Remission in rheumatoid arthritis: benefit over low disease activity in patient-reported outcomes and costs

The Economic Burden of Biological Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment

OBJECTIVES

This article aimed to count and compare treatment's direct (only biological drugs) and indirect (loss of productivity) costs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis from 2019 to 2021.

METHODS

The friction cost approach was used to establish indirect costs. Elasticity factor values and friction period for the Slovak Republic from 2019 to 2021 were determined. Direct drug costs were calculated based on average prices from 2019 to 2021 and the number of dispensed medication packages.

RESULTS

The average productivity loss reached €2984.54 in 2019, €3338.46 in 2020, and €3154.01 in 2021. Total indirect costs include productivity loss and sick pay, and from 2019 to 2021 came the values of €8.4 million, €10.1 million, and €8.1 million, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Indirect costs were almost 2.5 to 3 times lower than the biological and targeted treatment costs.

Patient-reported outcomes and radiographic progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in sustained remission versus low disease activity

OBJECTIVE

To compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) over 5 years between patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in sustained remission (sREM), sustained low disease activity (sLDA) or active disease (AD) in the first year after diagnosis.

METHODS

All patients with RA from the treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis CoHort trial, a multicentre, stratified, single-blinded trial with a treat-to-target approach, aiming for LDA (Disease Activity Score (DAS) ≤2.4), were studied. Patients were categorised into: (1) sREM (mean DAS from 6 to 12 months <1.6) (n=173); (2) sLDA (mean DAS from 6 to 12 months 1.6-2.4) (n=142); and (3) AD (mean DAS from 6 to 12 months >2.4) (n=59). Pain, fatigue, functional impairment, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), health status and productivity loss during 5 years were compared between groups. Radiographic progression (modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS)) was compared over 2 years.

RESULTS

Patients in sLDA in the first year had worse PROs during follow-up, compared with patients in sREM: pain (0-10 Likert) was 0.90 units higher (95% CI 0.52 to 1.27), fatigue (Visual Analogue Scale) was 12.10 units higher (95% CI 7.27 to 16.92), functional impairment (Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index) was 0.28 units higher (95% CI 0.17 to 0.39), physical HRQoL (36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary score) was 4.42 units lower (95% CI -6.39 to -2.45), mental HRQoL (SF-36 Mental Component Summary score (MCS)) was 2.95 units lower (95% CI -4.83 to -1.07), health status (European Quality of life 5-Dimensions 3-Levels (EQ-5D-3L)) was 0.06 units lower (95% CI -0.09 to -0.03) and productivity loss (0%-100%) was 7.76% higher (95% CI 2.76 to 12.75). Differences between the AD and sREM group were even larger, except for the SF-36 MCS and EQ-5D-3L. No differences in mTSS were found between groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with RA who reach sREM in the first year have better HRQoL and function, and less pain, fatigue and productivity loss in the years thereafter, compared with patients with RA who are in sLDA or AD in the first year.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of upadacitinib as a treatment option for patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

AIM

To evaluate cost-effectiveness of upadacitinib (targeted synthetic-disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug [ts-DMARD]) as first-line (1 L) treatment versus current treatment among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), who had an inadequate response to prior conventional-synthetic (csDMARDs) and/or biologic-DMARDs (bDMARDs).

METHODS

This Excel-based model included patients with moderate (Disease Activity Score [DAS28]: >3.2 to ≤5.1) or severe RA (DAS28 > 5.1). Cost-effectiveness of current treatment (1 L: adalimumab-originator/biosimilar; second-line (2 L): other bDMARDs/tofacitinib) was compared against a new treatment involving two scenarios (1 L: upadacitinib, 2 L: adalimumab-biosimilar [scenario-1]/adalimumab-originator [scenario-2]) for a 10-year time-horizon from societal perspective. Model outcomes included direct and indirect costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), hospitalization days, number of orthopedic surgeries, and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) per QALY.

RESULTS

With the current pathway, estimated total societal costs for 100 RA patients over 10-year period were Saudi Riyal (SAR) 50,450,354 (United States dollars [USD] 13,453,428) (moderate RA) and SAR50,013,945 (USD13,337,052) (severe RA). New pathway (scenario-1) showed that in patients with moderate-to-severe RA, upadacitinib led to higher QALY gain (+8.99 and +15.63) at lower societal cost (cost difference: -SAR2,023,522 [-USD539,606] and -SAR3,373,029 [-USD899,474], respectively). Thus, as 1 L, upadacitinib projects "dominant" ICUR per QALY over current pathway. Moreover, in alternate pathway (scenario-2), upadacitinib also projects "dominant" ICUR per QALY for patient with severe RA (QALY gain: +15.63; cost difference: -SAR 164,536 [-USD43,876]). However, moderate RA was associated with additional cost of SAR1,255,696 (USD334,852) for improved QALY (+8.99) over current pathway (ICUR per QALY: SAR139,742 [USD37,264]). Both scenarios resulted in reduced hospitalization days (scenario-1: -14.83 days; scenario-2: -11.41 days) and number of orthopedic surgeries (scenario-1: -8.36; scenario-2: -6.54) for moderate-to-severe RA over the current treatment pathway.

CONCLUSION

Upadacitinib as 1 L treatment in moderate-to-severe RA can considerably reduce healthcare resource burden in KSA, majorly due to reduced drug administration/monitoring/hospitalization/surgical and indirect costs.

Should We Use bDMARDs as an Induction Therapy in Early and Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis? Results at 5 years from the ERA UCLouvain Brussels Cohort

INTRODUCTION

This study sought to analyze the benefit of an early induction therapy with a biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD) during the first year of treatment with a 5-year follow-up in early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA).

METHODS

We included ERA patients from the UCLouvain Brussels cohort who met the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) 2010 classification criteria and were naïve to DMARDs. ERA patients were divided into two groups according to whether they received an induction bDMARD therapy or a standard therapy with methotrexate (MTX). Clinical response after the induction treatment at 6 and 12 months followed by a MTX maintenance therapy at 36 and 60 months was evaluated.

RESULTS

Data from 470 ERA patients were collected, 189 received a bDMARD and 281 initiated MTX alone. In the bDMARD group, disease activity and HAQ were higher at baseline. A total of 391 patients were followed up to 5 years. We then divided each group into two subgroups according to the last treatment they received at 5 years: bDMARD > MTX (n = 95), bDMARD > bDMARD (n = 59); MTX > MTX (n = 134), MTX > bDMARD (n = 103). During the induction, we observed a clinical response with a large number of patients achieving DAS28-CRP remission. According to a treat-to-target (T2T) approach, remission rate was stable on MTX monotherapy or rescued by the addition or prolongation of a bDMARD. Interestingly, bDMARD followed by a MTX maintenance therapy experienced a stable and sustained DAS28-CRP remission rate in 53% of the ERA patients at year 5.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term remission is an achievable goal in ERA. Our results suggest that a bDMARD induction therapy followed by MTX maintenance therapy could be an interesting option.

Physical Exercise and Occupational Therapy at Home to Improve the Quality of Life in Subjects Affected by Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune inflammatory disease that affects synovial membranes and typically causes joint pain and swelling. The resulting disability of RA is due to the erosion of cartilage and bone from the inflamed synovial tissue. Occupational therapy is a strategy and technique to minimize the joints' fatigue and effort. At the same time, physical exercise reduces the impact of systemic manifestations and improves symptoms in RA. This study investigates the role of a 30-day joint economy intervention (integration of physical exercise and occupational therapy) at home on the quality of life of subjects with RA.

METHODS

One hundred and sixty outpatients with RA were enrolled in a single-center trial with PROBE design and were divided into the intervention group (IG), which combined joint protection movements and physical exercise to maintain muscle tone at home, and the control group (CG). Both groups included 80 patients. In all patients, data from the disease activity score (DAS 28), health assessment questionnaire (HAQ), and short-form health survey (SF-12) "Italian version" were collected. In addition, to IG, a brochure was distributed, and the joint economy was explained, while to CG, the brochure only was distributed. The comparison between groups was made using Fisher's exact test for contingency tables and the z-test for the comparison of proportions. The non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare quantitative variables between groups. The Wilcoxon signed-ranked test was used for post-intervention versus baseline comparisons.

RESULTS

Among the recruited patients, 54% were female. The mean age was 58.0 (42.4-74.7) for the CG and 54.0 (39.7-68.3) for the IG. Patients included in the IG had a higher cumulative illness rating scale for the evaluation of severity and comorbidity index (2.81 vs. 2.58; 2.91 vs. 2.59, respectively), as well as morning stiffness (33.8 vs. 25.0), even if not significant compared with CG patients. Our results indicate that, after 30 days of joint economy intervention at home, the DAS28 erythrocyte sedimentation rate (esr) and DAS28 C-reactive protein (crp), HAQ, and SF-12 mental component score were significantly improved (p = 0.005, p = 0.004, p = 0.009, and p = 0.010, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that the combination of physical exercise and occupational therapy positively affects patients' quality of life with RA considering disease activity, global health status, and mental health.

