Opioid Use in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis Is Common in the United States: Outcomes of a Retrospective Cohort Study

Opioid use surrounding diagnosis and follow-up in patients with ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis: Results from US claims databases

OBJECTIVE

To describe patients' use of opioids in the year preceding and year following new diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis (AS), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), or rheumatoid arthritis (RA), compared with patients without the/se diseases.

METHODS

This study used US IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters (CCAE) and Medicaid data and included three cohorts, comprised of incident cases of AS, PsA, or RA (2010-2017). Three matched comparator patients (without the incident disease) were selected for each patient within the disease cohort. Opioid use and appropriate treatment exposure (as defined by US guideline recommendations) in the 12-month baseline and follow-up periods were evaluated using descriptive analyses.

RESULTS

Prevalence of claims for opioids was higher for disease cohorts vs. comparators in CCAE; 36.4% of patients with AS, 29.5% with PsA, and 44.4% with RA did not have any claim for guideline-appropriate therapy in follow-up. Prevalence of claims for opioids was also higher for disease cohorts vs. comparators in Medicaid; 30.6% of patients with AS, 36.6% with PsA, and 65.4% with RA did not have any claim for guideline-appropriate therapy in follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with AS, PsA, or RA, there was high reliance on opioids at and around the time of diagnosis. Significant proportions of patients were not on appropriate treatment as defined by professional society post-diagnosis guidelines; this discordance between actual patient therapies and treatment recommendations may suggest a need for better awareness of appropriate pain management and treatment strategies in rheumatic diseases. Key Points • This study analysed opioid use among patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), or rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and adds to current knowledge by expanding beyond assessment of opioid use at diagnosis, to the year before and after diagnosis. • Opioid use was found to be highly prevalent in AS, PsA, and RA in the year prior to diagnosis and, interestingly, was still seen during the year after diagnosis. • Opioids are neither disease modifying, nor a targeted/recommended treatment for chronic autoimmune diseases. In addition to their association with significant economic costs, opioids are potentially hazardous and are not better than alternative treatments with superior safety profiles. • The reasons behind opioid prescribing patterns should be explored further to support movement to targeted therapies.

Analgesic prescribing in patients with inflammatory arthritis in England: observational studies in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

OBJECTIVES

Despite little evidence that analgesics are effective in inflammatory arthritis (IA), studies report substantial opioid prescribing. The extent this applies to other analgesics is uncertain. We undertook a comprehensive evaluation of analgesic prescribing in patients with IA in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum to evaluate this.

METHODS

From 2004 to 2020, cross-sectional analyses evaluated analgesic prescription annual prevalence in RA, PsA and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), stratified by age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation and geography. Joinpoint regression evaluated temporal prescribing trends. Cohort studies determined prognostic factors at diagnosis for chronic analgesic prescriptions using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Analgesic prescribing declined over time but remained common: 2004 and 2020 IA prescription prevalence was 84.2/100 person-years (PY) (95% CI 83.9, 84.5) and 64.5/100 PY (64.2, 64.8), respectively. In 2004, NSAIDs were most prescribed (56.1/100 PY; 55.8, 56.5), falling over time. Opioids were most prescribed in 2020 (39.0/100 PY; 38.7, 39.2). Gabapentinoid prescribing increased: 2004 prevalence 1.1/100 PY (1.0, 1.2); 2020 prevalence 9.9/100 PY (9.7, 10.0). Most opioid prescriptions were chronic (2020 prevalence 23.4/100 PY [23.2, 23.6]). Non-NSAID analgesic prescribing was commoner in RA, older people, females and deprived areas/northern England. Conversely, NSAID prescribing was commoner in axSpA/males, varying little by deprivation/geography. Peri-diagnosis was high-risk for starting chronic opioid/NSAID prescriptions. Prognostic factors for chronic opioid/gabapentinoid and NSAID prescriptions differed, with NSAIDs having no consistently significant association with deprivation (unlike opioids/gabapentinoids).

CONCLUSION

IA analgesic prescribing of all classes is widespread. This is neither evidence-based nor in line with guidelines. Peri-diagnosis is an opportune moment to reduce chronic analgesic prescribing.

