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

Predictors of Disease Activity in Patients With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis at 12 and 24 Months After Diagnosis

OBJECTIVE

Identification of characteristics associated with active disease in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) could inform early disease treatment strategies. This study evaluated characteristics associated with active disease at 12 and 24 months after JIA diagnosis in the era in which biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) became available for JIA.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study from 2004 through 2018 assessed characteristics associated with active nonsystemic categories of JIA at 12 and 24 months after diagnosis. Relative prevalence (RP) of disease activity was evaluated in relation to prespecified characteristics. Using RP, the effect of increasing biologic DMARD availability on these predictors was assessed at 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 1,151 patients with JIA were included. At 12 months, a 40% to 45% higher point prevalence of active disease was noted in older children (>5 years). Patients with active disease at 3 months had a greater prevalence of active disease at 12 months (RP 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-1.8) and 24 months (RP 1.3, 95% CI 1-1.6). Compared to oligoarticular JIA, polyarticular RF-negative, psoriatic, and enthesitis-related JIA had a greater prevalence of active disease at 12 and 24 months. At 24 months, a greater prevalence of active disease was observed in children ≥10 years. RP of active disease was 25% lower in the late cohort (2013-2018) than in the earliest cohort (2004-2008; RP 0.75, 95% CI 0.62-0.92) when more biologic medications were available, but disease activity predictors were broadly similar over time.

CONCLUSION

Patients with JIA with active disease at 12 and 24 months were older at diagnosis, categorized as polyarticular RF-negative, psoriatic, or enthesitis-related JIA. Active disease at 3 months after diagnosis was associated with worse outcomes at 12 and 24 months.

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

Objectives

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

Patients and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Therapeutic Approaches for Oligoarthritis, Temporomandibular Joint Arthritis, and Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthritis, and systemic JIA with and without macrophage activation syndrome. Recommendations regarding tapering and discontinuing treatment in inactive systemic JIA are also provided.

METHODS

We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.

RESULTS

Similar to those published in 2019, these JIA recommendations are based on clinical phenotypes of JIA, rather than a specific classification schema. This guideline provides recommendations for initial and subsequent treatment of JIA with oligoarthritis, TMJ arthritis, and systemic JIA as well as for tapering and discontinuing treatment in subjects with inactive systemic JIA. Other aspects of disease management, including factors that influence treatment choice and medication tapering, are discussed. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional.

CONCLUSION

This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.

2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Therapeutic Approaches for Oligoarthritis, Temporomandibular Joint Arthritis, and Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthritis, and systemic JIA with and without macrophage activation syndrome. Recommendations regarding tapering and discontinuing treatment in inactive systemic JIA are also provided.

METHODS

We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.

RESULTS

Similar to those published in 2019, these JIA recommendations are based on clinical phenotypes of JIA, rather than a specific classification schema. This guideline provides recommendations for initial and subsequent treatment of JIA with oligoarthritis, TMJ arthritis, and systemic JIA as well as for tapering and discontinuing treatment in subjects with inactive systemic JIA. Other aspects of disease management, including factors that influence treatment choice and medication tapering, are discussed. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional.

CONCLUSION

This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.