Examining Rehabilitation Dose in Adults With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Association With Baseline Factors and Change in Clinical Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of baseline factors with rehabilitation dose and the association of rehabilitation dose with meaningful change in physical function, pain, and fatigue over 6 months among adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Using data from the National Databank for Rheumatic Diseases registry, we extracted baseline characteristics and self-reported physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire), pain (visual analog scale [VAS]), fatigue (VAS), rehabilitation dose (low: 1-2 visits, medium: 3-8 visits, high: >8 visits), and follow-up outcomes 6 months later. Changes in clinical outcomes were categorized as improved, no change, or worsened. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) using proportional odds logistic regression models to examine the association of the baseline factors with rehabilitation dose and the association of rehabilitation dose with changes in clinical outcomes, adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

The sample included 1,381 adults with a new episode of rehabilitation (dose: low 27%, medium 42%, high 31%). Worse baseline physical function (adjusted OR 1.29 [95% CI 1.04-1.60]), but not pain (adjusted OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.99-1.10]) or fatigue (adjusted OR 0.98 [95% CI 0.93-1.03]), were associated with a higher rehabilitation dose. A high rehabilitation dose was associated with a favorable change in physical function (OR 1.51 [95% CI 1.14-1.98]), pain (OR 1.44 [95% CI 1.06-1.96]), and fatigue (OR 1.45 [95% CI 1.06-1.99]) compared to a low dose; only the association with physical function change persisted in adjusted models (adjusted OR 1.41 [95% CI 1.03-1.92]).

CONCLUSION

Using real-world data, this study supports a higher rehabilitation dose to improve physical function in adults with RA.

Approaches to optimising access to NICE-approved biologic anti-TNFs for patients with rheumatoid arthritis with moderately active disease

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that is associated with joint pain and stiffness. Biologics represent some of the most effective treatments for RA, but previous guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has limited their use to patients with severely active disease. This has meant patients with moderately active RA have been treated as if they have an acceptable disease state, despite many cases where the inflammation has a major impact on joint damage, mobility, pain and quality of life. However, recent guideline changes (NICE TA715) have approved the use of three biologics - adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab - for the treatment of moderately active RA.

MAIN BODY

In response to these changes, we have held discussions with medical teams from across the UK to consider the main implications for implementation of these new recommendations, as well as any differences in approach that may exist at a local level. Several key challenges were identified. These included establishing methods of educating both physicians and patients concerning the new availability of the biologic treatments, with suggestions of various organisations that could be approached to circulate informative material. Identifying which patients with moderately active RA stand to benefit was another discussion topic. Relying solely on scoring systems like Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints (DAS28) was acknowledged to have limitations, and alternative complementary approaches such as ultrasound, as well as assessing a patient's co-morbidities, could also be useful tools in determining those who could benefit from biologics. An additional challenge for the process of patient identification has been the increase in the use of telemedicine consultations in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. More use of patient-reported outcomes was raised as one possible solution, and the importance of maintaining up-to-date databases on patient disease scores and treatment history was also stressed.

CONCLUSION

While challenges exist in education and identifying patients who may benefit from the use of biologics, the NICE TA715 recommendations hold great potential in addressing an unmet need for the treatment of moderate RA.

Number needed to treat and cost per responder of Janus kinase inhibitors approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis in Japan

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of baricitinib, tofacitinib, and upadacitinib regimens, compared to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) alone, among Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) inadequately responsive to csDMARD, measured in terms of number needed to treat (NNT) and cost per responder (CPR).

METHODS

Efficacy data were derived from two recent network meta-analyses among global and Japanese population. The cost perspective was that of the Japanese Health Service. Both NNT and CPR were based on disease activity score for 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) remission and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 at 12 and 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Over 12 weeks, the median NNT and the median CPR to achieve DAS28-CRP remission were 4.3 and JPY 1,799,696 [USD 16,361], respectively, for upadacitinib 15 mg + csDMARD. The equivalent results were 6.0 and JPY 2,691,684 [USD 24,470] for baricitinib 4 mg + csDMARD and 5.6 and JPY 2,507,152 [USD 22,792] for tofacitinib 5 mg + csDMARD. Similar rankings were observed at 24 weeks and for other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Upadacitinib 15 mg was associated with the lowest NNT and CPR among the three Janus kinase inhibitors used in treatment regimens for Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe RA inadequately responsive to csDMARD.

The Impact of b/tsDMARD Dose Reduction on Chronic Hepatitis B in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: A Two-Center Long-Term Safety Analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to investigate the change of hepatitis B virus (HBV) viral loads and HBV reactivation (HBVr) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients after tapering the dose of biological/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs).

METHODS

This two-center analysis retrospectively investigated the virological and biochemical evidence of HBVr in RA patients who underwent b/tsDMARD dose reduction. Serum levels of viral loads were determined using real-time PCR. Serum levels of alanine transaminase (ALT) were determined using spectrophotometry.

RESULTS

Among a total of 40 HBsAg+ RA patients who tapered b/tsDMARDs, 14 (35%) used tocilizumab; 12 (30%) used tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors; and the rest used either abatacept or tofacitinib. We found that patients who had detectable HBV DNA before tapering achieved a one-log reduction in HBV DNA levels, in contrast to the findings in the other 12 patients who did not taper b/tsDMARDs (no change in HBV DNA levels with time). The incidence of HBVr (increased viral loads with hepatitis) was 4.62 (95%CI: 2.08, 10.28) and 2.26 (95%CI: 0.56, 9.02) events per 100 person-years before and after b/tsDMARD tapering, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The HBV viral load decreased after the tapering of b/tsDMARDs in RA patients with detectable HBV DNA. Dose reduction in b/tsDMARDs might be beneficial.

Defining the relationship between pain intensity and disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a secondary analysis of six studies

Background

Pain is the main concern of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) while reducing disease activity dominates specialist management. Disease activity assessments like the disease activity score for 28 joints with the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) omit pain creating an apparent paradox between patients’ concerns and specialists’ treatment goals. We evaluated the relationship of pain intensity and disease activity in RA with three aims: defining associations between pain intensity and disease activity and its components, evaluating discordance between pain intensity and disease activity, and assessing temporal changes in pain intensity and disease activity.

Methods

We undertook secondary analyses of five trials and one observational study of RA patients followed for 12 months. The patients had early and established active disease or sustained low disease activity or remission. Pain was measured using 100-mm visual analogue scales. Individual patient data was pooled across all studies and by types of patients (early active, established active and established remission). Associations of pain intensity and disease activity were evaluated by correlations (Spearman’s), linear regression methods and Bland-Altman plots. Discordance was assessed by Kappa statistics (for patients grouped into high and low pain intensity and disease activity). Temporal changes were assessed 6 monthly in different patient groups.

Results

A total of 1132 patients were studied: 490 had early active RA, 469 had established active RA and 173 were in remission/low disease activity. Our analyses showed, firstly, that pain intensity is associated with disease activity in general, and particularly with patient global assessments, across all patient groups. Patient global assessments were a reasonable proxy for pain intensity. Secondly, there was some discordance between pain intensity and disease activity across all disease activity levels, reflecting similar discrepancies in patient global assessments. Thirdly, there were strong temporal relationships between changes in disease activity and pain intensity. When mean disease activity fell, mean pain intensity scores also fell; when mean disease activity increased, there were comparable increases in pain intensity.

Conclusions

These findings show pain intensity is an integral part of disease activity, though it is not measured directly in DAS28-ESR. Reducing disease activity is crucial for reducing pain intensity in RA.

Impact of initial therapy with upadacitinib or adalimumab on achievement of 48-week treatment goals in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: post hoc analysis of SELECT-COMPARE

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the importance of treatment sequencing in SELECT-COMPARE, assessing potential differences between starting upadacitinib or adalimumab therapy following inadequate MTX response.

METHODS

Patients from SELECT-COMPARE were randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, placebo, or adalimumab 40 mg. Per protocol, patients with <20% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts (weeks 14, 18, 22) or failure to achieve CDAI LDA at week 26 were blindly switched from upadacitinib to adalimumab or vice versa. Treatment outcomes, including clinical remission/LDA, physical function, pain, and a novel combined end point for deep response, were evaluated through 48 weeks and corresponding time-averaged response rates determined. Data were analysed by initial randomized group regardless of any subsequent switch in therapy.

RESULTS

This post hoc analysis included 651 patients initially randomized to upadacitinib (of whom 252 switched to adalimumab) and 327 patients initially randomized to adalimumab (of whom 159 switched to upadacitinib). At week 48, patients randomized to either therapy demonstrated similar achievement of most treatment endpoints. Greater improvements in the total time spent in a lower disease state were observed for initial upadacitinib versus initial adalimumab therapy across most clinical and patient-reported outcomes through 48 weeks, and the median time to DAS28(CRP) <2.6/≤3.2 occurred 6-8 weeks earlier among those randomized to upadacitinib.

CONCLUSION

Following a modified treat-to-target strategy, rates of CDAI remission/LDA and DAS28(CRP) <2.6/≤3.2 at 48 weeks were similar, regardless of starting therapy. However, patients initially receiving upadacitinib reached treatment targets more quickly and spent more time in clinical targets over the initial 48 weeks of treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02629159.

Predictors of flare in rheumatoid arthritis patients with persistent clinical remission/low disease activity: Data from the TARAC cohort

To identify predictors of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity flare in RA patients who achieved low disease activity (LDA) or persistent remission from the observational Thai Army Rheumatoid Arthritis Cohort study. RA patients with persistent clinical remission, defined by disease activity score 28 (DAS28) < 2.6 and LDA defined by DAS28 ≤ 3.2 for 3 consecutive months, were recruited and followed-up for at least 2 years. The flare was defined by an escalation of DAS28 ≥ 1.2 plus their physicians' decision to enhance RA treatment. Differences between sustained remission/LDA and flare groups were analyzed, by Chi-square test and unpaired Student t test. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was conducted to determine flare predictors. From 199 RA patients, female were 82.9%. Anticitrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA) or Rheumatoid factor (RF) were found in 69.8% of patients. Flares occurred in 69 patients (34.9%). Multivariate analysis found that the timescale from symptoms emergence to DMARD commencement, the timescale from DMARD commencement to when RA patients showed remission/LDA, the occurrence of RF or ACPA, LDA (in contrast to remission) and the increased DAS28 score when remission/LDA was achieved and tapering DMARDs promptly when persistent remission/LDA was achieved were predictors of RA flares with hazard ratios of (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 1.017 (1.003-1.030), 1.037 (1.015-1.059), 1.949 (1.035-3.676), 1.926 (0.811-4.566), 2.589 (1.355-4.947), and 2.497 (1.458-4.276), respectively. These data demonstrated that early and aggressive DMARDs treatment approach could maintain remission espcially in seropositive patients. Tapering should be applied minimally 6 months after reaching remission.

