on predictors (based on imaging-methods or biomarkers) for sustained drug-free remission and flare.

Biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs and Janus kinase inhibitors in paediatric rheumatology - what we know and what we do not know from randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors are prescribed in adult and paediatric rheumatology. Due to age-dependent changes, disease course, and pharmacokinetic processes paediatric patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (PiRD) differ from adult rheumatology patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in PiRD treated with bDMARDs/JAK inhibitors was conducted on Medline, clinicaltrials.gov , clinicaltrialsregister.eu and conference abstracts as of July 2020. RCTs were included if (i) patients were aged ≤20 years, (ii) patients had a predefined rheumatic diagnosis and (iii) RCT reported predefined outcomes. Selected studies were excluded in case of (i) observational or single arm study or (ii) sample size ≤5 patients. Study characteristics were extracted.

RESULTS

Out of 608 screened references, 65 references were selected, reporting 35 unique RCTs. All 35 RCTs reported efficacy while 34/3 provided safety outcomes and 16/35 provided pharmacokinetic data. The most common investigated treatments were TNF inhibitors (60%), IL-1 inhibitors (17%) and IL-6 inhibitors (9%). No RCTs with published results were identified for baricitinib, brodalumab, certolizumab pegol, guselkumab, risankizumab, rituximab, sarilumab, secukinumab, tildrakizumab, or upadacitinib. In patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) 25/35 RCTs were conducted. The remaining 10 RCTs were performed in non-JIA patients including plaque psoriasis, Kawasaki Disease, systemic lupus erythematosus and non-infectious uveitis. In JIA-RCTs, the control arm was mainly placebo and the concomitant treatments were either methotrexate, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) or corticosteroids. Non-JIA patients mostly received NSAID. There are ongoing trials investigating abatacept, adalimumab, baricitinib, brodalumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, guselkumab, infliximab, risankizumab, secukinumab, tofacitinib and tildrakizumab.

CONCLUSION

Despite the FDA Modernization Act and support of major paediatric rheumatology networks, such as the Pediatric Rheumatology Collaborative Study Group (PRCSG) and the Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organization (PRINTO), which resulted in drug approval for PiRD indications, there are limited RCTs in PiRD patients. As therapy response is influenced by age-dependent changes, pharmacokinetic processes and disease course it is important to consider developmental changes in bDMARDs/JAK inhibitor use in PiRD patients. As such it is critical to collaborate and conduct international RCTs to appropriately investigate and characterize efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of bDMARDs/JAK inhibitors in paediatric rheumatology.

Outcome of children with oligoarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis compared to polyarthritis on methotrexate- data of the German BIKER registry

BACKGROUND

Oligoarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (oligoJIA) is the most commonly diagnosed category of chronic arthritis in children. Nevertheless, there are no evidence- based guidelines for its treatment, in particular for the use of methotrexate (MTX). The primary objective of this analysis is to evaluate the outcomes in patients with persistent oligoJIA compared to those with extended oligoJIA and rheumatoid factor (RF) negative polyarthritis treated with methotrexate.

METHODS

Patients with persistent or extended oligoJIA or RF negative PA recorded in the Biologics in Pediatric Rheumatology Registry (BiKeR), receiving methotrexate for the first time were included in the analyses. Efficacy was determined using the Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score 10 (JADAS 10). Safety assessment included the documentation of adverse and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

From 2005 through 2011, 1056 patients were included: 370 patients with persistent oligoJIA, 221 patients with extended oligoJIA and 467 patients with RF negative PA. Therapeutic efficacy was observed following the start of methotrexate. Over a period of 24 months JADAS-minimal disease activity (JADAS ≤2) was reached in 44% of patients with persistent oligoJIA, 38% with extended oligoJIA, 46% with RF negative PA, JADAS-remission defined as JADAS ≤1 was reached in 33% of patients with persistent oligoJIA, 29% with extended oligoJIA and 35% (RF negative PA). Patients with extended oligoJIA achieved JADAS remission significantly later and received additional biologic disease-modifying drugs significantly more often than patients with persistent oligoJIA or RF negative PA (p < 0.001). Tolerability was comparable. New onset uveitis occurred in 0.3 to 2.2 per 100 patient years.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with persistent oligoJIA taking methotrexate are at least as likely to enter remission as patients with extended oligo JIA or polyarticular JIA. Patients with extended oligoJIA achieved JADAS remission significantly later. Within 2 years, almost half of the patients with persistent oligoJIA achieved JADAS-minimal disease activity.