Incidence Rate and Factors Associated With Fractures Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Ankylosing Spondylitis in the United States

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the incidence rate and factors associated with fractures among adults with ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study with data from the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness registry linked to Medicare claims from 2016 to 2018. Patients were required to have two AS International Classification of Diseases codes 30 or more days apart and a subsequent Medicare claim. Then, 1 year of baseline characteristics were included, after which patients were observed for fractures. First, we calculated the incidence rate of fractures. Second, we constructed logistic regression models to identify factors associated with the fracture, including age, sex, race and ethnicity, body mass index, Medicare/Medicaid dual eligibility, area deprivation index, Charlson comorbidity index, smoking status, osteoporosis, historical fracture, and use of osteoporosis treatment, glucocorticoids, and opioids.

RESULTS

We identified 1,426 adults with prevalent AS. Mean ± SD age was 69.4 ± 9.8 years, 44.3% were female, and 77.3% were non-Hispanic White. Fractures occurred in 197 adults with AS. The overall incidence rate of fractures was 76.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] 66.4-88.6) per 1,000 person-years. Older age (odds ratio [OR] 2.8, 95% CI 1.39-5.65), historical fracture (OR 5.24, 95% CI 3.44-7.99), and use of more than 30 mg morphine equivalent (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.08-3.19) conferred increased odds of fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large sample of Medicare beneficiaries with AS, increasing age, historical fracture, and use of opioids had higher odds of fracture. Men and women were equally likely to have a fracture. Because opioid use was associated with fracture in AS, this high-risk population should be considered for interventions to mitigate risk.

Review of publications evaluating opioid use in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article discusses publications assessing the prevalence, efficacy, and safety of opioid analgesics in patients with rheumatic diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and systemic sclerosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies show long-term opioid use is common in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease. We did not find any studies demonstrating improved function or pain control with long-term opioid use in people with rheumatic diseases. Some data shows potential adverse effects including increased risk for fractures and opioid poisoning hospitalizations. There is evidence demonstrating an association of opioid use with mental health disorders, fibromyalgia, obesity, and disability, although causative links have not been established. Only minimal reductions in opioid use were observed after initiation of biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Studies have shown delayed DMARD initiation and reduced DMARD use in patients on opioids, raising concerns that these analgesics may delay care or initially mask symptoms of active disease.

SUMMARY

Available literature highlights high levels of opioid use in people with rheumatic disease, without scientific evidence to support efficacy for chronic pain control and increasing evidence of adverse events. These findings strongly suggest that opioids do not have a routine role in the chronic management of inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

Geographic Variations in Diagnosis and Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis in the United States: A Real-World Study

Introduction

Diagnosis difficulties are common for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients, leading to inadequate and inconsistent treatment. We evaluated the national and geographic variability in disease diagnosis and treatment in the United States.

Methods

This retrospective, cross-sectional analysis utilized the IBM® MarketScan® Administrative Claims Database from 2014 to 2019. AS patients ≥ 18 years of age with continuous medical and pharmacy enrollment during the calendar year and complete geographic information during the study period were included. Patient cohorts assessed were D1 (≥ 1 AS diagnoses within each calendar year of assessment between 2014 and 2019), D2 (≥ 2 non-rheumatologist AS diagnoses), and D3 (≥ 2 rheumatologist AS diagnoses). For D2 and D3, diagnoses were ≥ 6 months apart, but within 18 months. Annual AS diagnostic prevalence and treatment rates were determined from 2014 to 2019 nationally and per state in 2019. Treatments assessed were disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), corticosteroids, and methotrexate.

Results

Nationally, AS diagnostic prevalence increased from 2014 to 2019, with 2019 rates of 9.6 (D1), 5.1 (D2), and 3.5 (D3) per 10,000 persons. Diagnostic prevalence varied between states, which was not explained by age, sex, racial distribution, or rheumatologists per capita. Nationally, a greater percentage of D3 patients vs. D1 and D2 patients received biologic/targeted synthetic DMARDs (bDMARD/tsDMARDs) and conventional synthetic DMARD. Opioid use ranged from 37 to 40% in 2019 and decreased from 2014 for all cohorts. Corticosteroid and methotrexate use decreased slightly, while NSAID and bDMARD/tsDMARD use generally increased from 2014 to 2019.

Conclusions

AS diagnostic prevalence is increasing nationally, though it remains low among some states. bDMARD/tsDMARDs use was more common among patients treated by rheumatologists. Opioid and corticosteroid use is decreasing, though national rates remain high with significant state variability. Further education is needed, particularly in states with low prevalence and inadequate treatment, to improve diagnosis and treatment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-021-00406-9.