The Economic Benefit of Remission for Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Introduction

In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), attaining remission or low disease activity (LDA), as recommended by the treat-to-target approach, has shown to yield improvement in symptoms and quality of life. However, limited evidence from real-world settings is available to support the premise that better disease control is associated with lower healthcare costs. This study fills in evidence gaps regarding the cost of care by RA disease activity (DA) states and by therapy.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study linked medical and prescription claims from Optum Clinformatics Data Mart to electronic health record data from Illumination Health over 1/1/2010–3/31/2020. Mean annual costs for payers and patients were examined, stratifying on DA state and baseline use of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), biologics, and targeted synthetic (ts)DMARDs. Subgroup analysis examining within-person change in costs pre- and post-initiation of new therapy was also performed. Descriptive statistics, means, and boot-strapped confidence intervals were analyzed by DA state and by RA therapy. Furthermore, multivariate negative binomial regression analysis adjusting for key baseline characteristics was conducted.

Results

Of 2339 eligible patients, 19% were in remission, 40% in LDA, 29% in moderate DA (MDA), and 12% in high DA (HDA) at baseline. Mean annual costs during follow-up were substantially less for patients in remission ($40,072) versus those in MDA ($56,536) and HDA ($59,217). For patients in remission, csDMARD use was associated with the lowest mean annual cost ($25,575), tsDMARD was highest ($75,512), and tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) ($69,846) and non-TNFi ($57,507) were intermediate. Among new TNFi (n = 137) and non-TNFi initiators (n = 107), 31% and 26% attained LDA/remission, respectively, and the time to achieve remission/LDA was numerically shorter in TNFi vs. non-TNFi initiators. For those on biologics, mean annual within-person medical and inpatient costs were lower after achieving LDA/remission, although pharmacy costs were higher.

Conclusions

Cost of care increased with increasing DA state, with patients in remission having the lowest costs. Optimizing DA has the potential for substantial savings in healthcare costs, although may be partially offset by the high cost of targeted RA therapies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-022-00473-6.

Patient-reported outcomes of upadacitinib versus abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 12- and 24-week results of a phase 3 trial

Background

In previous clinical trials, patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with upadacitinib (UPA) have improved patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This post hoc analysis of SELECT-CHOICE, a phase 3 clinical trial, evaluated the impact of UPA vs abatacept (ABA) with background conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) on PROs in patients with RA with inadequate response or intolerance to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR).

Methods

Patients in SELECT-CHOICE received UPA (oral 15 mg/day) or ABA (intravenous). PROs evaluated included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA) by visual analog scale (VAS), patient’s assessment of pain by VAS, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), morning stiffness duration and severity, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI), and EQ-5D 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) index score. Least squares mean (LSM) changes from baseline to weeks 12 and 24 were based on an analysis of covariance model. Proportions of patients reporting improvements ≥ minimal clinically important differences (MCID) were compared using chi-square tests.

Results

Data from 612 patients were analyzed (UPA, n=303; ABA, n=309). Mean age was 56 years and mean disease duration was 12 years. One-third received ≥2 prior bDMARDs and 72% received concomitant methotrexate at baseline. At week 12, UPA- vs ABA-treated patients had significantly greater improvements in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, morning stiffness severity, EQ-5D-5L, 2/4 WPAI domains, and 3/8 SF-36 domains and Physical Component Summary (PCS) scores (P<0.05); significant differences persisted at week 24 for HAQ-DI, morning stiffness severity, SF-36 PCS and bodily pain domain, and WPAI activity impairment domain. At week 12, significantly more UPA- vs ABA-treated patients reported improvements ≥MCID in HAQ-DI (74% vs 64%) and SF-36 PCS (79% vs 66%) and 4/8 domain scores (P<0.05).

Conclusions

At week 12, UPA vs ABA treatment elicited greater improvements in key domains of physical functioning, pain, and general health and earlier improvements in HAQ-DI. Overall, more UPA- vs ABA-treated patients achieved ≥MCID in most PROs at all timepoints; however, not all differences were statistically significant. These data, however, highlight the faster response to UPA treatment.

Trial registration

NCT03086343, March 22, 2017.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13075-022-02813-x.

Feeding Difficulties Associated with IBD during the Working Day: Qualitative Study, Alicante Spain

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic disease characterized by inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract. Nutrition is a key aspect as it can modulate much of the symptomatology. People affected by IBD often experience difficulties at work in all areas, including adapting their dietary management to workplace situations. The aim of this study is to identify the difficulties associated with eating during the working day in people diagnosed with IBD. A qualitative study was conducted through a nominal and focus group with people affected by IBD. After the thematic analysis of the data, three main themes emerged: management of food during the working day, searching for strategies to live with the disease, and the importance of visibility and support. This study shows that IBD influences the working life of people with IBD and makes it difficult to maintain an adequate diet. The institutions in charge of the treatment of IBD patients should consider the support of multidisciplinary teams, including nutrition professionals, as a fundamental part of the pathology control and dietary treatment to minimize its repercussions at work.

The Aftermath of Tapering Tocilizumab After Achieving Treatment Target in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Background

Although recent guidelines recommend that tapering of biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) can be considered in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), there has been little evidence supporting the strategy during the non-tumor necrosis factor inhibitor treatment. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness and safety of tapering tocilizumab (TCZ) dose in patients with RA who attain low disease activity (LDA) after TCZ therapy in a nationwide cohort.

Methods

Data were collected from a nationwide cohort of patients with RA receiving biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in South Korea (KOBIO-RA). This study included 350 patients who were treated with TCZ and achieved Clinical Disease Activity Index-low disease activity (CDAI)-LDA (CDAI ≤ 10) after 1 year of treatment. We performed longitudinal analysis considering clinical data measured at all 1-year intervals for the included patients using the generalized estimating equation. A total of 575 intervals were classified into two groups according to their dose quotient (DQ) of TCZ (tapering group vs. standard-dose group). The main outcome was maintaining CDAI-LDA in the following 1-year interval.

Results

Tapering TCZ dose strategy was used in 282 (49.0%) intervals with a mean (SD) DQ of 66.0 (15.5) %. Loss of CDAI-LDA occurred in 91 (15.1%) intervals. Multivariable GEE showed that the tapering group was associated with more frequent failure to sustain CDAI-LDA (adjusted OR [95% CI]: 0.57 [0.33–0.99]), which subsequently led to impaired functional status. The likelihood of achieving DAS28-deep remission (DAS28-ESR <1.98) was also significantly lower in the tapering group (adjusted OR 0.68 [0.46–0.99]). CDAI remission was achieved in only 69 (12.0%) of the total intervals, with no significant difference in the proportion of intervals achieving the target between the two groups. Incidence of adverse events was comparable in both groups except for hypercholesterolemia, which was lower in the tapering group.

Conclusions

Tapering TCZ dose after achieving LDA increases the risk of losing LDA without a significant merit in safety.

Increased remission with fewer corticosteroids and more biologics in rheumatoid arthritis at 7-year follow-up in real-life conditions

Remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an important therapeutic target that is not easy to achieve in real-life conditions. Some prognostic factors have been identified but the literature is variable. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the remission rate and the maintenance of remission in patients with RA over 7 years of follow-up in real-life conditions and to identify prognostic factors of long-term remission. Patients with RA seen at the Poitiers University Hospital were identified and clinical and biological data were collected. Data were analysed after 1 year and 7 years. Twice as many patients were in remission at 7 years than at 1 year of follow-up. 48.6% of patients who were not in remission at 1 year obtained remission at 7 years of follow-up. Patients achieving remission were more often receiving coprescription of csDMARDs and bDMARDs. Patients not in remission at 7 years were given more corticosteroids at higher doses. After 7 years of follow-up, low initial disease activity and use of csDMARDs and bDMARDs appeared to be independent positive predictive factors. Once obtained at one year, remission was maintained for 76% of our patients. As a conclusion, modern management of RA, whatever disease duration, leads to remission rates similar to those of early RA after 7 years of follow-up.

Value of Remission in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Targeted Review

The treat-to-target strategy, which defines clinical remission as the primary therapeutic goal for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), is a widely recommended treatment approach in clinical guidelines. Achieving remission has been associated with improved clinical outcomes, quality of life, and productivity. These benefits are likely to translate to reduced economic burden in terms of lower healthcare costs and resource utilization. As such, a literature review was conducted to better understand the economic value of remission. Despite the large heterogeneity found in RA-related economic outcomes across studies, patients in remission consistently had lower direct medical and indirect costs, less healthcare resource utilization, and greater productivity compared to those without remission. Remission was associated with 19–52% savings in direct medical costs and 37–75% savings in indirect costs. The economic value of remission should thus be considered in economic analyses of RA therapies to inform treatment and reimbursement decisions.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Etanercept 25 mg Maintenance Therapy After Treatment with Etanercept 50 mg for Moderate Rheumatoid Arthritis in the PRESERVE Trial in Japan

OBJECTIVES

To use Markov modeling to estimate the cost-effectiveness of treatment with etanercept 25 mg once weekly plus methotrexate (MTX) in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had achieved remission or low disease activity with etanercept 50 mg once weekly plus MTX.