Recent progress in the treatment of non-systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is a chronic inflammatory disease affecting the joints and other organs that occurs in 1 in 1,000 children in the United States. Given the various categories of JIA, interpretation of the literature can be difficult. In this review, new developments in understanding non-systemic JIA and its treatment will be covered. Recent advances in the journey toward personalized treatment in JIA will be highlighted, including a review of currently available biologic modifiers. Uveitis and the temporomandibular joint will be discussed as particularly challenging treatment issues. Recent guideline updates and literature-guided treatment decisions will be reviewed.

MRP8/14 and neutrophil elastase for predicting treatment response and occurrence of flare in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis

Objective

To study two neutrophil activation markers, myeloid-related protein (MRP) 8/14 and neutrophil elastase (NE), for their ability to predict treatment response and flare in patients with JIA.

Methods

Using samples from two cohorts (I and II), we determined MRP8/14 and NE levels of 32 (I) and 81 (II) patients with new-onset, DMARD-naïve arthritis and compared patients who responded to treatment (defined as fulfilling ≥ adjusted ACRpedi50 response and/or inactive disease) with non-responders (defined as fulfilling < adjusted ACRpedi50 response and/or active disease) at 6 and 12 months. Secondly, we compared biomarker levels of 54 (I) and 34 (II) patients with clinically inactive disease who did or did not suffer from a flare of arthritis after 6 or 12 months. Receiver operating characteristic analyses were carried out to study the predictive value of MRP8/14 and NE for treatment response and flare.

Results

For both cohorts, baseline MRP8/14 and NE levels for patients who did or did not respond to treatment were not different. Also, MRP8/14 and NE levels were not different in patients who did or did not flare. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of MRP8/14 and NE demonstrated areas under the curve <0.7 in both cohorts.

Conclusion

In our cohorts, MRP8/14 and NE could not predict treatment response. Also, when patients had inactive disease, neither marker could predict flares.

Early combination therapy with etanercept and methotrexate in JIA patients shortens the time to reach an inactive disease state and remission: results of a double-blind placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Remission is the primary objective of treating juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). It is still debatable whether early intensive treatment is superior in terms of earlier achievement of remission. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of early etanercept+methotrexate (ETA+MTX) combination therapy versus step-up MTX monotherapy with ETA added in refractory disease.

METHODS

A multi-centre, double-blind, randomized study in active polyarticular JIA patients treated with either ETA+MTX (n = 35) or placebo+MTX (n = 33) for up to 24 weeks, followed by a 24-week open-label phase. The efficacy endpoints included pedACR30 criteria improvement at week 12, inactive disease at week 24, and remission at week 48. Patients who failed to achieve the endpoints at week 12 or at week 24 escaped to open-label ETA+MTX. Safety was assessed at each visit.

RESULTS

By intention-to-treat analysis, more patients in the ETA+MTX group reached the pedACR30 response at week 12 (33 (94.3%)) than in the placebo+MTX group (20 (60.6%); p = 0.001). At week 24, comparable percentages of patients reached inactive disease (11 (31.4%) vs 11 (33.3%)). At week 48, 11 (31.4%) and eight (24.2%) patients achieved remission. The median (+/-IQR) times to achieve an inactive disease state in the ETA+MTX and placebo+MTX groups were 24 (14-32) and 32 (24-40) weeks, respectively. Forty-four (74/100 patient-years) adverse events (AEs) were reported, leading to treatment discontinuation in 6 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Early combination therapy with ETA+MTX proved to be highly effective compared to the standard step-up regimen. Compared to those treated with the standard regimen, more patients treated with a combination of ETA+MTX reached the pedACR30 response and achieved inactive disease and remission more rapidly.