Analgesia Prescribing in Patients with Inflammatory Arthritis in England: An Observational Study Using Electronic Healthcare Record Data

Objectives

International data suggest inflammatory arthritis (IA) pain management frequently involves opioid prescribing, despite little evidence of efficacy, and potential harms. We evaluated analgesic prescribing in English National Health Service-managed patients with IA.

Methods

Repeated cross-sectional analyses in the Consultations in Primary Care Archive (primary care consultation and prescription data in nine general practices from 2000 to 2015) evaluated the annual prevalence of analgesic prescriptions in: (i) IA cases (RA, PsA or axial spondyloarthritis [SpA]), and (ii) up to five age-, sex- and practice-matched controls. Analgesic prescriptions were classified into basic, opioids, gabapentinoids and oral NSAIDs, and sub-classified into chronic and intermittent (≥3 and 1–2 prescriptions per calendar year, respectively).

Results

In 2000, there were 594 cases and 2652 controls, rising to 1080 cases and 4703 controls in 2015. In all years, most (65.3–78.5%) cases received analgesics, compared with fewer (37.5–41.1%) controls. Opioid prescribing in cases fell between 2000 and 2015 but remained common with 45.4% (95% CI: 42.4%, 48.4%) and 32.9% (95% CI: 29.8%, 36.0%) receiving at least 1 and ≥3 opioid prescriptions, respectively, in 2015. Gabapentinoid prescription prevalence in cases increased from 0% in 2000 to 9.5% (95% CI: 7.9%, 11.4%) in 2015, and oral NSAID prescription prevalence fell from 53.7% (95% CI: 49.6%, 57.8%) in 2000 to 25.0% (95% CI: 22.4%, 27.7%) in 2015. Across years, analgesic prescribing was commoner in RA than PsA/axial SpA, and 1.7–2.0 times higher in cases than controls.

Conclusions

Analgesic prescribing in IA is common. This is at variance with existing evidence of analgesic efficacy and risks, and guidelines. Interventions are needed to improve analgesic prescribing in this population.

Treatment Satisfaction and Decision-making from the Patient Perspective in Axial Spondyloarthritis: Real-World Data from a Descriptive Cross-sectional Survey Study from the ArthritisPower Registry

Objective

Aims were to 1) to characterize patient decision‐making with treatment for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and 2) to explore relationships among decision‐making, treatment satisfaction, and biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs).

Methods

ArthritisPower participants with physician‐diagnosed axSpA were invited to complete an online survey about their treatment and their most recent physician visit. Analysis compared treatment decision by satisfaction and bDMARD status.

Results

Among the 274 participants, 87.2% were female, and the mean age was 50 years. Of participants, 79.5% had researched treatment before their most recent physician visit, and 56.9% discussed treatment change at their most recent physician visit. Of treatment‐change discussions, 69.2% of them were related to escalation, compared with deescalation (27.6%) and/or switching (39.1%). Among those participants who discussed a change, 73.7% agreed to it because they felt that their disease was not being controlled (54.9%) or felt that it could be better controlled on new treatment (20.3%). Top symptoms prompting change were back/buttock pain (63.3%), other joint pain (55.1%), and fatigue (54.1%). Among bDMARD‐treated participants (n = 128), important factors for treatment decisions were prevention of long‐term axSpA consequences (92.9%) and doctor's advice (87.5%). Among 43.4% of participants reporting treatment dissatisfaction, 37% did not discuss treatment change. Current bDMARD use was more common in satisfied (61.9%) than dissatisfied participants (26.9%).

Conclusion

In this cross‐sectional study of a predominantly female axSpA population, patients frequently researched treatment options and discussed escalation with their providers. Under two‐thirds of participants who were dissatisfied with treatment discussed changes at their most recent visit. Current bDMARD use was associated with higher satisfaction, and bDMARD users considered prevention of long‐term consequences and doctor's advice to be very important for decision‐making.

Opioid use frequency in early axial spondyloarthritis in Finland - a pharmacoepidemic register study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate opioid use among incident axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) patients compared to general population.

METHODS

From the national register, we identified all adult patients with axSpA (ICD-10 codes M45-46), who between 2010 and 2014 (index date, ID) were for the first time granted special reimbursement for any disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Three matched population controls were identified for each patient. Drug purchases were evaluated between 2009-15, and opioid use was analyzed for one year before and after the ID. The Defined Daily Dose (DDD) was used as a tool to assess the opioid consumption before and after the biological (b) DMARD initiation.