METHODS

Effectiveness data were estimated based on results from a clinical trial (PRESERVE) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had achieved remission or low disease activity and who were then randomized to receive etanercept 25 mg plus MTX or placebo plus MTX. A Markov model was established and included flare rates of 21% and 62% in the etanercept 25 mg and placebo groups, respectively. EQ-5D was calculated using an ordinary least-squares model that included the health assessment questionnaire disability index and pain visual analog scale. Worsening of the health assessment questionnaire score over 1 year was estimated to be 0.047 for patients with flare, and when associated with radiographic progression it was estimated to increase by 0.006 and 0.025 in the etanercept 25 mg and placebo groups, respectively. A cycle length of 1 year was applied to calculate the cumulative cost and effectiveness for a 10-year time span.

RESULTS

Compared with the placebo group, the quality-adjusted life-years for the etanercept 25 mg group was increased by 0.841. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was ¥6 173 772.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that maintenance treatment with etanercept 25 mg is cost-effective.

Economic Benefit from Improvements in Quality of Life with Upadacitinib: Comparisons with Tofacitinib and Methotrexate in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Introduction

To compare the economic benefit of upadacitinib combination therapy versus tofacitinib combination therapy and upadacitinib monotherapy versus methotrexate monotherapy from improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

Data were analyzed from two trials of upadacitinib (SELECT-NEXT and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY) and one trial of tofacitinib (ORAL-Standard) that collected HRQOL measurements using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey in patients with RA. Direct medical costs per patient per month (PPPM) for patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg once daily and methotrexate were derived from observed SF-36 Physical (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores in the SELECT trials using a regression algorithm. Direct medical costs PPPM for patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily were obtained from a published analysis of SF-36 PCS and MCS scores observed in the ORAL-Standard trial. Short-term (12–14 weeks) and long-term (48 weeks) estimates of direct medical costs PPPM were compared between upadacitinib and tofacitinib and between upadacitinib and methotrexate.

Results

Over 12 weeks, direct medical costs PPPM were $252 lower (95% CI $72, $446) for upadacitinib-treated patients versus tofacitinib-treated patients. Medical costs PPPM at weeks 24 and 48 and cumulative costs over the entire 48-week period (difference $1759; 95% CI $1162, $2449) were significantly lower for upadacitinib than for tofacitinib. Over 14 weeks, direct medical costs PPPM were $399 lower (95% CI $158, $620) for patients treated with upadacitinib monotherapy compared with those treated with methotrexate alone. Direct medical costs at week 48 and cumulative costs over the entire 48-week period (difference $2044; 95% CI $1221, $2846) were significantly lower for upadacitinib monotherapy compared with methotrexate alone.

Conclusion

In the short and long term, upadacitinib combination therapy versus tofacitinib combination therapy and upadacitinib monotherapy versus methotrexate monotherapy were associated with significantly lower direct medical costs for patients with RA.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02675426, NCT02706951, and NCT00853385.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01930-4.

Differences and similarities in clinical and functional responses among patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib plus methotrexate, and adalimumab plus methotrexate: a post hoc analysis of data from ORAL Strategy

BACKGROUND

This post hoc analysis assessed clinical and functional responses to tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib + methotrexate (MTX), and adalimumab + MTX, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis enrolled in the ORAL Strategy study, including evaluation of patient-level data using cumulative probability plots.

METHODS

In the 12-month, phase IIIb/IV ORAL Strategy study, patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to MTX were randomized to receive tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID), tofacitinib 5 mg BID + MTX, or adalimumab 40 mg every other week + MTX. In this post hoc analysis, cumulative probability plots were generated for mean percent change from baseline (%∆) in the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI; clinical response) and mean change from baseline (∆) in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI; functional response) at month 12. Median C-reactive protein (CRP) levels by time period were summarized by CDAI remission (≤ 2.8) status at months 6 and 12.

RESULTS

Data for 1146 patients were analyzed. At month 12, cumulative probability plots for %∆CDAI and ∆HAQ-DI were similar across treatments in patients with greater response. At lower levels of response, patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy did not respond as well as those receiving combination therapies. With tofacitinib + MTX, numerically higher baseline CRP levels and numerically larger post-baseline CRP reductions were seen in patients achieving CDAI remission at months 6 and 12 vs those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that patients with a greater response did well, irrespective of which therapy they received. Patients with lesser response had better outcomes with combination therapies vs tofacitinib monotherapy, suggesting they benefitted from MTX. High pre-treatment CRP levels may be associated with better response to tofacitinib + MTX.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02187055. Registered on 08 July 2014.

Upadacitinib monotherapy improves patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis: results from SELECT-EARLY and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of upadacitinib (UPA) monotherapy vs MTX on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with RA who were MTX-naïve or who had an inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR).

METHODS

PROs from the SELECT-EARLY and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY randomized controlled trials were evaluated at Weeks 2 and 12/14. Patients were ≥18 years of age with RA symptoms for ≥6 weeks (SELECT-EARLY, MTX-naïve) or diagnosed RA for ≥3 months (SELECT-MONOTHERAPY, MTX-IR) and received UPA monotherapy (15 or 30 mg) or MTX. PROs included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain visual analogue scale, HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI), morning stiffness duration/severity, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue (SELECT-EARLY), health-related quality of life (HRQOL) by the 36-iem Short Form Health Survey and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI; SELECT-EARLY). Least square mean (LSM) changes and proportions of patients reporting improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and normative values were determined.

RESULTS

In 945 MTX-naïve and 648 MTX-IR patients, UPA monotherapy (15 mg, 30 mg) vs MTX resulted in greater reported LSM changes from baseline at Weeks 12/14 in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, morning stiffness duration/severity, FACIT-F (SELECT-EARLY), HRQOL and WPAI (SELECT-EARLY). These changes were statistically significant with both doses of UPA vs MTX at Weeks 12/14 in both RCTs. Improvements were reported as early as week 2. Compared with MTX, more UPA-treated MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients reported improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and scores greater than or equal to normative values.

CONCLUSION

Among MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients with active RA, UPA monotherapy at 15 or 30 mg for 12/14 weeks resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in pain, physical function, morning stiffness, HRQOL and WPAI compared with MTX alone.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

SELECT-EARLY (NCT02706873) and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY (NCT02706951) are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov.

Intensive therapy for moderate established rheumatoid arthritis: the TITRATE research programme

Background

Rheumatoid arthritis is a major inflammatory disorder and causes substantial disability. Treatment goals span minimising disease activity, achieving remission and decreasing disability. In active rheumatoid arthritis, intensive management achieves these goals. As many patients with established rheumatoid arthritis have moderate disease activity, the TITRATE (Treatment Intensities and Targets in Rheumatoid Arthritis ThErapy) programme assessed the benefits of intensive management.

Objectives

To (1) define how to deliver intensive therapy in moderate established rheumatoid arthritis; (2) establish its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in a trial; and (3) evaluate evidence supporting intensive management in observational studies and completed trials.

Design

Observational studies, secondary analyses of completed trials and systematic reviews assessed existing evidence about intensive management. Qualitative research, patient workshops and systematic reviews defined how to deliver it. The trial assessed its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in moderate established rheumatoid arthritis.

Setting

Observational studies (in three London centres) involved 3167 patients. These were supplemented by secondary analyses of three previously completed trials (in centres across all English regions), involving 668 patients. Qualitative studies assessed expectations (nine patients in four London centres) and experiences of intensive management (15 patients in 10 centres across England). The main clinical trial enrolled 335 patients with diverse socioeconomic deprivation and ethnicity (in 39 centres across all English regions).

Participants

Patients with established moderately active rheumatoid arthritis receiving conventional disease-modifying drugs.

Interventions

Intensive management used combinations of conventional disease-modifying drugs, biologics (particularly tumour necrosis factor inhibitors) and depot steroid injections; nurses saw patients monthly, adjusted treatment and provided supportive person-centred psychoeducation. Control patients received standard care.

Main outcome measures

Disease Activity Score for 28 joints based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR)-categorised patients (active to remission). Remission (DAS28-ESR < 2.60) was the treatment target. Other outcomes included fatigue (measured on a 100-mm visual analogue scale), disability (as measured on the Health Assessment Questionnaire), harms and resource use for economic assessments.

Results

Evaluation of existing evidence for intensive rheumatoid arthritis management showed the following. First, in observational studies, DAS28-ESR scores decreased over 10–20 years, whereas remissions and treatment intensities increased. Second, in systematic reviews of published trials, all intensive management strategies increased remissions. Finally, patients with high disability scores had fewer remissions. Qualitative studies of rheumatoid arthritis patients, workshops and systematic reviews helped develop an intensive management pathway. A 2-day training session for rheumatology practitioners explained its use, including motivational interviewing techniques and patient handbooks. The trial screened 459 patients and randomised 335 patients (168 patients received intensive management and 167 patients received standard care). A total of 303 patients provided 12-month outcome data. Intention-to-treat analysis showed intensive management increased DAS28-ESR 12-month remissions, compared with standard care (32% vs. 18%, odds ratio 2.17, 95% confidence interval 1.28 to 3.68; p = 0.004), and reduced fatigue [mean difference –18, 95% confidence interval –24 to –11 (scale 0–100); p < 0.001]. Disability (as measured on the Health Assessment Questionnaire) decreased when intensive management patients achieved remission (difference –0.40, 95% confidence interval –0.57 to –0.22) and these differences were considered clinically relevant. However, in all intensive management patients reductions in the Health Assessment Questionnaire scores were less marked (difference –0.1, 95% confidence interval –0.2 to 0.0). The numbers of serious adverse events (intensive management n = 15 vs. standard care n = 11) and other adverse events (intensive management n = 114 vs. standard care n = 151) were similar. Economic analysis showed that the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £43,972 from NHS and Personal Social Services cost perspectives. The probability of meeting a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 was 17%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio decreased to £29,363 after including patients’ personal costs and lost working time, corresponding to a 50% probability that intensive management is cost-effective at English willingness-to-pay thresholds. Analysing trial baseline predictors showed that remission predictors comprised baseline DAS28-ESR, disability scores and body mass index. A 6-month extension study (involving 95 intensive management patients) showed fewer remissions by 18 months, although more sustained remissions were more likley to persist. Qualitative research in trial completers showed that intensive management was acceptable and treatment support from specialist nurses was beneficial.

