It's good to feel better but it's better to feel good and even better to feel good as soon as possible for as long as possible. Response criteria and the importance of change at OMERACT 10

Efficacy of risankizumab across subgroups in patients with active psoriatic arthritis: a post hoc integrated analysis of the phase 3 KEEPsAKE 1 and KEEPsAKE 2 randomized controlled trials

In the KEEPsAKE 1 (NCT03675308) and KEEPsAKE 2 (NCT03671148) phase 3 trials, risankizumab demonstrated greater efficacy compared with placebo in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This post hoc integrated analysis evaluated achieving the following efficacy outcomes at weeks 24 and 52 by baseline demographics and clinical characteristics: ≥20%/50%/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20/50/70), ≥90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, minimal disease activity status, Low Disease Activity status (Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis), and minimal clinically important difference in pain. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were similar between risankizumab (n = 707) and placebo (n = 700) groups. Numerically higher ACR20 response rates at week 24 (primary endpoint) were observed among the risankizumab (46.3%-60.1%) vs. placebo (15.5%-36.2%) cohorts, regardless of subgroups. At week 52, consistent proportions of patients randomized to risankizumab achieved ACR20 (48.6%-75.8%) while those initially randomized to placebo and switched to risankizumab experienced an improvement from week 24 (43.7%-63.9%), regardless of subgroups. Similar trends were observed for other efficacy measures assessing rigorous skin response criteria, composite measures of overall disease activity, and PsA-related symptoms. Risankizumab treatment was efficacious among patients with varying demographic and psoriatic disease characteristics through 52 weeks.

Impact of psoriasis disease severity and special area involvement on patient-reported outcomes in the real world: an analysis from the CorEvitas psoriasis registry

BACKGROUND

The impact of psoriasis in special areas (i.e., scalp, nails, palms, soles, genitals) on patient physical functioning, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and work abilities has not been fully characterized. We assessed associations between disease severity and special area involvement in psoriasis symptoms, HRQoL, and work/activity impairment.

METHODS

Patients with psoriasis from the CorEvitas Psoriasis Registry who initiated systemic treatment between 04/2015-06/2020 were included. Outcomes were change from baseline in psoriasis symptoms, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and work/activity impairment at 6 months stratified by baseline disease severity and special area involvement.

RESULTS

Among 2620 patients, increasing disease severity was associated with worsening patient-reported outcomes. Patients with (46.0%; N = 1205) versus without (54.0%; N = 1415) psoriasis in special areas reported greater HRQoL and work/activity impairment. Over 6 months, patients with unchanged or worsening disease severity had reduced HRQoL and increased symptom severity; incremental increases in patient HRQoL and decreases in symptom severity were associated with improved disease severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher disease severity and special area involvement was associated with worse outcomes and impaired work abilities. These data highlight the significant impact that adequate treatment of severe psoriasis and/or special area involvement may have on patient HRQoL and function.

Improvements in Patient-Reported Outcomes After Treatment With Deucravacitinib in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: Results From a Randomized Phase 2 Trial

OBJECTIVE

Deucravacitinib, a tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, was assessed in a phase 2 trial in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Here, we report effects of deucravacitinib from the patient perspective.

METHODS

This phase 2, double-blind trial (NCT03881059) randomized patients with active PsA 1:1:1 to deucravacitinib 6 mg once daily (QD), 12 mg QD, or placebo, for 16 weeks. Key secondary end points were changes from baseline (CFBs) at week 16 in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component summary (PCS) scores. Additional patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessed disease impact, including fatigue, pain, and mental health. The mean CFBs in PROs and percentages of patients reporting improvements with minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) or scores of greater than normal values were also assessed.

RESULTS

This study comprised 203 patients (51.2% female; mean ± SD age, 49.8 ± 13.5 years). At week 16, the adjusted mean difference (95% confidence interval) versus placebo in HAQ-DI and SF-36 PCS CFB was significant for each deucravacitinib group (HAQ-DI 6 mg, -0.26 [-0.42 to -0.10], P = 0.0020; HAQ-DI 12 mg, -0.28 [-0.45 to -0.12], P = 0.0008; SF-36 PCS 6 mg, 3.3 [0.9 to 5.7], P = 0.0062; SF-36 PCS 12 mg, 3.5 [1.1 to 5.9], P = 0.0042). MCID at week 16 were reported for all PROs with either dose of deucravacitinib. Improvements of MCID or to normative values were reported by more patients receiving deucravacitinib than placebo.

CONCLUSION

Deucravacitinib groups demonstrate significant and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo in patients with active PsA, which warrants further study.

Rapid and Sustained Effect of Ixekizumab on Patient Global, Spinal Pain, Stiffness, and Fatigue in Chinese Patients with Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis

INTRODUCTION

Ixekizumab, an interleukin 17A (IL-17A) inhibitor, has demonstrated rapid and sustained improvement in the signs and symptoms in patients with active radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) in global and Chinese populations. We studied the effect of ixekizumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (including patient global, spinal pain, stiffness, and fatigue) and overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of ixekizumab in the phase 3 study in China.

METHODS

In this Chinese phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients with r-axSpA were randomized (1:1) to receive ixekizumab 80 mg every 4 weeks (IXEQ4W; starting dose 160 mg) or placebo for 16 weeks. At week 16, patients receiving placebo were switched to IXEQ4W, and those receiving IXEQ4W continued, until week 52. Data for patient global, spinal pain, spinal pain at night, stiffness, and fatigue were collected through week 52. Minimally clinical important differences (MCIDs) were determined for spinal pain and spinal pain at night. The subgroup analyses by baseline disease duration since diagnosis and baseline C-reactive protein (CRP) level were conducted post hoc.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, patients treated with IXEQ4W reported significantly greater improvement with a rapid onset in changes from baseline of PROs (patient global, spinal pain, spinal pain at night, stiffness, and fatigue) through week 16. Improvements were maintained through week 52. A similar trend of improvement was also observed in MCID response in spinal pain and spinal pain at night. The improvement in overall HRQoL was supported by EQ-5D-5L assessment. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that IXEQ4W provided significantly greater efficacy at week 16 compared with placebo, irrespective of baseline disease duration or baseline CRP level.

CONCLUSION

IXEQ4W provided rapid and sustained improvement in clinically relevant PROs and overall HRQoL through 1-year treatment in Chinese patients with r-axSpA. Regardless of the baseline disease duration or baseline CRP level, consistent efficacy was observed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04285229.

Safety and Efficacy of Upadacitinib in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Refractory to Biologic DMARDs: Results Through Week 216 from the SELECT-CHOICE Study

INTRODUCTION

The safety and efficacy of upadacitinib 15 mg (UPA15) through week 216 was evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the long-term extension (LTE) of the phase 3 SELECT-CHOICE study.

METHODS

Patients with RA refractory to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were randomized to UPA15 or abatacept (ABA) for 24 weeks. During the open-label LTE, patients on ABA switched to UPA15 at week 24, and those on UPA15 continued treatment. The safety and efficacy of continuous UPA15, and ABA to UPA15, are summarized through week 216.

RESULTS

The LTE was comprised of 91.4% (n = 277/303) of patients that initially received UPA15, and 89.6% (n = 277/309) that initially received ABA. Of patients on UPA15 in the LTE (n = 547), 28.3% (n = 155/547) discontinued the study drug by week 216. Relative to other adverse events of special interest, and largely consistent with previous findings at week 24, higher rates of serious infection, COVID-19, herpes zoster, and elevated creatine phosphokinase were reported, while rates of malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC), NMSC, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), and venous thromboembolism (VTE) were low. Long-term safety data with UPA through week 216 aligned with previous observations and no new safety risks were identified, including in patients who switched from ABA to UPA15. Proportions of patients achieving 28-joint disease activity score based on C-reactive protein (DAS28[CRP]) < 2.6/ ≤ 3.2, clinical disease activity index (CDAI) and simple disease activity index (SDAI) low disease activity/remission, ≥ 20%/50%/70% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20/50/70) response criteria, and Boolean remission were maintained or improved with UPA15 through week 216. Improvements in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), patient's assessment of pain, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) were also maintained or improved with UPA15 through week 216. Across all efficacy endpoints, similar results were observed in patients who switched from ABA to UPA15 versus continuous UPA15. Patients with an inadequate response to ≥ 1 prior tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor (UPA15: n = 263/303, 86.8%; ABA to UPA15: n = 273/309, 88.3%) showed similar responses to the total population.

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term safety profile of UPA was consistent with previous findings and the broader RA clinical program. Compared to the primary analyses at week 24, efficacy responses were maintained or further improved with UPA15 through week 216 in patients with RA. Trial registration, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03086343.

Quality of life in retired workers with past exposure to asbestos

BACKGROUND

Asbestos causes cancer and non-cancerous lung and pleural diseases and can also have a negative psychological impact but little is known about its effect on health-related quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to describe the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of retired men with a history of occupational exposure to asbestos and examine factors linked with low HRQoL.

METHODS

Retired male workers of the French Asbestos-Related Disease Cohort (ARDCO) completed self-questionnaires that included SF-36v2 and HAD scales, questions about their perception of asbestos (perceived dangers and level of exposure, expectations to fall ill, or knowing someone who is) and their respiratory symptoms. Asbestos exposure was assessed by industrial hygienists. A perceived risk score was created using factorial analysis. Multivariable regressions were performed for all SF-36 subscales.

RESULTS

A total of 1266 of 2075 questionnaires (61%) were returned complete and included in analysis. After adjustment for potential confounders, an increase in perceived risk score resulted in a decrease in physical component summary score (PCS), up to 10.7 points (p = 0.048) and in mental component summary score (MCS) (p = 0.044). Presence of respiratory symptoms was also associated with significantly decreased PCS and MCS (p < 0.001). Poor HRQoL was linked to higher perceived risk score with p ≤ 0.01 for all SF-36 dimensions. Asbestos exposure assessed by an expert was not associated with any outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

All dimensions of HRQoL appear to be affected by the perceived risk of incurring asbestos-related disease and respiratory symptoms.

Enthesitis and Dactylitis Resolution with Risankizumab for Active Psoriatic Arthritis: Integrated Analysis of the Randomized KEEPsAKE 1 and 2 Trials

INTRODUCTION

The presence (vs absence) of enthesitis/dactylitis is associated with greater psoriatic arthritis (PsA) activity and reduced health-related quality of life. Risankizumab, an interleukin 23 antagonist, demonstrated superior treatment efficacy over placebo in patients with PsA, including enthesitis/dactylitis. Herein, we report the efficacy of risankizumab on complete resolution of enthesitis and/or dactylitis and improvements in patient-reported outcomes in patients with PsA.