Longitudinal assessment of racial disparities in juvenile idiopathic arthritis disease activity in a treat-to-target intervention

BACKGROUND

We sought to evaluate racial disparities in disease outcomes among children with polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) during a treat-to-target (TTT) intervention with clinical decision support (CDS).

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a TTT-CDS strategy integrated into clinical practice for children with polyarticular JIA at a single center from 2016 to 2019. The primary outcome was the clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (cJADAS-10). We used multivariable linear regression to assess racial differences in disease outcomes at the index visit (first visit after implementation). The effect of race on disease outcomes over time was estimated using linear mixed-effects models, stratified by incident or prevalent disease.

RESULTS

We included 159 children with polyarticular JIA, of which 74, 13 and 13% were white, black, and Asian/other, respectively. cJADAS-10 improved significantly over time for all race categories, while the rates of improvement did not differ by race in incident (p = 0.53) or prevalent cases (p = 0.58). cJADAS-10 over time remained higher among black children compared to white children (β 2.5, p < 0.01 and β 1.2, p = 0.08 for incident and prevalent cases, respectively). Provider attestation to CDS use at ≥50% of encounters was associated with a 3.9 greater reduction in cJADAS-10 among black children compared to white children (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Despite similar rates of improvement over time by race, disparities in JIA outcomes persisted throughout implementation of a TTT-CDS approach. More consistent CDS use may have a greater benefit among black children and needs to be explored further.

Different corticosteroid induction regimens in children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: the SIRJIA mixed-methods feasibility study

BACKGROUND

In the UK, juvenile idiopathic arthritis is the most common inflammatory disorder in childhood, affecting 10 : 100,000 children and young people aged < 16 years each year, with a population prevalence of around 1 : 1000. Corticosteroids are commonly used to treat juvenile idiopathic arthritis; however, there is currently a lack of consensus as to which corticosteroid induction regimen should be used with various disease subtypes and severities of juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

OBJECTIVE

The main study objective was to determine the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial to compare the different corticosteroid induction regimens in children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

DESIGN

This was a mixed-methods study. Work packages included a literature review; qualitative interviews with children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and their families; a questionnaire survey and screening log to establish current UK practice; a consensus meeting with health-care professionals, children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and their families to establish the primary outcome; a feasibility study to pilot data capture and to collect data for future sample size calculations; and a final consensus meeting to establish the final protocol.

SETTING

The setting was rheumatology clinics across the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Children, young people and their families who attended clinics and health-care professionals took part in this mixed-methods study.

INTERVENTIONS

This study observed methods of prescribing corticosteroids across the UK.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main study outcomes were the acceptability of a future trial for children, young people, their families and health-care professionals, and the feasibility of delivering such a trial.

RESULTS

Qualitative interviews identified differences in the views of children, young people and their families on a randomised controlled trial and potential barriers to recruitment. A total of 297 participants were screened from 13 centres in just less than 6 months. In practice, all routes of corticosteroid administration were used, and in all subtypes of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Intra-articular corticosteroid injection was the most common treatment. The questionnaire surveys showed the varying clinical practice across the UK, but established intra-articular corticosteroids as the treatment control for a future trial. The primary outcome of choice for children, young people, their families and health-care professionals was the Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score, 71-joint count. However, results from the feasibility study showed that, owing to missing blood test data, the clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score should be used. The Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score, 71-joint count, and the clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score are composite disease activity scoring systems for juvenile arthritis. Two final trial protocols were established for a future randomised controlled trial.

LIMITATIONS

Fewer clinics were included in this feasibility study than originally planned, limiting the ability to draw strong conclusions about these units to take part in future research.

CONCLUSIONS

A definitive randomised controlled trial is likely to be feasible based on the findings from this study; however, important recommendations should be taken into account when planning such a trial.

FUTURE WORK

This mixed-methods study has laid down the foundations to develop the evidence base in this area and conducting a randomised control trial to compare different corticosteroid induction regimens in children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis is likely to be feasible.

STUDY REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16649996.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 36. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Treat-to-target study for improved outcome in polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis is one of the most prevalent chronic inflammatory diseases in children. Evidence suggests that early effective treatment minimises the burden of disease during childhood and in further life. We hypothesise that a guided treat-to-target (T2T) approach is superior to routine care in polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA) in terms of reaching a clinical remission after 12 months of treatment.

