Validation of the ASDAS with a quick quantitative CRP assay (ASDAS-Q) in patients with axial SpA: a prospective multicentre cross-sectional study

Axial Spondyloarthritis Treatment Recommendations and Disease Activity Monitoring in Clinical Practice: Results of an Online Survey

OBJECTIVE

Clinical practice guidelines are not always followed consistently. To better understand potential barriers to the implementation of treatment recommendations in axial spondyloarthritis and ankylosing spondylitis (axSpA/AS), an online survey was conducted.

METHODS

Email invitations were sent to US rheumatology care providers in January 2023. The questionnaire included 20 questions, with an estimated completion time of 5-7 minutes.

RESULTS

One hundred four of 441 (24%) invitees participated, including 80/104 (77%) board-certified rheumatologists and 20/104 (19%) fellows. Survey participants identified UpToDate (85%), treatment guidelines (74%), and colleagues (54%) as relevant sources of knowledge for managing axSpA/AS. Of the participants, 64% and 53% considered themselves to be at least moderately familiar with the American College of Rheumatology/Spondylitis Association of America/Spondyloarthritis Research and Treatment Network (ACR/SAA/SPARTAN) and Assessment of Spondyloarthritis international Society/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (ASAS/EULAR) treatment recommendations for axSpA/AS, respectively. Whereas 69% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that disease activity scores are useful for making treatment decisions in axSpA/AS, only 37% measure patient-reported outcomes (PROs) frequently (≥ 50% of clinic visits) while 82% do so for C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). PROs are typically recorded during clinic encounters (65%) and CRP/ESR are obtained after the visit (86%). Of the participants, 57% and 47% considered the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score to be at least moderately useful for measuring disease activity in axSpA/AS, respectively; 41% and 37% thought the same about the ASAS 20% improvement criteria and Clinical Disease Activity Index, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Treatment guidelines are an important resource for rheumatologists who manage patients with axSpA/AS. Although there is general agreement that disease activity monitoring is important, the implementation of the respective recommendations is lacking. Reasons may include lack of familiarity and an underdeveloped infrastructure to efficiently collect PROs.

Comparison of Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index tools in assessment of axial spondyloarthritis activity

Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is an inflammatory joint disease, in which the dominant symptom is inflammatory back pain. It affects approximately 1% of the population, with a higher incidence in males. Spinal pain associated with spondyloarthritis is referred to as inflammatory back pain. In clinical practice, it is extremely important to be able to assess the activity of inflammatory back diseases and to select appropriate treatment and monitor the therapy. Currently, two main tools are used for assessment of the activity of axial spondyloarthritis: BASDAI (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index) and ASDAS (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score). The BASDAI is a tool used for years for assessment of disease activity, determining eligibility for treatment, and making decisions about continuation of therapy. Since BASDAI depends entirely on patient self-assessment, it is considered less objective than the ASDAS index. In turn, the latter includes not only answers to questions provided by the patient but also a parameter of inflammation such as erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C-reactive protein (CRP). Additionally, increasing numbers of studies report advantages of the ASDAS index over BASDAI. Moreover, as indicated by ASAS/EULAR (Assessment in Spondyloarthritis International Society/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology) 2022, ASDAS, especially ASDAS-CRP is the preferred tool for assessment of the activity of axSpA, whereas BASDAI is used only when the evaluation of the ASDAS is not possible. This paper presents the definition and symptoms of axSpA and reviews the latest research on ASDAS and BASDAI, with emphasis on the objectivity of the ASDAS assessment also presenting the doubts and limitations concerning this tool.

Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life questionnaire: Translation, cultural adaptation and validation into Arabic language

BACKGROUND

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a multifaceted inflammatory disease that has a strong negative impact on the quality of life (QoL) of patients. The Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life (PsAQoL) questionnaire was the first disease-specific patient-derived instrument developed to measure the QoL in patients with PsA. Our objective was to translate the PsAQol into Arabic language and evaluate its reliability and validity in patients with PsA.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study including patients with PsA. A clinical and biological assessment of the patients was performed at inclusion. The translation of the original PsAQoL into Arabic was performed by a professional bilingual and lay panel. Eight patients were interviewed to assess face and content validity. A separate sample of PsA patients (n = 30) were invited to participate in a test-retest postal study in order to investigate reproducibility and construct validity. One week separated the two administrations. The Arabic version of Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) was used as a comparator instrument for convergent validity.

RESULTS

Face and content validity were satisfactory. The Arabic version of the PsAQoL was found to be relevant, understandable and easy to complete in only a few minutes. One item was excluded (item 16). It had no correlation with either the other 19 items or the total score of PsAQol. The Arabic PsAQol had excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's a = 0.926), and test-retest reliability (r = 0.982). There was a positive correlation between the total score of the PsAQoL and the Arabic version of HAQ (Spearman's r = 0.838, p < 10-3 ). Exploratory factor analysis had extracted two factors explaining 55% of the total variance.

CONCLUSION

Nineteen items were selected to compose the Arabic version of PsAQoL, which was found to be relevant and understandable and has excellent reliability and construct validity. The new measure will be a valuable new tool for use in routine care for patients' assessment.