METHODS

This integrated post hoc analysis of data from KEEPsAKE 1 and KEEPsAKE 2 included patients with baseline enthesitis (Leeds Enthesitis Index > 0) and/or dactylitis (Leeds Dactylitis Index > 0). Efficacy outcomes at weeks 24 and 52 included proportion of patients achieving enthesitis and/or dactylitis resolution and minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue.

RESULTS

Of 1407 patients, approximately 63%, 28%, and 20% had baseline enthesitis, dactylitis, and both enthesitis/dactylitis, respectively. At week 24, higher response rates were observed for risankizumab vs placebo for resolution of enthesitis, dactylitis, and both enthesitis/dactylitis (differences of 13.9%, 16.9%, and 13.3%, respectively; p < 0.05). By week 52, risankizumab treatment resulted in complete resolution of enthesitis, dactylitis, and both enthesitis and dactylitis in 55.0%, 76.1%, and 52.3% of patients; similar resolution rates occurred among patients who switched from placebo to risankizumab. Among risankizumab-treated patients who achieved resolution of enthesitis and/or dactylitis, MCIDs were also attained in patient-reported pain, disability, and fatigue at week 24 (all p < 0.05; except fatigue in patients with resolution of both enthesitis/dactylitis); responses were sustained through week 52.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher proportions of risankizumab-treated (vs placebo-treated) patients achieved enthesitis and/or dactylitis resolution and meaningful improvements in patient-reported outcomes at week 24 and generally sustained responses at week 52. Thus, risankizumab may result in sustained alleviation of PsA-related pathognomonic musculoskeletal lesions of enthesitis/dactylitis.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIERS

NCT03675308, and NCT03671148.

Real-World Long-Term Effectiveness of Risankizumab Among Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis: Analysis from an International Medical Chart Review (RAPID) Study

INTRODUCTION

Real-world data on the efficacy of risankizumab (RZB) in clinical moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (PsO) are limited. The RAPID study assessed real-world clinical and patient-reported outcomes in RZB-treated PsO patients using data collected from dermatologists in Canada, the Czech Republic, Germany, Japan, and Poland.

METHODS

This ongoing, retrospective chart review collected data from medical records of RZB-treated adults with moderate-to-severe PsO (09/2022-06/2023). Eligible patients received RZB, had ≥ 12 months of medical records after RZB initiation (index date), and had Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), Investigator Global Assessment (IGA), or static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) scores ≥ 3 months before and up to 18 months after the index date. The proportion of patients achieving a clear/almost clear PsO (IGA/sPGA = 0/1), PASI ≤ 1, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) = 0/1, and a 90%/100% improvement from baseline in PASI as well as the mean changes in PASI, DLQI, itch, and skin pain scores at 12 and 18 months were reported for patients with non-missing assessments at baseline and 12 months.

RESULTS

Most patients (66.4%) were male, 74.0% were biologic naïve, and 73.0% had scalp PsO. Mean baseline IGA/sPGA was 3.7 ± 0.5, with a mean PASI of 23.3 ± 11.8. After 12 months, 86.1% of patients reported IGA/sPGA ≤ 1, and 75.7% achieved PASI90; these further increased to 91.1% and 80.5% at 18 months. DLQI, itch, and skin pain scores improved over time.

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrated the durable, real-world effectiveness of RZB in patients with moderate-to-severe PsO through continued improvement in disease and symptom severity over 18 months, with most of the patients reporting clear/almost clear skin.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Psoriasis: A Systematic Review

Importance

Multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for health-related quality of life (HRQL) exist for patients with psoriasis. Evidence for the content validity and other measurement properties of these PROMs is critical to determine which HRQL PROMs could be recommended for use.

Objective

To systematically review the validity of HRQL-focused PROMs used in patients with psoriasis.

Evidence Review

Using PubMed and Embase, full-text articles published in English or Spanish on development or validation studies for psoriasis-specific, dermatology-specific, or generic HRQL PROMs were included. Development studies included original development studies, even if not studied in psoriasis patients per Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) recommendations. If a study included multiple diagnoses, more than 50% of patients had to have psoriasis or psoriasis-specific subgroup analyses available. Data extraction and analysis followed the COSMIN guidelines. Two independent reviewers extracted and analyzed the data, including PROM characteristics, quality of measurement properties (structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity, reliability, measurement error, criterion validity, construct validity, and responsiveness), and level of evidence. PROMs were classified into 3 levels of recommendations: (1) PROM recommended for use; (2) PROM requires further validation; and (3) PROM not recommended for use.

Findings

Overall, 97 articles were identified for extraction. This included 19 psoriasis-specific, 8 skin-specific, and 6 generic PROMs. According to COSMIN standards, most measures identified received a B recommendation for use, indicating their potential but requiring further validation. Only the Rasch reduced version of the Impact of Psoriasis Questionnaire (IPSO-11 Rasch) received an A recommendation for use given that it had sufficient content validity, structural validity, and internal consistency.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study identified a significant lack of information concerning the quality of HRQL measures in psoriasis. This gap in knowledge can be attributed to the fact that traditional measures were developed using validation criteria that differ from the current standards in use. Consequently, additional validation studies in accordance with contemporary standards will be useful in aiding researchers and clinicians in determining the most suitable measure for assessing HRQL in patients with psoriasis.

Real-World Use and Effectiveness Outcomes in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Upadacitinib: An Analysis from the CorEvitas Registry

INTRODUCTION

Data assessing longer-term real-world effectiveness and treatment patterns with upadacitinib (UPA), a Janus kinase inhibitor, in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are lacking. We assessed improvement in clinical and patient-reported outcomes and treatment patterns for up to 12 months among adult patients with RA initiating UPA.

METHODS

Data were collected from the CorEvitas® RA Registry (08/2019-04/2022). Eligible patients had moderate to severe RA (Clinical Disease Activity Index [CDAI] > 10) and follow-up visits at 6 or 12 months after UPA initiation. Outcomes were mean change from baseline, percentage achieving minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in clinical and patient-reported outcomes, and disease activity at follow-up. We evaluated clinical outcomes and therapy changes among patients with tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) experience and among those receiving UPA as first-line therapy, as well as those receiving UPA as monotherapy versus as part of combination therapy. We further evaluated whether outcomes were similar among those that remained on therapy.

RESULTS

Patients treated with UPA (6-month cohort, N = 469; 12-month cohort, N = 263) had statistically significant improvements (p < 0.001) in mean CDAI, tender/swollen joint counts, pain, and fatigue at follow-up. At 12 months, 46.0% achieved MCID in CDAI and 40.0% achieved low disease activity/remission. Overall, 43.0% discontinued UPA at 12 months; of those receiving combination treatment (N = 90) with conventional therapies and UPA, 42.2% (N = 38) discontinued conventional therapy. Findings were similar in the 6-month cohort and among subgroups. Changes from baseline and proportions of patients achieving MCID or clinical outcomes tended to be numerically lower among patients with TNFi experience and numerically higher among those receiving UPA as first-line therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

UPA initiation was associated with improvements in clinical and patient-reported outcomes, with meaningful clinical improvements regardless of prior TNFi experience, line of therapy, or concomitant use of conventional therapies. Further research is needed to better understand sustained response of UPA over longer treatment periods.

Tofacitinib Efficacy in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Probable Depression/Anxiety: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase 3 and 3b/4 Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

The aim of our work is to assess the prevalence of probable major depressive disorder and/or probable generalized anxiety disorder (pMDD/pGAD) in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to evaluate the efficacy of tofacitinib on RA symptoms stratified by baseline pMDD/pGAD status.

METHODS

Data were pooled from five phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one phase 3b/4 RCT, assessing tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), adalimumab (two RCTs), or placebo. pMDD/pGAD was defined as Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary (MCS) score ≤ 38. Efficacy outcomes over 12 months included least squares mean change from baseline in SF-36 MCS score and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, proportions of patients with pMDD/pGAD in those with baseline pMDD/pGAD, and American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 response, and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate remission (< 2.6) rates.

RESULTS

A total of 4404 patients with non-missing baseline values were included. Baseline pMDD/pGAD was reported by 44.5%, 39.8%, 45.4%, and 39.1% of patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg BID, tofacitinib 10 mg BID, adalimumab, and placebo, respectively. SF-36 MCS improvements were greater for tofacitinib versus adalimumab/placebo through month 6, with numerical improvements for tofacitinib versus adalimumab sustained through month 12, when the proportions of patients with baseline pMDD/pGAD who continued to have pMDD/pGAD were reduced. RA efficacy outcomes were generally similar in patients with/without baseline pMDD/pGAD.

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of patients with pMDD/pGAD reduced from baseline over 1 year of treatment with tofacitinib or adalimumab. Effective treatment of underlying RA may lead to improvements in depression and anxiety, based on the SF-36 MCS. Specially designed studies using gold-standard diagnostic tools would be warranted to investigate this further. Video Abstract available for this article.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT02187055. Video Abstract (MP4 204475 KB).

Patient burden and joint-inflammation during development of RA from arthralgia: is it similar in ACPA-positive and ACPA-negative disease?

OBJECTIVES

Anti-citrullinated protein antibody(ACPA)-positive and ACPA-negative rheumatoid arthritis(RA) differ in underlying risk factors but have a similar clinical presentation at RA-diagnosis. It is unknown what the ACPA-associated differences or similarities are during the symptomatic at-risk stage of RA, clinically suspect arthralgia(CSA). To deepen insights into these differences/similarities, we compared the course of symptoms/impairments and subclinical joint-inflammation in the CSA-phase during progression to inflammatory arthritis(IA) or to CSA-resolution.

METHODS

845 CSA-patients were followed for median 24 months; 136 patients developed IA and additional 355/505 patients had resolution of CSA according to rheumatologists. Patient burden (pain/morning stiffness/fatigue/functional disabilities/presenteeism) was assessed at baseline, 4/12/24 months and IA-development. Subclinical joint-inflammation in hands/feet was assessed over time with 1.5 T-MRI. Linear/Poisson mixed models were used.