RESULTS

We identified 3,577 axSpA patients and 10,573 controls. Of these patients, 97.2% started a conventional synthetic (cs) DMARD during a year after ID and 23.4% switched later to a self-injected bDMARD between the ID and 31 Dec 2015 (median follow-up 3.4 years). Opioids were purchased at least once by 29.8% and 21.7% of the patients in the years before and after the ID, respectively, compared to 8.1% and 7.8% of the controls. The proportion of opioid-using patients was greatest during the last quarter before the ID [relative risk (RR) 4.72 (95% CI 4.14 to 5.39)] compared to controls, and it remained higher [RR 2.84 (2.59 to 3.11)] also after the start of csDMARDs. DDD of opioid consumption decreased from 7.7 to 1.6/1,000 inhabitants after bDMARD initiation.

CONCLUSION

Considerably more axSpA patients than population controls used opioids. The opioid consumption by dose decreased clearly after bDMARD initiation.

The Annual Diagnostic Prevalence of Ankylosing Spondylitis and Axial Spondyloarthritis in the United States Using Medicare and MarketScan Databases

Objective

The objective of this study was to investigate the diagnostic prevalence of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) in the United States and examine treatment patterns for these diseases.

Methods

This retrospective observational cohort study drew from 2006‐2014 data in the US Medicare Fee‐for‐Service and IBM MarketScan databases. AS and axSpA diagnoses were identified through International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision [ICD‐9] codes. Diagnostic prevalence (per 10,000 patients) was calculated as patients with AS and axSpA with full insurance coverage in each calendar year divided by the total patients with full insurance coverage in the same year. Two diagnosis definitions were used: definition 1 (D1), one or more relevant ICD‐9 codes from hospital claims or two or more relevant ICD‐9 codes from outpatient claims; definition 2 (D2), one or more codes from hospital/outpatient claims. Primary analyses assessed annual AS and axSpA prevalence (D1); sensitivity analyses assessed annual (D2) and 2‐year prevalence. Patterns in prevalence and treatment use were analyzed descriptively; no statistical tests were performed.

Results

An increase in AS prevalence (per 10,000 patients) was seen from 2006 to 2014 in primary analyses (Medicare: 2.12‐3.60; MarketScan: 0.85‐1.42) and sensitivity analyses. A similar trend occurred for axSpA (Medicare: 4.39‐6.52; MarketScan: 1.33‐2.21). For Medicare, the proportion of patients with AS (D1) using tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors (TNFis), conventional synthetic antirheumatic drugs (csARDs), nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and glucocorticoids remained relatively stable; for MarketScan, TNFi‐treated patients increased (51.7% to 65.7%) and NSAID‐treated patients decreased (63.5% to 55.7%).

Conclusion

AS and axSpA prevalence may have increased in the United States between 2006 and 2014. Reasons are unknown, but this may be due to increased disease awareness, among other factors.

The Prevalence of Opioid Analgesic Use in People with Chronic Noncancer Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

OBJECTIVE

To review studies examining the proportion of people with chronic noncancer pain who report consuming opioids and characteristics associated with their use.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

We searched databases from inception to February 8, 2020, and conducted citation tracking. We included observational studies reporting the proportion of adults with chronic noncancer pain who used opioid analgesics. Opioids were categorized as weak (e.g., codeine) or strong (e.g., oxycodone). Study risk of bias was assessed, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations provided a summary of the overall quality. Results were pooled using a random-effects model. Meta-regression determined factors associated with opioid use.

RESULTS

Sixty studies (N=3,961,739) reported data on opioid use in people with chronic noncancer pain from 1990 to 2017. Of these 46, 77% had moderate risk of bias. Opioid use was reported by 26.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.1-30.8; moderate-quality evidence) of people with chronic noncancer pain. The use of weak opioids (17.3%; 95% CI 11.9-24.4; moderate-quality evidence) was more common than the use of strong opioids (9.8%; 95% CI, 6.8-14.0; low-quality evidence). Meta-regression determined that opioid use was associated with geographic region (P=0.02; lower in Europe than North America), but not sampling year (P=0.77), setting (P=0.06), diagnosis (P=0.34), or disclosure of funding (P=0.77).

CONCLUSIONS

Our review summarized data from over 3.9 million people with chronic noncancer pain reporting their opioid use. Between 1990 and 2017, one-quarter of people with chronic noncancer pain reported taking opioids, and this proportion did not change over time.