ASAS-EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis: 2022 update

OBJECTIVES

To update the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS)-EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

METHODS

Following the EULAR Standardised Operating Procedures, two systematic literature reviews were conducted on non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment of axSpA. In a task force meeting, the evidence was presented, discussed, and overarching principles and recommendations were updated, followed by voting.

RESULTS

Five overarching principles and 15 recommendations with a focus on personalised medicine were agreed: eight remained unchanged from the previous recommendations; three with minor edits on nomenclature; two with relevant updates (#9, 12); two newly formulated (#10, 11). The first five recommendations focus on treatment target and monitoring, non-pharmacological management and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as first-choice pharmacological treatment. Recommendations 6-8 deal with analgesics and discourage long-term glucocorticoids and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for pure axial involvement. Recommendation 9 describes the indication of biological DMARDs (bDMARDs, that is, tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), interleukin-17 inhibitors (IL-17i)) and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs, ie, Janus kinase inhibitors) for patients who have Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score ≥2.1 and failed ≥2 NSAIDs and also have either elevated C reactive protein, MRI inflammation of sacroiliac joints or radiographic sacroiliitis. Current practice is to start a TNFi or IL-17i. Recommendation 10 addresses extramusculoskeletal manifestations with TNF monoclonal antibodies preferred for recurrent uveitis or inflammatory bowel disease, and IL-17i for significant psoriasis. Treatment failure should prompt re-evaluation of the diagnosis and consideration of the presence of comorbidities (#11). If active axSpA is confirmed, switching to another b/tsDMARD is recommended (#12). Tapering, rather than immediate discontinuation of a bDMARD, can be considered in patients in sustained remission (#13). The last recommendations (#14, 15) deal with surgery and spinal fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2022 ASAS-EULAR recommendations provide up-to-date guidance on the management of patients with axSpA.

Evaluation of the Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) with a quick quantitative C reactive protein assay (Q-DAPSA) in patients with psoriatic arthritis: a prospective multicentre cross-sectional study

Objectives

This study aimed to evaluate the Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) based on a quick quantitative C reactive protein (qCRP) assay (Q-DAPSA) in a multicentre, prospective, cross-sectional study in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Methods

The assessment of prospectively recruited study patients included joint examination and patient reported outcome (PRO) measures (patient global assessment, patient pain assessment). Following, the DAPSA based on a routine laboratory CRP measurement, Q-DAPSA and clinical DAPSA (cDAPSA) were calculated. Cross-tabulations and weighted Cohen’s kappa were performed to analyse the agreement of disease activity categories. Bland-Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficients were used to determine the agreement of numerical values regarding CRP and qCRP as well as different disease activity scores.

Results

Altogether, 104 patients with PsA could be included in the statistical analysis. With Q-DAPSA, 102 of 104 (98.1%) patients achieved identical disease activity categories in comparison to DAPSA with a weighted Cohen’s kappa of 0.980 (95% CI: 0.952 to 1.000). The agreement between DAPSA and cDAPSA was slightly lower with identical disease activity categories seen in 97 of 104 (93.3%) of patients and with a weighted Cohen’s kappa of 0.932 (95% CI 0.885 to 0.980).

Conclusions

The Q-DAPSA showed an almost perfect agreement with the conventional DAPSA regarding identical disease activity categories. Thus, the Q-DAPSA can be used as a timely available disease activity score in patients with PsA with the additional benefit of CRP involvement. Consequently, the Q-DAPSA could facilitate the implementation of the treat-to-target concept in clinical routine and clinical trials.

Validation of the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) with a quick quantitative C-reactive protein assay (SDAI-Q) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective multicenter cross-sectional study

Objectives:

The Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) is a recommended composite score for assessing the remission status in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, determination of C-reactive protein (CRP) levels takes several hours and sometimes days and limits the use of the SDAI in the clinical setting. The aim of this study was to validate the SDAI using a quick quantitative C-reactive protein (qCRP) assay (as SDAI-Q) in RA patients.

Design:

This is a multicenter, prospective, cross-sectional pilot study in RA patients.

Methods:

Adult patients (⩾18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of RA were recruited between January 2020 and September 2020 from five rheumatologic centers located in Berlin, Germany. SDAI, SDAI-Q, Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), and DAS28 scores comprising CRP, qCRP, or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) were calculated. The agreement of disease activity categories was analyzed using cross tabulations and weighted Cohen’s kappa. The agreement of numerical values was analyzed with Bland–Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

Results:

Overall, 100 RA patients were included in the statistical analysis. The mean value of qCRP (7.89 ± 16.98 mg/l) was slightly higher than that of routine laboratory CRP (6.97 ± 15.02 mg/l). Comparing SDAI and SDAI-Q, all patients were assigned to identical disease activity categories. Agreement of disease activity categories by CDAI and SDAI/SDAI-Q was observed in 93% with a weighted Cohen’s kappa of 0.929 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.878; 0.981).

Conclusion:

The SDAI-Q showed an absolute agreement regarding the assignment of disease activity categories in comparison with the conventional SDAI. Therefore, the SDAI-Q may facilitate the application of a treat-to-target concept in clinical trials and clinical routine as a quickly available disease activity score incorporating CRP as an objective parameter.