RESULTS

Both in ACPA-positive and ACPA-negative patients, patient burden increased towards IA-development and decreased towards CSA-resolution. However, patient burden was lower in ACPA-positive than ACPA-negative disease on all timepoints. Conversely, subclinical joint-inflammation tended to increase more rapidly during development of ACPA-positive IA (IRR = 1.52,95%CI = 0.94-2.47, p= 0.089), and remained higher over time in ACPA-positive CSA-patients achieving resolution compared with ACPA-negative patients (IRR = 1.52,95%CI = 1.07-2.15, p= 0.018). Although correlation coefficients between changes in patient burden and subclinical joint-inflammation during progression to IA were weak, they were consistently higher in ACPA-positive than ACPA-negative disease, e.g. ρ = 0.29 vs ρ = 0.12 for functional disabilities.

CONCLUSION

During RA-development and CSA-resolution, ACPA-positive CSA-patients have lower patient burden, but more subclinical joint-inflammation than ACPA-negative CSA-patients. These data strengthen the notion that the development of ACPA-positive and ACPA-negative RA is pathophysiologically different, and encourage further research on these differences.

Meaningful score changes for SF-36v2, FACIT-fatigue, and RASIQ in rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Interpretation thresholds for patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores are of crucial importance, particularly when interpreting treatment benefit. This study was designed to determine the within-patient meaningful improvement (WPMI) thresholds for the Short-Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), and the novel Rheumatoid Arthritis Symptoms and Impact Questionnaire (RASIQ) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

In this post-hoc analysis, anchor-based and supportive distribution-based methods were used to derive WPMI based on blinded data from all treatment arms in two Phase 2 RA trials with otilimab. Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA) was the general anchor for all SF-36v2 scales. SF-36 Patient's Global Impression of Status (PGIS), PtGA, and VT03 (an SF-36v2 item) were used as anchors for FACIT-Fatigue. SF-36 PGIS, PtGA, and Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain (PAIN) were anchors for RASIQ. Mean change was calculated for the anchor category associated with minimal meaningful improvement from baseline to Week 24 for SF-36v2 and FACIT-Fatigue, and to Week 12 for RASIQ. Sensitivity and specificity were used to evaluate the accuracy of estimated WPMI values.

RESULTS

For the SF-36v2 physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional, and mental health domains, anchor-based estimates of WPMI based on 0-100 scores were 24.5, 24.5, 25.4, 13.6, 21.5, 20.5, 16.9, and 14.3, respectively. Anchor-based WPMI estimates were 9.7 for the Physical Component Summary score and 7.6 for the Mental Component Summary score (using norm-based T-score metric). For FACIT-Fatigue (range 0-52), WPMI estimates ranged from 9.7 to 11.3 points. For RASIQ (range 0-100), anchor-based WPMI was determined as a change between -32.7 and -21.7 points for the Joint Pain scale, -26.7 to -23.7 for the Joint Stiffness scale, and -21.1 to -17.4 for the Impact scale.

CONCLUSIONS

This study derived WPMI thresholds for SF-36v2, FACIT-Fatigue, and RASIQ among patients with RA, using multiple anchors. Derivation of WPMI thresholds for these PRO instruments will enable their broader use in evaluating and interpreting treatment benefit in future RA studies.

Disease activity-guided tapering of biologics in patients with inflammatory arthritis: a pragmatic, randomized, open-label, equivalence trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether disease activity-guided tapering of biologics compared to continuation as usual care enables a substantial dose reduction while disease activity remains equivalent.

METHOD

In this pragmatic, randomized, open-label, equivalence trial, adults with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, or axial spondyloarthritis in low disease activity on stable-dose biologics for ≥ 12 months were randomized 2:1 into either the tapering group, i.e. disease activity-guided prolongation of the biologic dosing interval until flare or withdrawal, or the control group, i.e. maintaince of baseline biologics with a possible small interval increase at the patients request. The co-primary outcome in the intention-to-treat population was met if superiority in ≥ 50% biologic reduction at 18 months was demonstrated and disease activity was equivalent (equivalence margins ± 0.5).

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients were randomized to tapering and 47 to control, of whom 37% (35/95) versus 2% (1/47) achieved ≥ 50% biologic reduction at 18 months. The risk difference was statistically significant [35%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 24%-45%], while disease activity remained equivalent [mean difference 0.05, 95% CI -0.12-0.29]. A statistically significant flare risk was observed [tapering 41% (39/95) vs control 21% (10/47), risk difference 20%, 95% CI 4%-35%]; but, only 1% (1/95) and 6% (3/47) had persistent flare and needed to switch to another biological drug.

CONCLUSIONS

Disease activity-guided tapering of biologics in patients with inflammatory arthritis enabled one-third to achieve ≥ 50% biologic reduction, while disease activity between groups remained equivalent. Flares were more frequent in the tapering group but were managed with rescue therapy.

Effects of Different Exercises on Physical Function, Dialysis Adequacy, and Health-Related Quality of Life in Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines recommend exercise training for patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (MHD). However, the effectiveness of different types of exercise remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of the study were to compare and rank the effect of different types of exercise on walking capacity, cardiorespiratory fitness, dialysis adequacy, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients undergoing MHD.

METHODS

Eight databases (four English and four Chinese) were searched from inception to January 1, 2022. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of different exercises for patients undergoing MHD were included. Two independent reviewers screened the literature, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias, and evaluated the certainty of evidence. A frequentist random-effect network meta-analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Ninety trials with 4,084 participants comparing 15 types of exercise were included, reporting on the six-minute walking test (45 trials), peak oxygen uptake (22 trials), dialysis adequacy (30 trials), and HRQOL (23 trials). Network meta-analysis showed that the most effective intervention for walking capacity was intradialytic aerobic exercise combined with blood flow restriction with a mean difference and 95% confidence interval of 97.35 (11.89-182.81), for peak oxygen uptake it was non-intradialytic combined aerobic and resistance exercise with a value of 4.35 (2.25-6.44), for dialysis adequacy it was intradialytic combined aerobic and resistance exercise with a value of 0.17 (0.06-0.28), for the physical component summary of HRQOL it was intradialytic aerobic exercise with a value of 4.93 (2.31-7.54), and for the mental component summary of HRQOL it was non-intradialytic combined aerobic and resistance exercise with a value of 6.36 (0.45-12.27). Ultimately, intradialytic combined aerobic and resistance exercise could improve all the above outcomes compared to usual care.

CONCLUSIONS

This study concluded that intradialytic combined aerobic and resistance exercise is optimal for MHD patients due to its significant positive effects on multiple outcomes. Walking capacity can be further enhanced by combining blood flow restriction with exercise. For improving dialysis adequacy, intradialytic exercise proves to be more effective than non-intradialytic exercise. Further well-designed clinical trials are needed to investigate the effects of exercise with varying durations, intensities, and frequencies.

Effect of Upadacitinib on Quality of Life and Work Productivity in Active Non-radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis: Results From Randomized Phase 3 Trial SELECT-AXIS 2

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the effect of upadacitinib vs. placebo on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and work productivity in patients with active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) enrolled in the SELECT-AXIS 2 phase 3 randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Adult patients with active nr-axSpA and an inadequate response to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were randomized 1:1 to receive upadacitinib 15 mg once daily or placebo. Mean changes from baseline in measures of HRQoL (Ankylosing Spondylitis QoL [ASQoL], Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Health Index [ASAS HI], Short-Form 36 Physical Component Summary [SF-36 PCS] score) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) were assessed through 14 weeks based on mixed-effects repeated measures or analysis of covariance models. The proportions of patients with improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) were assessed in HRQoL measures at week 14 using non-responder imputation with multiple imputation.

RESULTS

At week 14, upadacitinib- vs. placebo-treated patients reported greater improvements from baseline in ASQoL and ASAS HI (ranked, P < 0.001) and in SF-36 PCS and WPAI overall work impairment (nominal P < 0.05). Improvements were observed as early as week 2 in ASAS HI. Greater proportions of upadacitinib vs. placebo-treated patients reported improvements ≥ MCID in ASQoL (62.6 vs. 40.9%), ASAS HI (44.8 vs. 28.8%), and SF-36 PCS (69.3 vs. 52.0%), with numbers needed to treat < 10 for all (nominal P ≤ 0.01). Improvements ≥ MCID were consistently observed irrespectively of prior exposure to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

Upadacitinib provides clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL and work productivity in patients with active nr-axSpA.

CLINICAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04169373, SELECT-AXIS 2.

The impact of treatment with avacopan on health-related quality of life in antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis: a post-hoc analysis of data from the ADVOCATE trial

BACKGROUND

Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis is characterised by inflammation and destruction of small to medium sized blood vessels. In the previously reported ADVOCATE study, a phase 3 double-blind, double-dummy randomised controlled trial of patients with newly diagnosed or relapsing ANCA-associated vasculitis, the oral selective complement 5a receptor inhibitor avacopan was shown to be non-inferior with regard to remission induction at week 26 and superior with regard to sustained remission at week 52, compared with a prednisone taper in a standard of care regimen. In this Article, we report an in-depth analysis of prespecified and exploratory patient-reported outcomes from the ADVOCATE study, measuring health-related quality of life and health utilities.

METHODS

We did a post-hoc analysis of patient-reported outcome data from the ADVOCATE study (NCT02994927) of patients with newly diagnosed or relapsing ANCA-associated vasculitis. We analysed summary scores and individual domain scores for the prespecified health-related quality of life outcomes from ADVOCATE, which were evaluated at weeks 26 and 52 by use of the Medical Outcomes Survey 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) version 2, the EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Levels Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), and the EQ-5D health utility measure, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population. We also calculated the Short Form 6 Dimension (SF-6D) score as an additional health utility measure. We evaluated the proportion of patients who reported scores that met or exceeded minimum clinically important differences in health-related quality of life, and we compared scores to normative values (age-specific and sex-specific scores from healthy populations from the USA matched to the protocol population). We also evaluated the proportion of patients who reported scores that met or exceeded minimum important difference in health utility scores.

FINDINGS

331 patients were enrolled in the ADVOCATE trial, of whom 166 were in the avacopan group and 165 were in the prednisone standard of care group. In the avacopan group, the mean age was 61·2 years (SD 14·6), 98 (59%) of 166 patients were men, 68 (41%) were women, and 138 (83%) were White; in the prednisone group, the mean age was 60·5 years (14·5), 88 (54%) of 164 patients were men, 76 (46%) were women, and 140 (85%) were White. Patients treated with avacopan received approximately 2500 mg less median total prednisone up to week 52. Least squares means difference from baseline in physical component summary scores were significantly greater in patients in the avacopan group compared with those in the prednisone group at weeks 26 and 52, as well as in five of eight SF-36 domains at week 26 and two of eight SF-36 domains at week 52. The proportion of patients reporting scores equal to or greater than normative values was higher in the avacopan group than in the prednisone group across all SF-36 domains at both week 26 and 52, although the differences were not statistically significant with the exception of the role physical and vitality domains at week 26. Least squares means change from baseline in EQ-5D-5L visual analogue scale, EQ-5D health utility scores, and SF-6D health utility scores were significantly greater at week 52 in the avacopan group compared with the prednisone group.