Variations in Long-term Opioid Therapy Definitions: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies Using Routinely Collected Data (2000-2019)

Routinely collected data have been increasingly used to assess long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) patterns, with very little guidance on how to measure LTOT from these data sources. We conducted a systematic review of studies published between January 2000 and July 2019 to catalogue LTOT definitions, the rationale for definitions and LTOT rates in observational research using routinely collected data in nonsurgical settings. We screened 4056 abstracts, 210 full-text manuscripts and included 128 studies, mostly from the United States (81%) and published between 2015 and 2019 (69%). We identified 78 definitions of LTOT, commonly operationalised as 90 days of use within a year (23%). Studies often used multiple criteria to derive definitions (60%), mostly based on measures of duration, such as supply days/days of use (66%), episode length (21%) or prescription fills within specified time periods (12%). Definitions were based on previous publications (63%), clinical judgment (16%) or empirical data (3%); 10% of studies applied more than one definition. LTOT definition was not provided with enough details for replication in 14 studies and 38 studies did not specify the opioids evaluated. Rates of LTOT within study populations ranged from 0.2% to 57% according to study design and definition used. We observed a substantial rise in the last 5 years in studies evaluating LTOT with large variability in the definitions used and poor reporting of the rationale and implementation of definitions. This variation impacts on research reproducibility, comparability of findings and the development of strategies aiming to curb therapy that is not guideline-recommended.

Identifying Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis in Large Datasets: Expanding Possibilities for Observational Research

OBJECTIVE

Observational research of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is limited by a lack of methods for identifying diverse axSpA phenotypes in large datasets. Algorithms were previously designed to identify a broad spectrum of patients with axSpA, including patients not identifiable with diagnosis codes. The study objective was to estimate the performance of axSpA identification methods in the general Veterans Affairs (VA) population.

METHODS

A patient sample with known axSpA status (n = 300) was established with chart review. For feasibility, this sample was enriched with veterans with axSpA risk factors. Algorithm performance outcomes included sensitivities, positive predictive values (PPV), and F1 scores (an overall performance metric combining sensitivity and PPV). Performance was estimated with unweighted outcomes for the axSpA-enriched sample and inverse probability weighted (IPW) outcomes for the general VA population. These outcomes were also assessed for traditional identification methods using diagnosis codes for the ankylosing spondylitis (AS) subtype of axSpA.

RESULTS

The mean age was 54.7 and 92% were male. Unweighted F1 scores (0.59-0.74) were higher than IPW F1 scores (0.48-0.65). The full algorithm had the best overall performance (F1_IPW 0.65). The Early Algorithm was the most inclusive (sensitivity_IPW 0.90, PPV_IPW 0.38). The traditional method using ≥ 2 AS diagnosis codes from rheumatology had the highest PPV (PPV_IPW 0.84, sensitivity_IPW 0.34).

CONCLUSION

The axSpA identification methods demonstrated a range of performance attributes in the general VA population that may be appropriate for various types of studies. The novel identification algorithms may expand the scope of research by enabling identification of more diverse axSpA populations.

Chronic Opioid Therapy: A Scoping Literature Review on Evolving Clinical and Scientific Definitions

The management of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) with chronic opioid therapy (COT) is controversial. There is a lack of consensus on how COT is defined resulting in unclear clinical guidance. This scoping review identifies and evaluates evolving COT definitions throughout the published clinical and scientific literature. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. A total of 227 studies were identified from 8,866 studies published between January 2000 and July 2019. COT definitions were classified by pain population of application and specific dosage/duration definition parameters, with results reported according to PRISMA-ScR. Approximately half of studies defined COT as "days' supply duration >90 days" and 9.3% defined as ">120 days' supply," with other days' supply cut-off points (>30, >60, or >70) each appearing in <5% of total studies. COT was defined by number of prescriptions in 63 studies, with 16.3% and 11.0% using number of initiations or refills, respectively. Few studies explicitly distinguished acute treatment and COT. Episode duration/dosage criteria was used in 90 studies, with 7.5% by Morphine Milligram Equivalents + days' supply and 32.2% by other "episode" combination definitions. COT definitions were applied in musculoskeletal CNCP (60.8%) most often, and typically in adults aged 18 to 64 (69.6%). The usage of ">90 days' supply" COT definitions increased from 3.2 publications/year before 2016 to 20.7 publications/year after 2016. An increasing proportion of studies define COT as ">90 days' supply." The most recent literature trends toward shorter duration criteria, suggesting that contemporary COT definitions are increasingly conservative. PERSPECTIVE: This study summarized the most common, current definition criteria for chronic opioid therapy (COT) and recommends adoption of consistent definition criteria to be utilized in practice and research. The most recent literature trends toward shorter duration criteria overall, suggesting that COT definition criteria are increasingly stringent.