Limitations

The main limitations comprised (1) using single time point remissions rather than sustained responses, (2) uncertainty about benefits of different aspects of intensive management and differences in its delivery across centres, (3) doubts about optimal treatment of patients unresponsive to intensive management and (4) the lack of formal international definitions of ‘intensive management’.

Conclusion

The benefits of intensive management need to be set against its additional costs. These were relatively high. Not all patients benefited. Patients with high pretreatment physical disability or who were substantially overweight usually did not achieve remission.

Future work

Further research should (1) identify the most effective components of the intervention, (2) consider its most cost-effective delivery and (3) identify alternative strategies for patients not responding to intensive management.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN70160382.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Impact of sustained remission on quality of life among women with rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus: a prospective observational study

Background

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) as a patient reported outcome plays important roles in the life of patients with RA (rheumatoid arthritis) and SLE (Systemic lupus erythematosus) as well as their families. Evaluating the impact of sustained remission on HRQOL is important and could be of potential help in daily practice. Thus, we aimed to assess and compare prospectively the impact of sustained remission on HRQOL in Saudi RA and SLE female cohorts.

Results

Sixty-two female patients with active RA and 34 female patients with active SLE fulfilled the inclusion-, entry- and follow-up criteria. At baseline, the SLE patients had significantly better SF-36 scores than the RA patients. In both groups, significant correlations were found between disease activity and physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) components summary of the SF-36 (all p’s ≤ 0.001). In sustained remission, both SLE and RA patients showed significant improvements of the SF-36 scores (p < 0.001) compared to baseline. RA patients in sustained remission had a significantly better general health, bodily pain and physical functioning, and total PCS scores (p < 0.001) than those with SLE.

Conclusions

Both SLE and RA patients in sustained remission showed strongly improved HRQOL. In sustained remission, RA patients had comparable or better HRQOL than SLE patients.

Healthcare Costs of Not Achieving Remission in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in the United States: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction

To compare all-cause and rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-related healthcare costs and resource use in patients with RA who do not achieve remission versus those who achieve remission, using clinical practice data.

Methods

Data were derived from Optum electronic health records linked to claims from commercial and Medicare Advantage health plans. Two cohorts were created: remission and non-remission. Remission was defined as Disease Activity Score 28-joint count with the C-reactive protein level or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-CRP/ESR) < 2.6 or Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3 ≤ 3.0). Outcomes were all-cause and RA-related costs and resource use during a 1-year follow-up period. A weighted generalized linear regression and negative binomial regression were used to estimate adjusted annual costs and resource use, respectively, controlling for confounding factors, including patient and socio-demographic characteristics.

Results

Data from 335 patients (remission: 125; non-remission: 210) were analyzed. Annual all-cause total costs were significantly less in the remission versus non-remission cohort ($30,427 vs. $38,645, respectively; cost ratio [CR] = 0.79; 95% CI 0.63, 0.99). All-cause resource use (mean number of visits) was less in the remission versus non-remission cohort: inpatient (0.23 vs. 0.63; visit ratio [VR] = 0.36; 95% CI 0.19, 0.70), emergency department (0.36 vs. 0.77; VR = 0.47; 95% CI 0.30, 0.74), and outpatient visits (20.7 vs. 28.5; VR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.62, 0.86). Annual RA-related total costs were similar in both cohorts; however, RA-related medical costs were numerically lower in the remission versus non-remission cohort ($8,594 vs. $10,002, respectively; CR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.59, 1.25). RA-related resource use was less in the remission versus non-remission cohort.

Conclusions

Significant economic burden was associated with patients who did not achieve remission compared with those who did achieve remission.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01730-w.

Functional disability is related to serum chemerin levels in rheumatoid arthritis

Adipokines, especially chemerin, can interact with cytokines and other molecules in inflammation. To date, there is insufficient information regarding a possible correlation between functional disability and chemerin and other pro-inflammatory molecules in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To identify the association of functional disability with serum chemerin and other pro-inflammatory molecules, including other adipokines, cytokines and E-selectin, in patients with RA. Cross-sectional study. Assessment: disease activity (DAS28-ESR) and functional disability (HAQ-DI). We compared the adipokines (chemerin, leptin, adiponectin, resistin, and visfatin), cytokines (TNF-α, IL-6, IL-1β, and IL-18) and E-selectin levels between RA with functional disability and RA non-disabled patients. Of 82 patients with RA, 43 (52%) had functional disability. The RA with functional disability group had higher chemerin (140 vs. 112 ng/mL, p = 0.007) than the non-disabled RA group. Chemerin correlated with the HAQ-DI (rho = 0.27, p = 0.02) and DAS28-ESR (rho = 0.21, p = 0.05). Severe activity correlated with IL-6 (rho = 0.33, p = 0.003) and E-selectin (rho = 0.23, p = 0.03) but not with disability. No other pro-inflammatory molecules correlated with HAQ-DI. High chemerin levels were associated with functional disability in RA, whereas no other molecules correlated with loss of function. These results encourage further studies assessing new roles of chemerin as a marker of impairment in RA.

Is There a Symmetry in Disease Control and Quality of Life of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Biological Therapy?

This study aims to analyze and compare the disease activity control and quality of life of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were treated with biological products in real-life settings. We tried to determine whether there is a symmetry in the performance of the biological molecules between each other and with the first Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor. This is an observational, longitudinal, real-life study performed in the biggest rheumatology clinic during the period 2012–2020 comparing quality of life, cost of therapy, and disease control via different clinical measures. In all three disease activities measurement instruments, we observed an improvement for all biologic and target synthetic medicines. The disease activity score (DAS28) score decreased from 5.06 to 3.01, on average, for all INNs, suggesting that the majority of patients move away from moderate to low disease activity. The clinical disease activity index (CDAI) score decreased from 25.9 to 9.4, also indicating that patients with moderate disease activity reached a low level of activity. Similar results are reflected in the score, which fell from 27.7 to 10.3, again confirming the improvement to a low level of disease activity for patients treated with all INNs. Logically, with the successful control of disease activity, the quality of life (QoL) of the observed patients improved from 0.77 to 0.83 after a one-year follow up, as measured with the EuroQuol 5D-3L (EQ5D). Based on these results, we can consider that the observed biological INNs perform symmetrically in terms of the control of disease activity and improvement in the QoL of the observed patients. Biological therapy improves the disease control and quality of life of suitable patients with RA in real-life settings. All available biological therapies could be used interchangeably.

Mini-Review: The Administration of Apoptotic Cells for Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis: Current Knowledge and Clinical Perspectives

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic immune-mediated disease managed by conventional synthetic drugs, such as methotrexate (MTX), and targeted drugs including biological agents. Cell-based therapeutic approaches are currently developed in RA, mainly mesenchymal stroma cell-based approaches. Early-stage apoptotic cells possess direct and indirect anti-inflammatory properties. During the elimination of dying cells (a process called efferocytosis), specific mechanisms operate to control immune responses. There are compelling evidences in experimental models of arthritis indicating that apoptotic cell administration may benefit joint inflammation, and may even have therapeutic effects on arthritis. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that apoptotic cells could be administered with standard treatments of RA, such as MTX or TNF inhibitors (TNFi), given even a synergistic response with TNFi. Interestingly, apoptotic cell infusion has been successfully experienced to prevent acute graft-vs.-host disease after hematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with hematologic malignancies, with a good safety profile. In this mini-review, the apoptotic cell-based therapy development in arthritis is discussed, as well as its transfer in the short-term to an innovative treatment for patients with RA. The use of apoptotic cell-derived factors, including secretome or phosphatidylserine-containing liposomes, in RA are also discussed.

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for monitoring TNF-alpha inhibitors and antibody levels in people with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic autoimmune disease that primarily causes inflammation, pain and stiffness in the joints. People with severe disease may be treated with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, including tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors, but the efficacy of these drugs is hampered by the presence of anti-drug antibodies. Monitoring the response to these treatments typically involves clinical assessment using response criteria, such as Disease Activity Score in 28 joints or European League Against Rheumatism. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays can also be used to measure drug and antibody levels in the blood. These tests may inform whether or not adjustments to treatment are required or help clinicians to understand the reasons for treatment non-response or a loss of response.