INTERPRETATION

Patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis who received avacopan reported statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in health-related quality of life at 26 and 52 weeks and in health utility EQ-5D and SF-6D scores at 52 weeks. These patient-reported outcomes complement investigator assessments and support the efficacy of avacopan in patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis with use of lower prednisone doses.

FUNDING

ChemoCentryx.

Effect of Upadacitinib on Disease Activity, Pain, Fatigue, Function, Health-Related Quality of Life and Work Productivity for Biologic Refractory Ankylosing Spondylitis

INTRODUCTION

Patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have significant unmet treatment needs, despite advancements in biologic therapies. This study evaluated the impact of upadacitinib on clinically meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessing disease activity, pain, fatigue, function, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and work productivity in patients with AS with inadequate responses or intolerance to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR).

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the phase 3 SELECT-AXIS 2 AS bDMARD-IR study received blinded once-daily oral upadacitinib 15 mg or placebo for 14 weeks. The percentage of patients achieving improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) at week 14 were compared between treatment groups for disease activity (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, BASDAI), patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), total and nocturnal back pain, fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, FACIT-F), physical function (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index, BASFI), HRQoL (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Health Index [ASAS HI], Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life [ASQoL], Short form-36 [SF-36] physical [PCS] and mental [MCS] component summary scores), and work productivity (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI] Questionnaire). Mean changes from baseline through week 14 in fatigue and HRQoL were compared between treatment groups.

RESULTS

A total of 420 patients with active AS who were bDMARD-IR were included. A higher proportion of patients reported MCIDs at week 14 across all PROs with upadacitinib compared with placebo (nominal p ≤ 0.05). Greater improvements in mean change from baseline through week 14 were reported with upadacitinib compared with placebo across FACIT-F, HRQoL, and WPAI, with improvements differentiated as early as week 1 for ASAS HI, ASQoL and SF-36 PCS and week 4 for SF-36 MCS.

CONCLUSIONS

Upadacitinib 15 mg demonstrated rapid and clinically meaningful improvements in disease activity, pain, FACIT-F, function, HRQoL, and WPAI among bDMARD-IR patients with active AS.

TRIAL REGISTRY

Clinical Registration number: NCT04169373, SELECT-AXIS 2.

Importance of quick attainment of minimal disease activity for a positive impact on lives of patients with psoriatic arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the first year to the third year between patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who achieved minimal disease activity (MDA) in the first year after diagnosis and those who did not.

METHODS

Consecutive, newly diagnosed, patients with DMARD naïve PsA with oligoarthritis or polyarthritis were selected from the Dutch southwest Early PsA cohoRt. Patients were categorised in three groups: (1) Patients who were in MDA at both 9 months and 12 months after diagnosis (sustained MDA); (2) Patients who achieved MDA in the first year but in whom it was not sustained at both 9 months and 12 months (non-sustained MDA); (3) Patients who did not achieve MDA in the first year (no MDA). PROs were compared between groups from the first year to the third year after diagnosis using a linear mixed model.

RESULTS

240 patients were selected; 104 (43%) were classified as sustained MDA, 60 (25%) as non-sustained MDA and 76 (32%) as no MDA. Patients who did not achieve MDA in the first year experienced remarkably lower PROs during follow-up, compared with the sustained MDA group: health status (European Quality of life 5-Dimensions 5-Levels) was 0.23 units lower (95% CI -0.28 to -0.18), functional impairment (Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index) was 0.81 units higher (95% CI 0.70 to 0.92), pain (Visual Analogue Scale) was 35.38 mm higher (95% CI 30.57 to 40.18), fatigue (Bristol Rheumatoid Arthritis Fatigue-Multidimensional Questionnaire) was 17.88 units higher (95% CI 14.60 to 21.16), and anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) were, respectively, 3.26 units (95% CI 2.25 to 4.27) and 4.04 units higher (95% CI 3.10 to 4.99).

CONCLUSION

Failure to achieve MDA in the first year after PsA diagnosis was associated with worse PROs that persisted over the years.

Swefoot - The Swedish national quality register for foot and ankle surgery

BACKGROUND

Population-based register data could be used to improve our knowledge of patients surgically treated for foot and ankle disorders. The quality register Swefoot was recently created to collect surgical and patient-reported data of foot and ankle surgery. This manuscript aims to describe the development and current use of the register.

METHODS

The development of Swefoot started in 2014 and currently, data on 16 different diagnoses are collected in 49 units performing foot and ankle surgery. Registrations are performed by the surgeon and the patient.

RESULTS

Between 2014 and 2020 approximately 20,000 surgical procedures have been registered. 75.1% of the registered patients were women, 9.3% were smokers, 9.3% had a concomitant rheumatoid disease, and 18.4% a BMI larger than 30 kg/m²_. CONCLUSIONS: The Swefoot is a unique national register for foot and ankle surgery. It is by now possible to present demographic, surgical, and outcome parameters based on Swefoot.

The effect of risankizumab on achieving minimal clinically important differences in patient-reported outcomes in patients with psoriatic arthritis: results from KEEPsAKE 1 and 2

BACKGROUND

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that reduces the quality of life. This study assessed the effects of risankizumab (RZB) on the achievement of minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

KEEPsAKE-1 and -2 are randomized, placebo-controlled Phase 3 clinical studies assessing RZB (150 mg) vs. placebo (PBO) in adult patients with PsA with inadequate response or intolerance to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and/or biologics. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive RZB or PBO for 24 weeks; starting at Week 24, all patients received RZB 150 mg through Week 52. PROs assessed were Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), Patient's Assessment of Pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Short-Form 36 Physical and Mental Component Summary scores (PCS and MCS, respectively), 5-Level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI). The proportion of patients achieving MCID at Weeks 24 and 52 are reported. Odds ratios of achieving MCID with RZB treatment at Week 24, relative to PBO, were estimated by logistic regression controlling for baseline and stratification factors.

RESULTS

In KEEPsAKE-1, RZB- vs. PBO-treated patients were more likely to report MCID in all PROs at Week 24; similar results were obtained in KEEPsAKE-2, except for SF-36 MCS and WPAI presenteeism domain. In KEEPsAKE-1 and KEEPsAKE-2, 65% and 62% of RZB-treated patients, respectively, reported MCID in PtGA at Week 24, which increased to 74% and 68%, respectively, at Week 52. Approximately 48% of all PBO-treated patients reported MCID in PtGA at Week 24 and, after initiating RZB, >65% reported MCID at Week 52. Results were similar in the remaining PROs.

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate that patients with PsA receiving RZB treatment are more likely to report clinically important improvements in PROs compared with patients receiving PBO.

Do biological agents improve health-related quality of life in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus? Results from a systematic search of the literature

Despite an unprecedented rise in the number of biological therapies developed for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) during the last decades, most randomised clinical trials (RCTs) have failed to reach their primary efficacy endpoint. These endpoints mainly constitute composite outcomes that encompass disease activity indices derived from clinician-reported and laboratory data and do not necessarily reflect the patient perspective, as symptoms that represent major concerns to patients, such as fatigue, are seldom part of the evaluation. To overcome this limitation, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) constitute useful tools for evaluating the effect of an intervention on facets that are particularly relevant for the patients. In the present review, we performed a systematic literature search aiming to examine the effect of biological therapies on SLE patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and fatigue in RCT and real-life settings. We summarised results concerning 14 different biological agents, the majority of which targeting B cells or type I interferons, and discuss strategies that have been used to analyse HRQoL data, putting emphasis on minimal clinically important differences and the potential use of PROs as distinct targets in treat-to-target approaches. Lastly, we discuss differences between generic and disease-specific PRO measures and highlight the need of using a combination thereof aiming to capture the patient perspective in a comprehensive manner.

Effect of tofacitinib on dactylitis and patient-reported outcomes in patients with active psoriatic arthritis: post-hoc analysis of phase III studies

Background

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This post-hoc analysis of two phase III studies in patients with PsA treated with tofacitinib assessed dactylitis by location, and the impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

Methods

Patients received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), or placebo. Endpoints included change from baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score (DSS), proportions of patients with dactylitis, Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), and PROs (Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index [HAQ-DI]; Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue [FACIT-F]; Short Form-36 Health Survey [SF-36] Physical Component Summary [PCS], Mental Component Summary [MCS], and physical functioning [PF]; arthritis pain; and Work Limitations Questionnaire [WLQ]). Descriptive statistics were generated by visit and treatment. Change from baseline in PROs were evaluated by multivariate linear regression.

Results

The analysis included 373/337 patients with baseline DSS > 0/DSS = 0. Regardless of location, DSS improvements in patients with DSS > 0 were greater from month 1 with tofacitinib (10 mg BID) versus placebo. For patients with DSS > 0/DSS = 0, both doses of tofacitinib led to mean dactylitis presence ≤ 15%/< 2% for all digits at month 6, and PASDAS (by dactylitis location) was lower versus placebo at month 3. Dactylitis location was not significantly associated with change from baseline in PROs.

Conclusion

Tofacitinib resulted in sustained improvements in dactylitis irrespective of location, with minimal emergence of new dactylitis.

Trial registration NCT01877668; NCT01882439.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41927-022-00298-4.

Intervention with methotrexate in patients with arthralgia at risk of rheumatoid arthritis to reduce the development of persistent arthritis and its disease burden (TREAT EARLIER): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept trial

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis is the most common autoimmune disease worldwide and requires long-term treatment to suppress inflammation. Currently, treatment is started when arthritis is clinically apparent. We aimed to evaluate whether earlier intervention, in the preceding phase of arthralgia and subclinical joint inflammation, could prevent the development of clinical arthritis or reduce the disease burden.