Opioid Use among Patients with Early Inflammatory Arthritides Compared to the General Population

OBJECTIVE

To assess to what extent the worldwide opioid epidemic affects Finnish patients with early inflammatory arthritis (IA).

METHODS

From the nationwide register maintained by the Social Insurance Institution of Finland, we collected all incident adult patients with newly onset seropositive and seronegative rheumatoid arthritis (RA+ and RA-) and undifferentiated arthritis (UA) between 2010 and 2014. For each case, 3 general population (GP) controls were matched according to age, sex, and place of residence. Drug purchases between 2009 and 2015 were evaluated 1 year before and after the index date (date of IA diagnosis), further dividing this time into 3-month periods.

RESULTS

A total of 12,115 patients (66% women) were identified. At least 1 opioid purchase was done by 23-27% of the patients 1 year before and 15-20% one year after the index date. Relative risk (RR) of opioid purchases compared to GP was highest during the last 3-month time period before the index date [RR 2.81 (95% CI 2.55-3.09), 3.06 (2.68-3.49), and 4.04 (3.51-4.65) for RA+, RA-, and UA, respectively] but decreased after the index date [RR 1.38 (1.23-1.58), 1.91 (1.63-2.24), and 2.51 (2.15-2.93)]. Up to 4% of the patients were longterm users both before and after the diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

During 2009-15 in Finland, opioid use peaked just before the diagnosis of IA but decreased rapidly after that, suggesting effective disease control, especially in seropositive RA. Further, opioids were used to treat arthritis pain of patients with incident RA and UA less often than previously reported from other countries.

Application of machine learning in the diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review article, we describe the development and application of machine-learning models in the field of rheumatology to improve the detection and diagnosis rates of underdiagnosed rheumatologic conditions, such as ankylosing spondylitis and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

RECENT FINDINGS

In an attempt to aid in the earlier diagnosis of axSpA, we developed machine-learning models to predict a diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis and axSpA using administrative claims and electronic medical record data. Machine-learning algorithms based on medical claims data predicted the diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis better than a model developed based on clinical characteristics of ankylosing spondylitis. With additional clinical data, machine-learning algorithms developed using electronic medical records identified patients with axSpA with 82.6-91.8% accuracy. These two algorithms have helped us understand potential opportunities and challenges associated with each data set and with different analytic approaches. Efforts to refine and validate these machine-learning models are ongoing.

SUMMARY

We discuss the challenges and benefits of machine-learning models in healthcare, along with potential opportunities for its application in the field of rheumatology, particularly in the early diagnosis of axSpA and ankylosing spondylitis.

Use of prescription opioids among patients with rheumatic diseases compared to patients with hypertension in the USA: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Long-term opioid prescribing has increased amid concerns over effectiveness and safety of its use. We examined long-term prescription opioid use among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS), compared with patients with hypertension (HTN).

METHODS

We used Truven MarketScan, a US commercial claims database (2003-2014) and identified RA, SLE, PsA and AS cohorts, each matched by age and sex to patients with HTN. We compared long-term opioid prescription use during 1 year of follow-up and used multivariable Poisson regression model to estimate the relative risk (RR) of receiving opioid prescriptions based on underlying disease cohort.

RESULTS

We identified 181 710 RA (mean age 55.3±13.1, 77% female), 45 834 SLE (47.1±13.1, 91% female), 30 307 PsA (49.7±11.5, 51% female), 7686 AS (44.6±12.0, 39% female) and parallel numbers of age-matched and sex-matched patients with HTN. The proportion of patients receiving long-term opioid prescriptions, and other measures of opioid prescriptions were higher among rheumatic disease cohorts and highest in patients with AS. AS was associated with the highest RR of receiving long-term opioid prescriptions (RR 2.73, 95% CI 2.60 to 2.87) versus HTN, while RRs were 2.21 (2.16 to 2.25) for RA, 1.94 (1.87 to 2.00) for PsA and 1.82 (1.77 to 1.88) for SLE.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with rheumatic disease have higher rates of long-term opioid prescriptions, and patients with AS have the highest risk of receiving opioid prescriptions versus patients with HTN. Further studies investigating the effectiveness of disease-targeted treatments on decreasing opioid use in these four rheumatic diseases may provide strategies for reducing prescription opioids.