METHODS

Systematic reviews were conducted to identify studies reporting on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays to measure drug and anti-drug antibody levels to monitor the response to tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors [adalimumab (Humira^®; AbbVie, Inc., North Chicago, IL, USA), etanercept (Enbrel^®; Pfizer, Inc., New York, NY, USA), infliximab (Remicade^®, Merck Sharp & Dohme Limited, Hoddesdon, UK), certolizumab pegol (Cimzia^®; UCB Pharma Limited, Slough, UK) and golimumab (Simponi^®; Merck Sharp & Dohme Limited)] in people with rheumatoid arthritis who had either achieved treatment target (remission or low disease activity) or shown primary or secondary non-response to treatment. A range of bibliographic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), were searched from inception to November 2018. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane ROBINS-1 (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) tool for non-randomised studies, with adaptations as appropriate. Threshold and cost-utility analyses that were based on a decision tree model were conducted to estimate the economic outcomes of adding therapeutic drug monitoring to standard care. The costs and resource use were considered from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services. No discounting was applied to the costs and effects owing to the short-term time horizon of 18 months that was adopted in the economic analysis. The impact on the results of variations in testing and treatment strategies was explored in numerous clinically plausible sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Two studies were identified: (1) a non-randomised controlled trial, INGEBIO, that compared standard care with therapeutic drug monitoring using Promonitor^® assays [Progenika Biopharma SA (a Grifols-Progenika company), Derio, Spain] in Spanish patients receiving adalimumab who had achieved remission or low disease activity; and (2) a historical control study. The economic analyses were informed by INGEBIO. Different outcomes from INGEBIO produced inconsistent results in both threshold and cost-utility analyses. The cost-effectiveness of therapeutic drug monitoring varied, from the intervention being dominant to the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £164,009 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. However, when the frequency of testing was assumed to be once per year and the cost of phlebotomy appointments was excluded, therapeutic drug monitoring dominated standard care.

LIMITATIONS

There is limited relevant research evidence and much uncertainty about the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-based testing for therapeutic drug monitoring in rheumatoid arthritis patients. INGEBIO had serious limitations in relation to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence scope: only one-third of participants had rheumatoid arthritis, the analyses were mostly not by intention to treat and the follow-up was 18 months only. Moreover, the outcomes might not be generalisable to the NHS.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, no firm conclusions could be made about the cost-effectiveness of therapeutic drug monitoring in England and Wales.

FUTURE WORK

Further controlled trials are required to assess the impact of using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for monitoring the anti-tumour necrosis factors in people with rheumatoid arthritis.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018105195.

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. 25, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Understanding Refractory Rheumatoid Arthritis: Implications for a Therapeutic Approach

Refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has emerged as an area of unmet need in a landscape of generally well-controlled disease. Whilst most patients are adequately treated on methotrexate and other first-line disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), a proportion requires biologic (b) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, with a further subsection failing multiple agents. Recent observational studies have adopted working definitions of refractory RA based on number of failed DMARDs, with prevalence estimates of 6-21% depending on threshold and study population. Risk factors include treatment delay, baseline disease activity and function, female gender, smoking, obesity and lower socioeconomic status. Practical and conceptual challenges in defining refractory RA arise from limitations of disease activity scores used to assess response, with attendant misclassification risk of co-existent non-inflammatory pathology, and failure to capture additional outcomes, such as fatigue, that have variable treatment response. Time is an important factor in defining refractory disease; registry studies show that growing treatment options have resulted in rapid b/tsDMARD cycling and earlier refractory status, and refractory RA is itself a dynamic concept, evolving with each new therapeutic class. Whilst the biology underpinning refractory RA remains largely unknown, a general overview of biomarker studies and clinical trials old and new offers insights into prediction of response and treatment failure. Whilst the future holds promise, current data are insufficient to personalise or meaningfully sequence b/tsDMARDs. Therefore, avoidance of a refractory course is best achieved by following proven management paradigms (e.g. early diagnosis and treat-to-target), addressing modifiable risk factors, and considering enrolment in novel trials.

A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of Upadacitinib Versus Tofacitinib in Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis

Introduction

Upadacitinib and tofacitinib are Janus kinase inhibitors approved for moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing their effectiveness, this study assessed the efficacy of upadacitinib 15 mg once-daily monotherapy/combination therapy against tofacitinib 5 mg twice-daily combination therapy among patients with RA using matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs).

Methods

The first of two MAICs used individual patient data (IPD) from the 14-week SELECT-MONOTHERAPY trial (upadacitinib [n = 217] vs. methotrexate [n = 216]) and published data from the ORAL Standard trial (tofacitinib + methotrexate [n = 204] vs. methotrexate [n = 108]). The second MAIC used IPD from the 26-week SELECT-COMPARE trial (upadacitinib + methotrexate [n = 647] vs. adalimumab + methotrexate [n = 324]) and published data from ORAL Strategy (tofacitinib + methotrexate [n = 376] vs. adalimumab + methotrexate [n = 386]). Data from patients in the upadacitinib trials were re-weighted based on age, sex, race, swollen joint count 66/28, tender joint count 68/28, C-reactive protein (CRP), and patients’ global assessments to match the patient characteristics in tofacitinib trials. After matching, ACR20/50/70 and clinical remission (SDAI[CRP] ≤ 3.3, CDAI ≤ 2.8, DAS28-ESR/CRP < 2.6) were compared for upadacitinib vs. tofacitinib + methotrexate at month 3 and upadacitinib + methotrexate vs. tofacitinib + methotrexate at months 3 and 6 using Wald tests.

Results

At month 3, upadacitinib monotherapy patients experienced significantly larger improvement in ACR70 compared to tofacitinib + methotrexate (mean difference in difference [DID]: 9.9%; p = 0.019), while upadacitinib + methotrexate was associated with higher ACR50 compared to tofacitinib + methotrexate (DID: 12.9%; p = 0.011). At month 6, upadacitinib + methotrexate patients experienced significantly larger improvement in SDAI/CDAI/DAS28-ESR clinical remission compared to tofacitinib + methotrexate, with DIDs of 9.1% (p = 0.011), 7.5% (p = 0.038), and 11.3% (p = 0.002), respectively.

Conclusions

Compared to tofacitinib combination therapy, treatment with upadacitinib monotherapy and combination therapy were associated with improved outcomes at 3/6 months (monotherapy: ACR70; combination: ACR50, SDAI, CDAI, and DAS28-ESR remission).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40744-020-00257-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A Budget Impact and Cost Per Additional Responder Analysis for Baricitinib for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis in Patients with an Inadequate Response to Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in the USA

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Baricitinib is a selective and reversible Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor indicated for the treatment of adult patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have had an inadequate response to one or more tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) and has been shown to improve multiple clinical and patient-reported outcomes. However, it is unclear what the budgetary impact would be for US commercial payers to add baricitinib to their formulary and how the efficacy of baricitinib compares to other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) with a similar indication.

METHODS

A budget impact model (BIM) was developed for a hypothetical population of 1 million plan members that compared a world without and with baricitinib. A retrospective observational study was carried out to estimate market utilization of advanced therapies. Number needed to treat (NNT) and cost per additional responder were calculated for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20%/50%/70% improvement criteria (ACR20/50/70) response outcomes combining cost estimates from the BIM and efficacy values from a network meta-analysis (NMA). The model included costs related to drug acquisition and monitoring costs.

RESULTS

Adding baricitinib would save a commercial payer $US169,742 for second-line therapy and $US135,471 for third-line therapy over a 2-year time horizon (all costs correspond to 2019 US dollars). Cost savings were driven by baricitinib drawing market share away from more expensive comparators. The NMA, based on nine studies, found no statistically significant differences in the median treatment difference between baricitinib and comparators except for versus a conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD), and thus NNT versus a csDMARD was similar. The cost per additional responder for baricitinib in patients with inadequate response to a TNFi was substantially lower than all other treatments for all three ACR response criteria at 12 weeks (ACR20: $US129,672; ACR50: $US237,732; ACR70: $US475,464), and among the lowest at 24 weeks (ACR20: $US167,811; ACR50: $US259,344; ACR70: $US570,557).

CONCLUSIONS

Baricitinib, compared to other DMARDs, was a less expensive option (- $US0.01 incremental cost per member per month in second- and third-line therapy over a 2-year time horizon) with comparable efficacy in patients with inadequate response to TNFi. Adding baricitinib to formulary would likely be cost saving for US payers and expands treatment options for these patients.

Effects of upadacitinib on patient-reported outcomes: results from SELECT-BEYOND, a phase 3 randomized trial in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate responses to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important when evaluating treatment benefits in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We compared upadacitinib, an oral, selective JAK-1 inhibitor, with placebo to assess clinically meaningful improvements in PROs in patients with RA who have had inadequate responses to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR).

METHODS

PRO responses between upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg and placebo were evaluated at week 12 from the SELECT-BEYOND trial. Improvement was determined by measuring Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), duration and severity of morning (AM) stiffness, and Insomnia Severity Index (ISI). Least squares mean changes and percentage of patients reporting improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) and scores greater than or equal to normative values were determined. The number needed to treat (NNT) to achieve clinically meaningful improvements was calculated.

RESULTS

In 498 patients, both upadacitinib doses resulted in statistically significant changes from baseline versus placebo in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS), 7 of 8 SF-36 domains (15 mg), 6 of 8 SF-36 domains (30 mg), and AM stiffness duration and severity. Compared with placebo, more upadacitinib-treated patients reported improvements ≥ MCID in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 PCS, 7 of 8 SF-36 domains (15 mg), 5 of 8 SF-36 domains (30 mg), AM stiffness duration and severity, and ISI (30 mg) and scores ≥ normative values in HAQ-DI and SF-36 domains. Across most PROs, NNTs to achieve MCID with upadacitinib ranged from 4 to 7 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In bDMARD-IR RA patients, upadacitinib (15 mg or 30 mg) improved multiple aspects of quality of life, and more patients reached clinically meaningful improvements approaching normative values compared with placebo.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02706847), registered 6 March 2016.