METHODS

We conducted a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept-trial at the Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands. Adults aged 18 years or older with arthralgia clinically suspected of progressing to rheumatoid arthritis and MRI-detected subclinical joint inflammation were eligible for enrolment across 13 rheumatology outpatient clinics in the southwest region of the Netherlands and randomly assigned (1:1) to a single intramuscular glucocorticoid injection (120 mg) and a 1-year course of oral methotrexate (up to 25 mg/week), or placebo (single injection and tablets for 1 year). Participants and investigators were masked to group assignment. Follow-up continued for 1 year after the end of the 1-year treatment period. The primary endpoint was development of clinical arthritis (fulfilling the 2010 rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria or involving two or more joints) that persisted for at least 2 weeks. Patient-reported physical functioning, symptoms, and work productivity were secondary endpoints, which were measured every 4 months. Additionally, the course of MRI-detected inflammation was studied. All participants entered the intention-to-treat analysis. This trial is registered with EudraCT, 2014-004472-35, and the Netherlands Trial Register, NTR4853-trial-NL4599.

FINDINGS

Between April 16, 2015, and Sept 11, 2019, 901 patients were assessed for eligibility and 236 were enrolled and randomly assigned to active treatment (n=119) or placebo (n=117). At 2 years, the frequency of the primary endpoint was similar between the groups (23 [19%] of 119 participants in the treatment group vs 21 [18%] of 117 in the placebo group; hazard ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·45 to 1·48). Physical functioning improved more in the treatment group during the first 4 months and remained better than in the placebo group (mean between-group difference in Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index over 2 years: -0·09, 95% CI -0·16 to -0·03; p=0·0042). Similarly, pain (on scale 0-100, mean between-group difference: -8, 95% CI -12 to -4; p<0·0001), morning stiffness of joints (-12, -16 to -8; p<0·0001), presenteeism (-8%, -13 to -3; p=0·0007), and MRI-detected joint inflammation (-1·4 points, -2·0 to -0·9; p<0·0001) showed sustained improvement in the treatment group compared with the placebo group. The number of serious adverse events was equal in both groups; adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile for methotrexate.

INTERPRETATION

Methotrexate, the cornerstone treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, initiated at the pre-arthritis stage of symptoms and subclinical inflammation, did not prevent the development of clinical arthritis, but modified the disease course as shown by sustained improvement in MRI-detected inflammation, related symptoms, and impairments compared with placebo.

FUNDING

Dutch Research Council (NWO; Dutch Arthritis Society).

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.

Effect of tofacitinib on pain, fatigue, health-related quality of life and work productivity in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis: results from a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) impacts quality of life. We assessed patient-reported outcomes (PROs), pain, fatigue, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and work productivity in a phase III trial of tofacitinib.

Methods

Adults with AS and with inadequate response/intolerance to ≥2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs received tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily or placebo for 16 weeks. Afterwards, all received open-label tofacitinib until week 48. Change from baseline to week 48 was determined for PROs: total back pain; nocturnal spinal pain; Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) overall spinal pain (Q2); Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue; BASDAI fatigue (Q1); AS Quality of Life (ASQoL); Short Form-36 Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2); EuroQoL-Five Dimension-Three Level health profile and Visual Analogue Scale; and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire. Improvements from baseline ≥minimum clinically important difference, and scores ≥normative values at week 16 were evaluated.

Results

In 269 randomised and treated patients, at week 16, there were greater least squares mean improvements from baseline with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily versus placebo in BASDAI overall spinal pain (–2.85 vs –1.34), BASDAI fatigue (–2.36 vs –1.08), ASQoL (–4.03 vs –2.01) and WPAI overall work impairment (–21.49 vs –7.64) (all p<0.001); improvements continued/increased to week 48. Improved spinal pain with tofacitinib was seen by week 2. Patients receiving tofacitinib reported clinically meaningful PRO improvements at week 16. Percentages with PRO scores ≥normative values at week 16 were greater with tofacitinib in SF-36v2 Physical Component Summary, physical functioning and bodily pain domains (p≤0.05).

Conclusions

In patients with AS, treatment with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in pain, fatigue, HRQoL and work productivity versus placebo to week 16, which were sustained to week 48.

Trial registration number

NCT03502616.

The impact of tofacitinib on fatigue, sleep, and health-related quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a post hoc analysis of data from Phase 3 trials

Background

Fatigue, a common symptom of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), is detrimental to health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We evaluated the impact of tofacitinib on fatigue, sleep, and HRQoL and explored associations between fatigue, related patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and disease activity in RA patients.

Methods

This post hoc analysis pooled data from three Phase 3 studies of tofacitinib (ORAL Scan; ORAL Standard; ORAL Sync) in RA patients. Patients received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily, placebo, or adalimumab (active control; ORAL Standard only, not powered for superiority) with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Assessed through Month (M)12 were changes from baseline in disease activity, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep scale (MOS-SS), and Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) composite/domain scores, and proportions of patients reporting improvements from baseline in FACIT-F total and SF-36 domain scores ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) or ≥ population normative values. Pearson correlations examined associations among PROs at M6. Treatment comparisons were exploratory, with p < 0.05 considered nominally significant.

Results

Generally, active treatment led to significant improvements from baseline in FACIT-F total, and MOS-SS and SF-36 composite/domain scores vs placebo, observed by M1 and maintained through M6 (last placebo-controlled time point). Through M6, more patients achieved improvements from baseline ≥ MCID and achieved scores ≥ population normative values in FACIT-F total and SF-36 domain scores with tofacitinib vs placebo. Through M12, some nominally significant improvements with tofacitinib vs adalimumab were observed. With active treatment at M6, FACIT-F scores were moderately (0.40–0.59) to highly (≥ 0.60) correlated with SF-36 composite/domain scores (particularly vitality), moderately correlated with most MOS-SS domain scores, and highly correlated with MOS-SS Sleep Problems Index I scores. Disease activity correlations were moderate with FACIT-F scores and low (0.20–0.39) to moderate with SF-36 general health domain/composite scores.

Conclusion

Tofacitinib and adalimumab generally conferred significant, clinically meaningful improvements in fatigue, sleep, and HRQoL (including vitality) vs placebo through M6, with improvements maintained to M12. M6 correlations between FACIT-F, PROs of sleep, HRQoL, and disease activity underscore the interrelatedness of multiple PROs and disease activity in RA.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.govNCT00847613 (registered: February 19, 2009); NCT00853385 (registered: March 2, 2009); NCT00856544 (registered: March 5, 2009).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13075-022-02724-x.

Comparing Patient-Reported Outcomes From Sham and Saline-Based Placebo Injections for Knee Osteoarthritis: Data From a Randomized Clinical Trial of Lorecivivint

BACKGROUND

Durable, meaningful symptom responses to intra-articular saline placebo injections are observed in knee osteoarthritis (OA) trials, but it is unclear if these are due to physiological effects.

PURPOSE

To perform a prospective comparison of patient-reported outcome responses among participants with knee OA who underwent intra-articular injection of saline-based placebo or sham (dry needle).

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

From a 24-week randomized double-blind trial, participants with moderate to severe knee OA received 2-mL intra-articular injections of saline-based placebo (PBO; 99.45% PBS) or sham (dry needle) to the target knee. Least squares mean differences of changes from baseline to week 24 were compared between the PBO and sham groups for the following: pain Numeric Rating Scale; Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain, stiffness, and function; and patient global assessment. Bang Blinding Index was used to evaluate all-group blinding on day 1 and week 24.

RESULTS

In total, 116 and 117 participants were randomized to the PBO and sham groups, respectively. Within the full trial population, the mean ± SD age and body mass index were 59.0 ± 8.5 years and 28.97 ± 4.01, respectively. An overall 406 (58.4%) were female, and 394 (57.3%) had Kellgren-Lawrence grade 3 target knee OA. The PBO and sham groups demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements (≥10%) from baseline in all patient-reported outcomes at all time points (ie, weeks 4-24). Mean differences (95% CI) at week 24 between the PBO and sham groups were as follows: pain Numeric Rating Scale, -0.10 (-0.79 to 0.59; P = .78); WOMAC pain, -2.89 (-9.70 to 3.92; P = .40); WOMAC stiffness, -2.37 (-9.37 to 4.63; P = .51); and WOMAC function, -1.39 (-8.06 to 5.29; P = .68). Bang Blinding Index indicated that blinding was maintained.

CONCLUSION

PBO and sham groups demonstrated equivalent patient-reported outcomes at all time points through week 24, suggesting that responses attributed to saline were contextual (ie, to the procedure) and not physiological.

REGISTRATION

NCT03122860 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

The effect of secukinumab on patient-reported outcomes in patients with active psoriatic arthritis in a randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The phase 3 FUTURE 5 trial (NCT02404350) showed the clinical and radiographical efficacy of secukinumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis. This analysis aimed to assess the effect of secukinumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

FUTURE 5 was a phase 3, multicentre, parallel-group randomised trial in which patients who were 18 years old or older, met the classification criteria for psoriatic arthritis at screening, and had symptoms of moderate-to-severe psoriatic arthritis for at least 6 months were randomly assigned to receive secukinumab 300 mg, 150 mg, 150 mg no loading dose (NL), or placebo weekly from baseline to week 4 and every 4 weeks thereafter. The prespecified PROs of the FUTURE 5 trial were assessed first in the overall population. We report mean changes from baseline and the proportion of patients reporting improvements equal to or more than the minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) and scores equal to or more than the normative values for patient global assessments (PtGA) of disease activity; psoriasis and arthritis visual analogue scale (VAS) scores; pain VAS; Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI); 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36); Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue (FACIT-F); and quality of life questionnaires. Patients were then stratified and assessed according to their tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor status (TNF-naive and TNF-inadequate responder [TNF-IR] populations) as a post-hoc analysis.

FINDINGS

Patients in all secukinumab groups reported significant least-squares mean changes from placebo at week 16 in all PROs except SF-36 mental component summary (MCS), irrespective of TNF inhibitor use. These included PtGA (300 mg difference vs placebo -12·2 [95% CI -16·3 to -8·1], 150 mg -8·22 [-12·4 to -4·1], 150 mg NL -8·3 [-12·5 to -4·2]; all p<0·0001), pain VAS (300 mg -14·3 [-18·3 to -10·2], 150 mg -11·5 [-15·6 to -7·5], 150 mg NL -11·3 [-15·3 to -7·2]; all p<0·0001), HAQ-DI (300 mg -0·33 [-0·42 to -0·24], 150 mg -0·23 [-0·32 to -0·14], 150 mg NL -0·24 [-0·33 to -0·15]; all p<0·0001), and FACIT-F (300 mg 4·8 [3·2 to 6·4], 150 mg 4·2 [2·6 to 5·8], 150 mg NL 3·5 [1·9 to 5·1]; all p<0·0001). Similarly, the proportion of patients with improvements equal to or better than MCID at week 16 was higher in the secukinumab group compared with the placebo group for most PROs except SF-36 (MCS), regardless of TNF inhibitor use.