METHODS

Patients with early and active pJIA were enrolled. Targets for treatment were the following: Recognisable Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (JADAS) improvement after 3 months, acceptable disease at 6 months, minimal disease activity at 9 months and as primary endpoint remission after 12 months. Initially, patients received methotrexate. Failure to meet a defined target required treatment modification at the specified intervals. The choice of biologics was not influenced by the protocol. Finally, T2T patients were compared with a cohort of matched controls of patients with pJIA with unguided therapy documented by BIKER.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were enrolled. Treatment targets after 3/6/9 and 12 months were reached by 73%/75%/77% and 48% of patients. Fifty-four patients completed the protocol. Compared with matched controls, on T2T guidance significantly more patients reached JADAS remission (48% vs 32%; OR 1.96 (1.1-3.7); p=0.033) and JADAS minimal disease activity (JADAS-MDA) (76% vs 59%; OR 2.2 (1.1-4.4); p=0.028). Patients from the T2T cohort received a biologic significantly more frequent (50% vs 9% after 12 months; OR 9.8 (4.6-20.8); p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The T2T concept was feasible and superior to unguided treatment. High rates of patients reached JADAS-MDA and JADA remission after 12 months. Approximately half of the patients achieved their therapy goals without a biologic.

Treatment Withdrawal Following Remission in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Early diagnosis and treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with conventional and biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs have vastly improved outcomes for children with these diseases. Currently, a large proportion of children with JIA are able to achieve clinical inactive disease and remission. With this success, important questions have arisen about when medications can be stopped and how to balance the risks and benefits of continuing medications versus the potential for flare after stopping.

AIM

The aim was to conduct a systematic review of the available literature to summarize current evidence about medication withdrawal for JIA in remission.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed and Embase from 1990 to 2019. References were first screened by title and then independently screened by title and abstract by two authors. A total of 77 original papers were selected for full-text review. Data were extracted from 30 papers on JIA and JIA-associated uveitis, and the quality of the evidence was evaluated using National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) tools. Studies on biochemical and radiologic biomarkers were also reviewed and summarized.

RESULTS

Most studies investigating treatment withdrawal in JIA have been observational and of poor or fair quality; interpretations of these studies have been limited by differences in study populations, disease and remission durations, the medications withdrawn, approaches to withdrawal, and definitions of disease outcomes. Overall the data suggest that flares are common after stopping JIA medications, particularly biologic medications. Clinical characteristics associated with increased risks of flare have not been consistently identified. Biochemical biomarkers and ultrasound findings have been shown to predict outcomes after stopping medications, but to date, no such predictor has been consistently validated across JIA populations. Studies have also not identified optimal strategies for withdrawing medication for well-controlled JIA. Promising withdrawal strategies include discontinuing methotrexate before biologic medications in children receiving combination therapy, dose reduction for children on biologics, and treat-to-target approaches to withdrawal. These and other strategies require further investigation in larger, high-quality studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The published literature on treatment withdrawal in JIA has varied in design and quality, yielding little conclusive evidence thus far on the management of JIA in remission. Given the importance of this question, international collaborative efforts are underway to study clinical and biologic predictors of successful medication withdrawal in JIA. These efforts may ultimately support the development of personalized approaches to withdrawing medication in children with JIA in remission.

No radiographic wrist damage after treatment to target in recent-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

To evaluate radiographic progression of patients with new-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) in response to an early, tightly-controlled, treatment-to-target.

METHODS

Patients with JIA participating in the BeSt-for-Kids-study, randomized to 3 treatment strategy arms, were eligible if at least 1 conventional wrist-radiograph was available. Bone damage as reflected by carpal length was assessed using the Poznanski-score. The BoneXpert-method was used to determine the Bone Age (BA, > 5 years) and bone mineral density (BMD) of the wrist. These scores were evaluated over time and compared between the treatment arms and mean JADAS10-score using linear mixed models corrected for age and symptom duration.