Burden of rheumatoid arthritis on patients' work productivity and quality of life

BACKGROUND

To determine the burden of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) on patients' work productivity and health related quality of life (HRQoL), and examine the influence of several exposure variables; to analyze the progression of RA over 1 year and its impact on work productivity and HRQoL.

METHODS

International multicenter prospective survey including patients in 18 centers in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia and Mexico with diagnosis of RA and aged between 21-55 years. The following standard questionnaires were completed at baseline and throughout a 1-year follow-up: WPAI:RA, WALS, WLQ-25, EQ-5D-3 L and SF-36. Clinical and demographic variables were also collected through interview.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 290 patients on baseline visit. Overall mean scores at baseline visit were: WPAI:RA (presenteeism) = 29.5% (SD = 28.8%); WPAI:RA (absenteeism) = 9.0% (SD = 23.2%); WPAI:RA (absenteeism and presenteeism) = 8.6% (SD = 22.6%); WALS = 9.0 (SD = 6.1); WLQ-25 = 7.0% (SD = 5.1%); SF-36 Physical Scale = 39.1 (SD = 10.3) and Mental Scale = 45.4 (SD = 11.3); EQ-5D-3 L VAS = 69.8 (SD = 20.4) and EQ-5D-3 L index = 0.67 (SD = 0.23). Higher educational levels were associated with better results in WLQ-25, while previous orthopedic surgeries reduced absenteeism results of WPAI:RA and work limitations in WLQ-25. Higher disease duration was associated with decreased HRQoL. Intensification of disease activity was associated with decreased work productivity and HRQoL, except in WLQ-25. In the longitudinal analysis, worsening in disease activity was associated with a decrease in both work productivity and HRQoL.

CONCLUSIONS

RA patients are dealing with workplace disabilities and limitations and loss in HRQoL, and multiple factors seems to be associated with this. Worsening of disease activity further decreased work productivity and HRQoL, stressing the importance of disease tight control.

Assessing disease severity in bio-naïve patients with RA on treatment with csDMARDs: insights from the Corrona Registry

Introduction

This study aimed to characterize disease burden among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with moderate-to-high disease activity who had received conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (csDMARD) monotherapy for ≥ 6 months but had not advanced to a biologic therapy.

Methods

Patients enrolled in the US Corrona RA Registry between June 1, 2014, and January 30, 2018, with 6 months of continuous csDMARD monotherapy, with moderate-to-high disease activity, who remained biologic naive, and who had ≥ 1 follow-up visit were identified. Disease activity was assessed among patients with a 6-month follow-up visit (± 3 months). Descriptive statistics were used to compare demographics and disease characteristics between patients with or without treatment advancement.

Results

The study included 409 patients with a disease activity assessment at 6 months (mean (SD) age 65.9 (12.6) years; mean duration of csDMARD therapy 407 (221) days). Of those patients, more than half (54%, n = 219) remained in moderate-to-high disease activity. Patients remaining in moderate-to-high vs. remission-to-low disease activity had higher baseline swollen (6.1) and tender joint counts (6.8). Over the 6-month period, treatment advancement occurred in 29% of patients. Those who advanced treatment (n = 118) vs. did not advance treatment (n = 291) were younger, had a shorter duration of RA, had higher disease activity, and reported higher levels of pain and fatigue.

Conclusions

The substantial number of patients with persistent moderate-to-high disease on csDMARDs over a 6-month period and who did not advance treatment indicates that there is considerable need for a treat-to-target approach to care for patients with RA. Key Points•For patients with RA and an inadequate response to treatment with initial csDMARD monotherapy, guidelines recommend treatment advancement; however, this may not be occurring in real-world clinical settings.•In the current study, a substantial proportion of patients (54%) on csDMARDs had persistent moderate-to-severe disease activity at the 6-month (± 3 months) follow-up visit; however, only 29% of patients had their medication treatment advanced, indicating that there is considerable need for a treat-to-target approach to care for patients with RA.•Patients with younger age, shorter RA duration, and higher disease activity were more likely to have their medication treatment advanced, which suggests that potentially more aggressive treatment of disease activity is needed across the whole RA population.

Improvements in productivity and increased participation in daily activities over 52 weeks of certolizumab pegol treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: results of a Belgian observational study

Objectives: To report changes in productivity and social participation - alongside clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) - in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving certolizumab pegol (CZP) during routine clinical practice in Belgium. Methods: This was a prospective, non-interventional study, in which patients were prescribed CZP at their physicians' discretion and followed during routine clinical visits. The primary outcomes were household productivity and social participation at the last visit (~52 weeks), measured through responses to the Work Productivity Survey. Secondary outcomes included workplace productivity and achievement of DAS28(ESR) clinical response, low disease activity and remission at the last visit. Baseline demographics and adverse events (AEs) were recorded for all patients who received ≥1 dose CZP. Results: A total of 141 patients were enrolled in the study, of whom 119 (84.4%) formed the full analysis set (received ≥1 dose CZP and had ≥1 post-baseline measurement for ≥1 primary outcome). At Visit 1 (baseline), patients reported an average of 11.0 paid work days, 16.8 household work days and 5.5 days of social participation affected by their disease over the previous month. Rapid improvements in household productivity and social participation were evident from Visit 2 (2-8 weeks). By the final visit, mean improvements were observed for all aspects of productivity, participation and clinical/PROs. A total of 24 AEs were reported. Conclusion: CZP has a positive impact on productivity and social participation in patients with RA in the Belgian daily practice setting, with safety and efficacy profiles that mirror those observed in the trial setting.

Adherence to Treat-to-target Management in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Associated Factors: Data from the International RA BIODAM Cohort

Objective.

Compelling evidence supports a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy for optimal outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). There is limited knowledge regarding the factors that impede implementation of T2T, particularly in a setting where adherence to T2T is protocol-specified. We aimed to assess clinical factors that associate with failure to adhere to T2T.

Methods.

Patients with RA from 10 countries who were starting or changing conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and/or starting tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were followed for 2 years. Participating physicians were required per protocol to adhere to the T2T strategy. Factors influencing adherence to T2T low disease activity (T2T-LDA; 44-joint count Disease Activity Score ≤ 2.4) were analyzed in 2 types of binomial generalized estimating equations models: (1) including only baseline features (baseline model); and (2) modeling variables that inherently vary over time as such (longitudinal model).

Results.

A total of 571 patients were recruited and 439 (76.9%) completed 2-year followup. Failure of adherence to T2T-LDA was noted in 1765 visits (40.5%). In the baseline multivariable model, a high number of comorbidities (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02–1.19), smoking (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.08–1.63) and high number of tender joints (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02–1.04) were independently associated with failure to implement T2T, while anticitrullinated protein antibody/rheumatoid factor positivity (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.50–0.80) was a significant facilitator of T2T. Results were similar in the longitudinal model.

Conclusion.

Lack of adherence to T2T in the RA BIODAM cohort was evident in a substantial proportion despite being a protocol requirement, and this could be predicted by clinical features. [Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) BIODAM cohort; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01476956].

Defining response to TNF-inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: the negative impact of anti-TNF cycling and the need for a personalized medicine approach to identify primary non-responders

Current guidelines recommend treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients to reach low disease activity or remission, however, most biologic-naive RA patients fail to reach treatment targets on their first biologic therapy. Approximately 90% of biologic-naive RA patients receive a tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitor (anti-TNF) as their first biologic treatment, even though several alternative mechanism of action (MOA) therapies are approved as first-line options. After 3 months of therapy, patients may remain on anti-TNF therapy even if they fail to achieve the treatment target, mainly due to formulary structures. This means patients have to endure a second and even a third ineffective anti-TNF-called anti-TNF cycling-before changing MOA. This significantly delays patients from reaching their treatment targets. All anti-TNF drugs target the same molecular and inflammatory pathways; thus, it is not surprising that most patients who are primary non-responders to their initial anti-TNF therapy fail to achieve their treatment targets when cycled through alternative anti-TNFs. This suggests that primary non-responders should be switched to an alternative MOA therapy rather than enduring anti-TNF cycling. Avoiding anti-TNF cycling would prevent disease progression and improve quality of life for RA patients who are primary non-responders to anti-TNFs. The development of a personalized medicine approach to identify primary non-responders to anti-TNFs prior to treatment would allow significantly more patients to reach their treatment target by treating them with alternative MOA therapies as first-line therapies.

Management of rheumatoid arthritis: 2019 updated consensus recommendations from the Hong Kong Society of Rheumatology

The expanding range of treatment options for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), from conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to biological DMARDs (bDMARDs), biosimilar bDMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, has improved patient outcomes but increased the complexity of treatment decisions. These updated consensus recommendations from the Hong Kong Society of Rheumatology provide guidance on the management of RA, with a focus on how to integrate newly available DMARDs into clinical practice. The recommendations were developed based on evidence from the literature along with local expert opinion. Early diagnosis of RA and prompt initiation of effective therapy remain crucial and we suggest a treat-to-target approach to guide optimal sequencing of DMARDs in RA patients to achieve tight disease control. Newly available DMARDs are incorporated in the treatment algorithm, resulting in a greater range of second-line treatment options. In the event of treatment failure or intolerance, switching to another DMARD with a similar or different mode of action may be considered. Given the variety of available treatments and the heterogeneity of patients with RA, treatment decisions should be tailored to the individual patient taking into consideration prognostic factors, medical comorbidities, drug safety, cost of treatment, and patient preference.

The "Treat to Target" Approach to Rheumatoid Arthritis

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis has evolved significantly over the past decades. Therapeutic advances have made clinical remission a feasible goal. Systematic treatment approaches taking into account objective measures of disease activity ("treat-to-target"/"T2T") have been shown to result in better outcomes. This article reviews the latest information regarding T2T in rheumatoid arthritis, including a synopsis of the different disease activity scores available, new definitions of remission used in clinical trials and in routine clinical care, studies supporting a T2T approach, the role of imaging to guide treatment, and areas in which uncertainty remains.