INTERPRETATION

Secukinumab resulted in early, statistically significant, clinically meaningful, sustained improvements in PROs across all doses compared with placebo in patients with active psoriatic arthritis. These improvements were seen irrespective of previous TNF inhibitor use, in a post-hoc analysis. These results indicate that secukinumab provides comprehensive improvement for patients with psoriatic arthritis, regardless of previous therapy.

FUNDING

Novartis.

The Patient-Centered Approach in Rheumatologic Painful Diseases: A Narrative Review

A patient-centric approach to pain control represents a paradigm shift in analgesia and one that is both easy to endorse but challenging to execute. As pain mechanisms become increasingly elucidated, the understanding of pain has changed to encompass its complexities. Multiple types and mechanisms of pain have been described, and pain must be seen through the subjective experience of the patient. Earlier descriptions of pain based on intensity are one-dimensional and do not fully encompass the experience of pain. Thus, treating rheumatology patients or any patient in pain requires an understanding of the primary or secondary nature of the pain, underlying conditions, and patient factors such as anxiety, depression, fearfulness, and catastrophizing, all of which can shape and change the nature of the pain. Further, it is important to manage patient expectations concerning chronic pain as complete pain relief may not be possible, but a Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) may serve. Functional goals are often more meaningful to patients than pain scores. Pharmacologic therapy for pain must consider side effects as well as analgesia. Patient-centered pain control requires a focus on wellness and disease prevention, personalized care plans, education, support for self-care, and may involve coordination across disciplines to help the patient meet personally meaningful objectives. While patient-centric care has become a buzzword in modern medicine, it is extremely relevant and may be very beneficial to pain patients.

Does exercise therapy improve patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis? A systematic review and meta-analysis for the update of the 2020 JCR guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of exercise therapy on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as part of the process of updating the 2020 Japanese guidelines for the management of RA according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Japana Centra Revuo Medicina Web, and the Cochrane Library (from 2009 to 2018) to identify articles that evaluated PROs of exercise therapy and RA disease activity.

RESULTS

A total of 662 articles were identified, including nine RCTs, and meta-analyses were performed on six RCTs on systemic exercise therapy and three RCTs on upper extremity exercise therapy. Analyzed exercise therapies were diverse, differing in target population, intervention method, and duration. Significant improvements were observed in the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (mean difference -0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.60 to -0.10), pain (standardized mean difference -2.04, 95% CI: -3.77 to -0.32), and SF-36. For upper extremity exercise therapy, significant improvements in PROs (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire, Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire) were observed.

CONCLUSION

Exercise therapy in RA treatment improves patient subjective assessment of pain, physical function, and quality of life.

Association Between Janus Kinase Inhibitors Therapy and Mental Health Outcome in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic debilitating illness, usually associated with mental health ailments. Literature reports contradictory observations about the association between recent RA pharmacotherapies and mental health. We systematically reviewed RA randomized control trials to synthesize the association between Janus kinases (JAK) inhibitors therapy and mental health.

METHODS

We systematically searched clinical trials of JAK inhibitor intervention reporting mental health outcomes using short form-36 (SF-36) in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases from inception to February 2021. We have selected the studies and extracted the data, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. We have pooled the mean change of SF-36 mental component score (MCS) between JAK inhibitors and comparator therapy with a 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

Of the 2915 searched studies for systematic review, 19 studies involving 14,323 individuals were included for the meta-analysis. The pooled mean reduction in SF-36 MCS scores (after minus before) with JAK inhibitors was 4.95 (4.41-5.48). The pooled mean difference of incremental mean change in SF-36 MCS score between JAK monotherapy and comparator was 1.53 (0.88-2.18). The improvement in SF-36 MCS scores with JAK inhibitor therapy is greater than the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) value of 2.5. However, on separate analysis with comparator drugs like methotrexate and standard treatment, the MCS scores did not exceeded the MCID value and were also not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

JAK inhibitors results in clinically meaningful improvement in the mental health scores of the RA patients.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION ID

2021 CRD42021234466.

Patient-reported outcome measures in systemic lupus erythematosus by a web-based application: A randomized, crossover, agreement study

OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), but not widely used in clinical practice. However, interest in incorporating PROMs into the management of SLE is increasing as PROMs provide a unique insight into the patient's perception of lupus disease activity. The objective was to assess agreement in PROMs answered using a web app versus an outpatient touchscreen among patients with SLE.

METHODS

In a crossover RCT, SLE patients answered the following PROMs in a random order using the web app and the outpatient touchscreen: Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Activity Questionnaire (SLAQ) Global Health, SLAQ Symptom, SLAQ Total, SLAQ Worsening, Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Fatigue VAS, Patient Global Health VAS, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), and an Anchoring Question. Equivalence between the two device types was demonstrated if the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of the difference in PROM scores was within the prespecified equivalence margin. Agreement between the two device types was assessed using mixed linear models.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients with SLE were included. Equivalence was demonstrated between the two device types for SLAQ Global Health with a difference of -0.21 (95% CI: -0.65 to 0.23). Moreover, equivalence was also found for HAQ-DI, Pain VAS, and Fatigue VAS whereas only comparability within the limits of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) was demonstrated for VAS Patient Global Health. Statistical comparability was demonstrated for SLAQ Total, SLAQ Worsening, PASS, and Anchoring Question (no predefined MCID/equivalence margins available). However, a statistically significant difference between device types was observed for the SLAQ Symptom of -0.56 (95% CI: -1.10 to -0.01). The difference was, however, very small when considering the scale range of 0-24; thus, it was not judged to be of clinical relevance. Preference for the web app was very high (91.2%).

CONCLUSION

For the first time ever, equivalence and comparability between two electronic device types for various PROMs were demonstrated among patients with SLE. Implementation of the device is expected to improve the management of SLE.

A Pilot Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Treprostinil in the Treatment of Calcinosis in Systemic Sclerosis

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of oral treprostinil in preventing progression of SSc-associated calcinosis.

METHODS

This prospective open-label study enrolled 12 SSc patients meeting 2013 ACR/EULAR classification criteria with confirmed clinical and radiographic evidence of ≥ 1 calcinosis deposit in the hands. Patients received oral treprostinil for 1 year. Primary endpoints were safety/tolerability and percentage of patients without radiographic progression of calcinosis at 1 year (<25% increase in Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium radiographic score). Secondary endpoints included 1-year changes in Scleroderma HAQ (SHAQ), Cochin Hand Functional Scale, Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 36 (SF-36), Raynaud Condition Score, and patient/physician assessment of calcinosis severity.

RESULTS

Twelve female patients were enrolled, half with diffuse cutaneous disease; median age was 55 (range 35-68) years. Five patients completed the study. Seven patients withdrew due to intolerable adverse effects (n = 3), intercurrent unrelated illness (n = 2, cirrhosis, cancer), progressive SSc (n = 1), and personal reasons (n = 1). Most patients developed headaches and gastrointestinal adverse effects. Four of 11 (36%) patients with 1-year follow-up hand radiographs experienced progression of calcinosis. Of 5 who completed treatment, calcinosis was stable in 4 (80%) with progression in 1. Based on SF-36 Physical (PCS) and Mental (MCS) Component and Domain scores, transition question, and SF-6D utility score, all patients who finished the trial reported overall improvement or no change compared with baseline.

CONCLUSION

Oral treprostinil was poorly tolerated in SSc patients with calcinosis. Of 5 patients who completed treatment, most (80%) had documented stability of calcinosis on hand radiographs at 1 year.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT02663895.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Psoriatic Arthritis Patients with an Inadequate Response to Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs: SELECT-PsA 2

Introduction

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has a major impact on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs), important components in the assessment of therapeutic efficacy. We evaluated the impact of upadacitinib on PROs in PsA patients with inadequate responses or intolerance to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR).

Methods

Patients enrolled in the phase 3 SELECT-PsA 2 randomized controlled trial (RCT) received 56 weeks of oral upadacitinib 15 mg QD, upadacitinib 30 mg QD, or placebo switched to either dose of upadacitinib at week 24. PROs included patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), pain, physical function (HAQ-DI), health-related quality of life (SF-36 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary and domain scores), fatigue (FACIT-F), psoriasis symptom severity (SAPS), and work productivity (WPAI). Mean changes from baseline in PROs, improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) and scores ≥ normative values, and maintenance of improvements were assessed.

Results

At weeks 12 and 24, patients treated with either upadacitinib dose reported statistically and nominally significant improvements from baseline across all PROs versus placebo (p ≤ 0.05), except the WPAI absenteeism domain, which were maintained or further improved to week 56. A significantly greater proportion of patients receiving either upadacitinib dose reported improvements ≥ MCID and scores ≥ normative values versus placebo (nominal p ≤ 0.01) in most PROs at weeks 12 and 24, with clinically meaningful improvements continuing to week 56. Improvements ≥ MCID were reported as early as week 2 in PtGA, pain, and HAQ-DI.

Conclusions

Upadacitinib provides rapid, clinically meaningful, and sustained improvements in PROs reported by bDMARD-IR PsA patients. SELECT-PsA 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03104374.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-021-00377-x.

Improvement in Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Treated with Upadacitinib Versus Placebo or Adalimumab: Results from SELECT-PsA 1

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this work is to assess the effect of upadacitinib versus adalimumab and placebo on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients with inadequate responses to ≥ 1 non-biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (non-bDMARD-IR) in SELECT PsA-1.

METHODS

In this placebo- and active comparator, phase 3 randomized, controlled trial, patients received daily upadacitinib 15 or 30 mg, placebo, or adalimumab 40 mg every other week through 56 weeks. At week 24, placebo-assigned patients were rerandomized to upadacitinib 15 or 30 mg. PROs included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36), EQ-5D-5L index score, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, morning stiffness, Self-Assessment of Psoriasis Symptoms, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment. Mean changes from baseline in PROs, improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID), scores ≥ normative values, and sustained clinically meaningful responses were compared between treatment groups.