RESULTS

In 60 patients, 252 radiographs were analysed. Baseline age and symptom duration were different between the arms. No difference in comparison to the healthy reference population was found at baseline for the Poznanski-score (IQR varying from - 0,82; 0.68), nor for BA (varying from - 0.88 to 0.74). Baseline BMD was statistically significantly lower in arm 3 (initial treatment with etanercept and methotrexate) (- 1.48; - 0.68) compared to arm 1 (- 0.84; - 0.04) and arm 2 (- 0.93; 0.15). After treatment to target inactive disease, the Poznanski-scores and the BA remained clinically unchanged, while the BMD in arm 3 improved (p < 0.05 vs arm 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Recent-onset JIA patients, treated-to-target aimed at inactive disease, showed no signs of radiographic wrist damage (Poznanski-score, BA or BMD) either at baseline or at follow-up, irrespective of treatment arm. A lower BMD at baseline in arm 3, initially treated with methotrexate and etanercept, improved significantly after treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NTR, NL1504 (NTR1574). Registered 01-06-2009.

Treat to Target in Psoriatic Arthritis

A treat-to-target approach to psoriatic arthritis has emerged as a topic of interest following successful application of this treatment paradigm to rheumatoid arthritis. In psoriatic arthritis, this has been examined in one randomized trial to date showing benefits of a tight control treatment strategy over standard care. Nonetheless, international treatment recommendations have called for clinicians to aim for a target of remission or low disease activity, although little or no consensus exists on how to measure these targets. An ideal measure to define a treatment target should be able to address all the disease domains and preferences pertinent to an individual patient.

A prediction rule for lack of achievement of inactive disease with methotrexate as the sole disease-modifying antirheumatic therapy in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

To investigate the frequency of achievement of inactive disease (ID) in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) treated with methotrexate (MTX) as the sole disease-modifyng antirheumatic (DMARD) therapy and to develop a prediction model for lack of attainment of ID.

METHODS

The clinical charts of consecutive patients started with MTX as the sole DMARD between 2000 and 2013 were reviewed. Patient follow-up was censored at first episode of ID or, in case ID was not reached, at last follow-up visit or when a biologic DMARD was prescribed. The characteristic at MTX start of patients who achieved or did not achieve ID were compared with univariate and multivariable analyses. Regression coefficients (β) of variables that entered the best-fitting logistic regression model were converted and summed to obtain a "prediction score" for lack of achievement of ID.

RESULTS

A total of 375 patients were included in the study. During MTX administration, 8.8% were given systemic corticosteroids and 44.1% intra-articular corticosteroids. After MTX start, 229 (61%) patients achieved ID after a median of 1.7 years, whereas 146 patients (39%) did not reach ID after a median of 1.2 years. On multivariable analysis, independent correlations with lack of achievement of ID were identified for the disease categories of systemic arthritis, enthesitis-related arthritis (ERA) and polyarthritis and C-reactive protein (CRP) >  1.4 mg/dl. The prediction score ranged from 0 to 3 and its cutoff that discriminated best between patients who achieved or did not achieve ID was > 0.5. The categories of systemic arthritis or ERA, both of which had a score greater than 0.5, were sufficient alone to predict a lower likelihood to reach ID. Polyarthritis and increased CRP, whose score was 0.5, assumed a predictive value only when present in association.

CONCLUSION

A conventional treatment regimen based on MTX as the sole DMARD led to achievement of ID in a sizeable proportion of children with JIA. Our findings help to outline the characteristics of patients who may deserve a synthetic DMARD other than MTX or the introduction of a biologic DMARD from disease outset.

Predicting disease outcomes in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: challenges, evidence, and new directions

The aims of treating juvenile idiopathic arthritis are to elicit treatment response toward remission, while preventing future flares. Understanding patient and disease characteristics that predispose young people with this condition to these outcomes would allow the forecasting of disease process and the tailoring of therapies. The strongest predictor of remission is disease category, particularly oligoarthritis, although a few additional clinical predictors of treatment response have been identified. Novel evidence using biomarkers, such as S100 proteins and novel single nucleotide polymorphism data, could add value to clinical models. The future aim of personalised medicine in the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis will be aided with international collaborations, allowing for the analysis of larger datasets with novel biomarker data. Combined clinical and biomarker panels will probably be required for predicting outcomes in such a complex disease.