Low rates of remission with methotrexate monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis: review of randomised controlled trials could point towards a paradigm shift

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has improved substantially during the last decades, mainly due to the development and introduction in everyday practice of new, highly efficacious, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), more optimal usage of them, earlier diagnosis and tighter control of disease activity targeting at remission. Methotrexate is still today the anchor drug and the first-line treatment after diagnosis. However, numerous studies comparing methotrexate and biologic DMARDs, as well as new targeted synthetic DMARDs, both in early as in more established disease, have shown consistently better efficacy of the latter compared with methotrexate, with methotrexate yielding remission to maximum half of patients. This could suggest a new paradigm shift with earlier start of a biologic or a targeted synthetic DMARD, with the possibility of subsequent discontinuation in case of achievement of stable remission. Several strategy trials, however, have shown that there might be a clinical and structural benefit of initial, aggressive therapy, possibly even associated with higher chance of remaining in remission, after cessation of the biologic DMARD and continuing with methotrexate alone, but they have failed to show a clear advantage of such an aggressive treatment strategy. This might become a valuable option for the future treatment algorithm of RA, especially for a subgroup of patients with RA, but further confirmation from future research is needed. The crucial role of glucocorticoid use as part of the combination strategy should be acknowledged, and strategy trials should include this combination as an active comparator.

The effect of deep or sustained remission on maintenance of remission after dose reduction or withdrawal of etanercept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Background

Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are important options for managing rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Once patients achieve disease control, clinicians may consider dose reduction or withdrawal of the bDMARD. Results from published studies indicate that some patients will maintain remission; however, others will flare. We analyzed data from three etanercept down-titration studies in patients with RA to determine what extent of remission provides the greatest predictability of maintaining remission following dose reduction or discontinuation.

Methods

Patients with moderate to severe RA from the PRESERVE, PRIZE, and Treat-to-Target (T2T) randomized controlled trials were included. We determined the proportion of patients achieving remission with etanercept at the last time point in the induction period, and sustained remission (last two time points), according to the Disease Activity Score 28-joints (DAS28), the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Boolean criteria, and the clinical disease activity index (CDAI). We also calculated the proportion achieving DAS28 deep remission (DAS28 ≤ 1.98), sustained deep remission (last two time points), and low disease activity (LDA), and LDA according to the CDAI. Then, we evaluated whether they maintained remission or LDA following etanercept dose reduction or withdrawal.

Results

Patients achieving sustained and/or deep remission were more likely than patients achieving remission or LDA to maintain remission/LDA after etanercept dose reduction or withdrawal. In PRESERVE, the proportions of patients with DAS28 sustained deep remission, deep remission, sustained remission, remission, and LDA who maintained remission following etanercept dose reduction were 81%, 67%, 58%, 56%, and 36%, respectively, P < 0.001 for trend. In PRESERVE, this trend was significant when etanercept was discontinued and when ACR/EULAR Boolean and CDAI remission criteria were used. Although some sample sizes were small, the PRIZE and T2T studies also demonstrated response trends according to ACR/EULAR Boolean and CDAI remission criteria, and T2T demonstrated response trends according to DAS28.

Conclusions

These results suggest that patients achieving disease control according to a stringent definition, such as sustained ACR/EULAR Boolean or CDAI remission, or a new definition of sustained deep remission by DAS28, have a higher probability of remaining in remission or LDA following etanercept dose reduction or withdrawal.

Trial registration

PRESERVE: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00565409, registered 30 November 2007; PRIZE: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00913458, registered 4 June 2009; T2T: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01578850, registered 17 April 2012

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13075-019-1937-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Health-related quality of life in inflammatory bowel disease in a Danish population-based inception cohort

Background

Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are associated with reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL), but findings differ between studies. The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of disease activity and social factors on HRQoL.

Method

A total of 513 patients diagnosed with UC and CD between 2003 and 2004, in a population-based setting, were followed for 7 years. HRQoL was assessed using the Short Form-12, the Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) Questionnaire (SIBDQ), the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: General Health and a national health survey. Associations were assessed using multiple linear regressions.

Results

A total of 185 of the eligible patients (UC: 107 (50.2%) and CD: 78 (50.3%)) were included. No differences in disease-specific or generic HRQoL were found between CD and UC patients, and IBD patients did not differ compared with the background population. The majority of CD (73.1%) and UC (85.0%) patients had 'good' disease-specific HRQoL using the SIBDQ. Unemployment for ≥ 3 months occurred more in CD vs UC patients(30.6 vs 15.5%, p = 0.03); however, sick leave for ≥ 3 months did not differ significantly (17.4 vs 11.4%, p = 0.4). Using multiple linear regressions, unemployment, sick leave and disease activity were the factors most frequently associated with reduced HRQoL.

Conclusion

In a population-based cohort with 7 years of follow-up, HRQoL did not differ between patients and the background population.

How to Get the Most from Methotrexate (MTX) Treatment for Your Rheumatoid Arthritis Patient?-MTX in the Treat-to-Target Strategy

Methotrexate (MTX) is a remarkable drug with a key role in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at every stage of its evolution. Its attributes include good overall efficacy for signs and symptoms, inhibition of structural damage and preservation of function with acceptable and manageable safety, a large dose-titratable range, options for either an oral or parenteral route of administration, and currently unrivalled cost-effectiveness. It has a place as a monotherapy and also as an anchor drug that can be safely used in combination with other conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) or used concomitantly with biological DMARDs or targeted synthetic DMARDs. MTX is not without potential issues regarding toxicity, notably hepatotoxicity and bone marrow toxicity, as well as tolerability problems for some, but not all, patients. But many of these issues can be mitigated or managed. In the face of a welcome expansion in available targeted therapies for the treatment of RA, MTX looks set to remain at the foundation of pharmacotherapy for the majority of people living with RA and other inflammatory rheumatic diseases. In this article, we provide an evidence-based discussion as to how to achieve the best outcomes with this versatile drug in the context of a treat-to-target strategy for the management of RA.

Association between disease activity measured by RAPID3 and health-related quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Routine assessment of patient index data 3 (RAPID3) is a simple, valid and reliable tool designed to measure disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). RA causes significant disability and diminishes health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). The aim of this study was to investigate how RAPID3 is related to HR-QoL in patients with RA. In this cross-sectional study performed at the tertiary outpatient clinic 68 consecutive patients (58 females, and 10 males) with established RA were enrolled. RAPID3 and EuroQoL-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) were used to measure disease activity and quality of life, respectively. Alongside, demographic and clinical data were obtained, as well as HAQ-DI as a measure of physical function, and Steinbrocker's score for radiographic damage. To test the relationships among RAPID3 and study variables we used the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, with the significance was set at P < 0.05. Linear and forward stepwise regression was used to show how variables of interest contributed to RAPID3. The mean value of RAPID3 (standard deviation, SD) was 14.12 (± 5.21), while the median (IQR) value of EQ-5D-3L was 0.51 (0.62-0.23). There was a high significant correlation (r = - 0.73) between RAPID3 scores and EQ-5D-3L. Among the other variables of interest, the strongest correlation was found between RAPID3 and intensity of pain (r = 0.88), while the EQ-5D-3L and pain were moderately correlated (r = - 0.68). In evaluating the influence of variables of interest on RAPID3, a forward stepwise regression model was constructed to evaluate whether VAS pain, EQ-5D-3L and EQ-VAS predicted RAPID3. The given variables significantly explained approximately 81% of the variation in RAPID3. Based on the results of this study RAPID3, a simple and practical tool to assess disease activity, reflects well HR-QoL in patients with established RA.

Real world long-term impact of intensive treatment on disease activity, disability and health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis

Background

The emphasis on treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA) intensively reduces disease activity but its impact in routine care is uncertain. We evaluated temporal changes in disease activities and outcomes in a 10-year prospective observational cohort study of patients in routine care at one unit.

Methods

The Guy’s and St Thomas’ RA cohort was established in 2005. It involved most RA patients managed in this hospital. Clinical diagnoses of RA were made by rheumatologists. Patients were seen regularly in routine care. Each visit included measurement of disease activity scores for 28 joints (DAS28), health assessment questionnaire scores (HAQ) and EuroQol scores. Patients received intensive treatments targeting DAS28 remission.

Results

In 1693 RA patients mean DAS28 scores fell from 2005 to 15 by 11% from 4.08 (95% CI: 3.91, 4.25) in 2005 to 3.64 (3.34, 3.78); these falls were highly significant (p < 0.001). DAS28 components: swollen joint counts fell by 32% and ESR by 24%; in contrast tender joint counts and patient global assessments showed minimal or no reductions. The reduction in DAS28 scores was predominantly between 2005 and 2010, with no falls from 2011 onwards. Associated with falls in mean DAS28s, patients achieving remission increased (18% in 2005; 27% in 2015) and the number with active disease (DAS28 > 5.1) decreased (25% in 2005; 16% in 2015). In 752 patients seen at least annually for 3 years, persisting remission (68 patients) and intermittent remission (376 patients) were associated with less disability and better health related quality of life. Over time biologic use increased, but they were used infrequently in patients in persistent remission.

Conclusions

Over 10 years an intensive management strategy in a routine practice setting increased combination DMARD and biologic use: disease activity levels declined; this association is in keeping with a causal relationship. Patients who achieved remission, even transiently, had better functional outcomes than patients never achieving remission.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s41927-019-0054-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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