RESULTS

At weeks 12 and 24, upadacitinib treatment resulted in improvements from baseline versus placebo across all PROs as well as improvements versus adalimumab in HAQ-DI and SF-36 Physical Component Summary score (nominal p < 0.05). Improvements in PtGA, pain, and HAQ-DI were reported as early as week 2. At week 12, significantly (nominal p < 0.05) more upadacitinib- versus placebo-treated patients reported improvements ≥ MCID across all PROs including seven SF-36 domains. The proportions of upadacitinib-treated patients reporting clinically meaningful improvements at week 12 were similar to or greater than with adalimumab and sustained through week 56. Significantly (nominal p < 0.05) more upadacitinib-treated (both doses) patients reported scores ≥ normative values at week 12 versus placebo, and scores were generally similar to or greater than adalimumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Upadacitinib treatment provides rapid, sustained, and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs in non-bDMARD-IR patients with PsA. SELECT-PsA 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03104400.

Lifestyle factors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis-a cross-sectional study on two Scandinavian cohorts

INTRODUCTION

The risk for cardiovascular diseases and other comorbidities increases with the number of unhealthy lifestyle factors in the general population. However, information on the combined number of unhealthy lifestyle factors in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is scarce.

OBJECTIVES

To study lifestyle factors and the association between disease impact and two or more unhealthy lifestyle factors in two Scandinavian cohorts with RA.

METHODS

We analysed data from two cohorts, Danish (n = 566; mean age 61.82 (SD 11.13) years; 72% women) and Swedish (n = 955; mean age 66.38 (SD 12.90) years; 73% women). Lifestyle factors (tobacco use, BMI, alcohol consumption and physical activity) were dichotomised as healthy vs. unhealthy (range 0-4 unhealthy factors). The association between disease impact and two or more unhealthy lifestyle factors was analysed using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Sixty-six percent of Danish and 47% of Swedish respondents reported two or more unhealthy lifestyle factors, most commonly, being overweight/obese and physical inactivity. For Danish participants, two or more unhealthy lifestyle factors were associated with (OR and 95% CI) male gender (1.86; 1.21-2.85), cardiovascular diseases (1.90; 1.28-2.82) and disease duration (0.97; 0.95-0.99). Corresponding findings for the Swedish cohort were male gender (1.42; 1.07-1.89), pain (1.10; 1.04-1.15), fatigue (1.09; 1.04-1.15), physical functioning (1.64; 1.28-2.10) and quality of life (0.35; 0.20-0.60).

CONCLUSION

Many patients, most often male, in both cohorts had two or more unhealthy lifestyle factors. The number of unhealthy lifestyle factors indicates a multifaceted relationship with disease impact.

Patient-reported outcomes data in patients with psoriatic arthritis from a randomised trial of etanercept and methotrexate as monotherapy or in combination

Objectives

We examined patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in The Study of Etanercept And Methotrexate in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA); a 48-week, phase 3, randomised controlled trial that compared outcomes with methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy, etanercept monotherapy, and MTX+ etanercept in patients with PsA.

Methods

Efficacy endpoints included: mean changes from baseline and proportion of patients who reported improvements≥minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at week 24 in treatment groups for Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, Patient Global Assessment (PtGA), Patient Global Assessment of Joint Pain (PtGAJP) and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 Questionnaire (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS), and Mental Component Summary, and eight domain scores. PROs were analysed as reported (observed), without multiplicity adjustment; therefore, p values are descriptive.

Results

At week 24, patients receiving etanercept monotherapy or MTX+ etanercept combination reported greater improvements (p≤0.05) in PtGA, PtGAJP and SF-36 PCS scores compared with those receiving MTX monotherapy. Compared with MTX monotherapy, higher proportions of patients receiving etanercept monotherapy and combination therapy reported improvements≥MCID in PtGA (etanercept vs MTX, p=0.005) and PtGAJP (MTX +etanercept vs MTX, p=0.038). Across PROs, proportions of patients reporting scores≥age and gender-matched normative values at week 24 ranged from 20.8% to 51.0% with MTX monotherapy, 30.9% to 48.8% with etanercept monotherapy, and 30.6% to 52.3% with MTX+ etanercept combination.

Conclusions

Patients receiving etanercept monotherapy or MTX+ etanercept reported greater improvements from baseline in several PROs compared with those receiving MTX monotherapy. PROs should be incorporated in discussions between patients and clinicians regarding their treatment choices as they can help determine which treatments are more beneficial in patients with PsA.

Patient- and physician-reported outcomes from two phase 3 randomized studies (RAJ3 and RAJ4) of peficitinib (ASP015K) in Asian patients with rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Peficitinib (ASP015K), a novel oral Janus kinase inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy and safety in the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study evaluated the effect of peficitinib on patient- and physician-reported outcomes in Asian patients with RA and an inadequate response to prior disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

METHODS

Patients from two randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trials (RAJ3 and RAJ4) received once-daily peficitinib 100 mg, peficitinib 150 mg, or placebo, alone or in combination with DMARDs (RAJ3), or in combination with methotrexate (RAJ4). Mean changes in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire domain scores from baseline, and percentages of patients achieving minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for patient- and physician-reported outcomes (WPAI, Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [HAQ-DI], and Subject's Global Assessment of Pain [SGAP]), and Physician's Global Assessment of disease activity (PGA) were evaluated at weeks 4, 8, 12, and 12/early termination (ET).

RESULTS

Data from 1025 patients were analyzed. At week 12/ET in both studies, patients who received peficitinib 100 mg or 150 mg reported significantly improved WPAI domain scores from baseline (except for absenteeism in RAJ4) compared with placebo (both doses, p<0.05). A higher proportion of peficitinib- versus placebo-treated patients achieved MCID in WPAI, HAQ-DI, SGAP, and PGA in studies RAJ3 and RAJ4. Significant differences with peficitinib versus placebo were evident in both studies as early as week 4 in HAQ-DI (peficitinib 150 mg only), SGAP, and PGA, and week 8 in WPAI loss of work productivity and daily activity impairment. At week 12/ET, significantly higher proportions of patients receiving peficitinib versus placebo achieved MCID in HAQ-DI, SGAP, PGA, and WPAI domains of presenteeism (RAJ3 only), loss of work productivity (RAJ3 only), and daily activity impairment (p<0.05 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

Peficitinib 100 mg or 150 mg administered daily over 12 weeks resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes that are important to RA patients, including pain, physical function, and work productivity and activity. These observations were reinforced through similar improvements in physicians' rating of disease activity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

RAJ3: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02308163 , registered 4 December 2014. RAJ4: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02305849 , registered 3 December 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.

Fatigue in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis undergoing treat-to-target therapy: predictors and response to treatment

Objectives

Fatigue is a frequent symptom in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and has high impact on quality of life. We explored associations between disease activity and fatigue in patients with early RA during the initial 24 months of modern treat-to-target therapy and predictors of fatigue after 24 months of follow-up.

Methods

Data were obtained from the treat-to-target, tight control Aiming for Remission in Rheumatoid Arthritis: a Randomised Trial Examining the Benefit of Ultrasound in a Clinical Tight Control Regime (ARCTIC) trial. Fatigue was measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 to 100 mm and defined as clinically relevant if VAS was ≥20 mm. Baseline predictors of fatigue at 24 months were analysed by multivariable logistic regression.

Results

205 patients with fatigue data at baseline and 24 months were included. Median (25th, 75th percentiles) symptom duration was 5.4 months (2.8, 10.4), fatigue VAS 37.0 mm (13.0, 62.0) and mean Disease Activity Score (DAS) 3.4 (SD 1.1) at baseline. Prevalence of fatigue declined from 69% at baseline to 38% at 24 months. Fewer swollen joints (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.98, p=0.006), lower power Doppler ultrasound score (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.99, p=0.027) and higher patient global assessment (PGA) (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.04, p<0.001) increased the risk of clinically relevant fatigue at 24 months. Not achieving remission at 6 months was associated with a higher risk of reporting fatigue at 24 months.

Conclusions

Fatigue in patients with early RA was prevalent at disease onset, with a rapid and sustained reduction during treatment. Low objective disease activity and high PGA at baseline were predictors of clinically relevant fatigue at 24 months.

OMERACT Filter 2.1 Instrument Selection for Physical Function Domain in Psoriatic Arthritis: Provisional Endorsement for HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF

OBJECTIVES

Physical function is one of the core domains to be measured in all trials in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We aimed to evaluate two instruments for physical function in PsA: The Health Assessment Questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) and the physical functioning subscale of the Medical Outcome Survey Short-Form 36 items (SF-36 PF).

METHODS

We followed guidelines set out by the OMERACT Filter 2.1. A working group was formed to evaluate each instrument for domain match and feasibility to reach consensus. Two systematic literature reviews (SLRs) were conducted to identify the relevant articles supporting measurement properties of both instruments. Five additional measurement properties were appraised: construct validity, test-retest reliability, longitudinal construct validity, clinical trial discrimination, and threshold of meaning. New evidence was synthesized to fill the gap. Data were presented to the OMERACT technical advisory group (TAG) and the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) community for endorsement.

RESULTS

The results for seven measurement properties for HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF were presented in Summary of Measurement Property (SOMP) tables. The working group proposed "Provisional Endorsement" for both instruments. The body of evidence was approved by the OMERACT TAG. In two Delphi exercises among GRAPPA members, HAQ-DI received 93.9% and 97.5% endorsement votes, while that for SF-36 PF were 86.7% and 77.3%.

CONCLUSION

Both HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF were provisionally endorsed for the measurement of physical function in PsA trials, using the OMERACT Filter 2.1.

Using a novel smartphone application for capturing of patient-reported outcome measures among patients with inflammatory arthritis:A randomized, crossover, agreement study

Objectives: In Denmark, patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) have completed patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) via touchscreens in the outpatient clinic since 2006. However, current technology makes it possible for patients to use their own smartphone via an application (app) developed for the Danish Rheumatology Database (DANBIO). This study aims to evaluate the agreement of PROMs between the DANBIO app and outpatient touchscreen in patients with IA.Method: Patients with IA (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and axial spondyloarthritis) were enrolled in a randomized, crossover, agreement study. Participants answered PROMs through the two device types in a randomized order. Differences in PROM scores with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were evaluated for similarity according to prespecified equivalence margins.Results: The touchscreen invitation was accepted by 138 patients. Sixty patients (20 with each diagnosis) were included. The difference in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index between the two device types was -0.007 (95% CI -0.043 to 0.030); thus, equivalence was demonstrated. In addition, all other PROMs obtained with the two device types were equivalent, except for the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), which was within the limits of minimally clinically important difference (MCID). In total, 78.3% preferred the DANBIO app.Conclusion: In patients with IA, equivalence was demonstrated between two device types for all PROMs except BASDAI; however, BASDAI was within the limits of the MCID. Implementation of the DANBIO app is expected to optimize outpatient visits, thereby improving healthcare for the individual patient and society.

Measurement properties of selected patient-reported outcome measures for use in randomised controlled trials in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The heterogeneous multisystem manifestations of SLE include fatigue, pain, depression, sleep disturbance and cognitive dysfunction, and underscore the importance of a multidimensional approach when assessing health-related quality of life. The US Food and Drug Administration has emphasised the importance of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for approval of new medications and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology has mandated demonstration of appropriate measurement properties of selected PRO instruments.

METHODS

Published information regarding psychometric properties of the Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 36 (SF-36), Lupus Quality of Life Questionnaire (LupusQoL) and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue Scale (FACIT-F), and their suitability as end points in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal observational studies (LOS) were assessed. A search of English-language literature using MEDLINE and EMBASE identified studies related to development and validation of these instruments. Evidence addressed content validity, reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability), construct validity (convergent and divergent) and longitudinal responsiveness, including thresholds of meaning and discrimination.

RESULTS

All instruments demonstrated strong internal consistency, reliability and appropriate face/content validity, indicating items within each instrument that measure the intended concept. SF-36 and LupusQoL demonstrated test-retest reliability; although not published with FACIT-F in SLE supported by evidence from other rheumatic diseases. All instruments demonstrated convergent validity with other comparable PROs and responsivity to treatment.

CONCLUSION

The measurement properties of PRO instruments with published data from RCTs including: SF-36, LupusQoL and FACIT-F indicate their value as secondary end points to support labelling claims in RCTs and LOS evaluating the efficacy of SLE treatments.

A Phase 2b randomized trial of lorecivivint, a novel intra-articular CLK2/DYRK1A inhibitor and Wnt pathway modulator for knee osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

Lorecivivint (LOR; SM04690), an investigational Wnt pathway modulator, previously demonstrated patient-reported and radiographic outcome improvements vs placebo in clinically relevant subjects with moderate to severe knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study's objective was to identify effective LOR doses.

DESIGN

Subjects in this 24-week, Phase 2b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled trial received an intra-articular injection of 2 mL LOR (0.03, 0.07, 0.15, or 0.23 mg), PBO, or dry-needle sham. The primary efficacy endpoints were changes in Pain NRS [0-10], WOMAC Pain [0-100], WOMAC Function [0-100], and radiographic mJSW outcomes, which were measured using baseline-adjusted analysis of covariance at Week 24. Multiple Comparison Procedure-Modeling (MCP-Mod) was performed for dose modeling.

RESULTS

In total, 695/700 subjects were treated. Pain NRS showed significant improvements vs PBO after treatment with 0.07 mg and 0.23 mg LOR at Weeks 12 (-0.96, 95% CI [-1.54, -0.37], P = 0.001; -0.78 [-1.39, -0.17], P = 0.012) and 24 (-0.70 [-1.34, -0.06], P = 0.031; -0.82 [-1.51, -0.12], P = 0.022). Additionally, 0.07 mg LOR significantly improved WOMAC Pain and Function subscores vs PBO at Week 12 (P = 0.04, P = 0.021), and 0.23 mg LOR significantly improved both WOMAC subscores at Week 24 (P = 0.031, P = 0.017). No significant differences from PBO were observed for other doses. No radiographic progression was observed in any group at Week 24. MCP-Mod identified 0.07 mg LOR as the lowest effective dose.

CONCLUSION

This 24-week Phase 2b trial demonstrated the efficacy of LOR on PROs in knee OA subjects. The optimal dose for future studies was identified as 0.07 mg LOR.

Compression gloves for patients with hand arthritis (C-GLOVES): A feasibility study

Introduction

Compression gloves are frequently provided to patients with hand arthritis. Evidence for effectiveness is limited. The aim of this study was to determine feasibility of recruitment, assessment and treatment procedures, in preparation for a future compression glove trial.

Methods

A non-randomised feasibility study with out-patients with either undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis or hand osteoarthritis, with moderate to severe hand pain. All received Isotoner™ compression gloves provided by rheumatology occupational therapists. The main outcomes were feasibility of recruitment, assessment and treatment procedures, trial outcome selection and sample size calculation. Participants were assessed at baseline and four weeks. Assessments included: numeric rating scales (0-10) of hand pain (on activity, at rest, at night) and stiffness; hand joint swelling; finger flexion; and hand function (Grip Ability Test).

Results

Of 318 patients screened, 86/204 (42%) of inflammatory and 68/114 (60%) of hand osteoarthritis patients were eligible. Of these, 41 (48%: age: 59.10 (SD 12.54) years) and 32 (47%: age: 60.75 (SD 8.64) years) respectively, consented. All completed four-week follow-up. Assessment and treatment protocols were feasible. Hand pain on activity and at night, stiffness, joint swelling, finger flexion and hand function improved: e.g. hand pain on activity: inflammatory arthritis change = -0.95 (SD 2.26; p = 0.01); osteoarthritis -1.57 (SD 1.78; p = 0.001). Participants reported improved hand pain, stiffness and hand function as main benefits.

Conclusion

Procedures tested were feasible. The most relevant primary outcome was hand pain on activity. Future trials would need 161 participants (Inflammatory arthritis) and 151 (hand osteoarthritis).Trial registration: Clinical Trials.Gov: NCT01874067.

Upadacitinib improves patient-reported outcomes vs placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from SELECT-COMPARE

Objective

To evaluate the impact of upadacitinib vs placebo and adalimumab treatment, on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in SELECT-COMPARE in an active RA population with inadequate responses to MTX (MTX-IR).

Methods

PROs in patients receiving upadacitinib (15 mg QD), placebo, or adalimumab (40 mg EOW) while on background MTX were evaluated over 48 weeks. PROs included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA) and pain by visual analogue scale (VAS), the HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI), the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), morning (AM) stiffness duration and severity, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy–Fatigue (FACIT-F), and work instability. Least squares mean (LSM) changes and proportions of patients reporting improvements ≥ minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) and scores ≥ normative values were evaluated.

Results

Upadacitinib and adalimumab resulted in greater LSM changes from baseline vs placebo across all PROs (P < 0.05) at week 12, and pain and AM stiffness severity (P < 0.05) at week 2. More upadacitinib- vs placebo-treated (P < 0.05) and similar percentages of upadacitinib- vs adalimumab-treated patients reported improvements ≥ MCID across all PROs at week 12. Upadacitinib vs adalimumab resulted in greater LSM changes from baseline in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, stiffness severity, FACIT-F, and the SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) (all P < 0.05) at week 12. More upadacitinib- vs adalimumab-treated patients reported scores ≥ normative values in HAQ-DI and SF-36 PCS (P < 0.05) at week 12. More upadacitinib- vs adalimumab-treated patients maintained clinically meaningful improvements in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, FACIT-F, and AM stiffness through 48 weeks.

Conclusion

In MTX-IR patients with RA, treatment with upadacitinib resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs equivalent to or greater than with adalimumab.

Trial registration

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

Measurement properties of radiographic outcome measures in Psoriatic Arthritis: A systematic review from the GRAPPA-OMERACT initiative

BACKGROUND

Structural damage is as an important outcome in the Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Domain Set and its assessment is recommended at least once in the development of a new drug.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic review (SR) to identify studies addressing the measurement properties of radiographic outcome instruments for structural damage in PsA and appraise the evidence through the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1 Framework Instrument Selection Algorithm (OFISA).

METHODS

A SR was conducted using search strategies in EMBASE and MEDLINE to identify full-text English studies which aimed to develop or assess the measurement properties of radiographic outcome instruments in PsA. Determination of eligibility and data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers with input from a third to achieve consensus. Two reviewers assessed the methodology and results of eligible studies and synthesized the evidence using OMERACT methodology.

RESULTS

Twelve articles evaluating radiographic instruments were included. The articles assessed nine peripheral (hands, wrists and/or feet) and six axial (spinal and/or sacroiliac joints) radiographic instruments. The peripheral radiographic instruments with some evidence for reliability, cross-sectional construct validity and longitudinal construct validity were the Ratingen and modified Sharp van der Heijde scores. No instruments had evidence for clinical trial discrimination or thresholds of meaning. There was limited evidence for the measurement properties of all identified axial instruments.

CONCLUSION

There are significant knowledge gaps in the responsiveness of peripheral radiographic instruments. Axial radiographic instruments require further validation, and the need to generate novel instruments and utilise other imaging modalities should be considered.

Clinical and cost effectiveness of arthritis gloves in rheumatoid arthritis (A-GLOVES): randomised controlled trial with economic analysis

BACKGROUND

Arthritis (or compression) gloves are widely prescribed to people with rheumatoid arthritis and other forms of hand arthritis. They are prescribed for daytime wear to reduce hand pain and improve hand function, and/or night-time wear to reduce pain, improve sleep and reduce morning stiffness. However, evidence for their effectiveness is limited. The aims of this study were to investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of arthritis gloves compared to placebo gloves on hand pain, stiffness and function in people with rheumatoid arthritis and persistent hand pain.

METHODS

A parallel randomised controlled trial, in adults (≥ 18 years) with rheumatoid or undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis at 16 National Health Service sites in the UK. Patients with persistent hand pain affecting function and/or sleep were eligible. Randomisation (1:1) was stratified by recent change (or not) in medication, using permuted blocks of random sizes. Three-quarter-finger length arthritis gloves (Isotoner®: applying 23-32 mmHg pressure) (intervention) were compared to loose-fitting placebo gloves (Jobskin® classic: providing no/minimal pressure) (control). Both gloves (considered to have similar thermal qualities) were provided by occupational therapists. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded; clinicians were not. The primary outcome was dominant hand pain on activity (0-10) at 12 weeks, analysed using linear regression and intention to treat principles.

RESULTS

Two hundred six participants were randomly assigned (103 per arm) and 163 (84 intervention: 79 control) completed 12-week follow-up. Hand pain improved by 1.0 (intervention) and 1.2 (control), an adjusted mean difference of 0.10 (95% CI: - 0.47 to 0.67; p = 0.72). Adverse events were reported by 51% of intervention and 36% of control group participants; with 6 and 7% respectively, discontinuing glove wear. Provision of arthritis gloves cost £129, with no additional benefit.

CONCLUSION

The trial provides evidence of no clinically important effect of arthritis gloves on any of the trial outcomes (hand pain, function and stiffness) and arthritis gloves are not cost-effective. The clinical and cost-effectiveness results support ceasing provision of arthritis gloves in routine clinical practice.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN, ISRCTN25892131 ; Registered 05/09/2016: retrospectively registered.