OP0266 TREATMENT DISCONTINUATION DUE TO ADVERSE EVENTS AS AN OVERALL MEASURE OF TOLERANCE AND SAFETY OF JAK-INHIBITORS: AN INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION OF REGISTRIES OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS (THE “JAK-pot” STUDY)

Background

The recently presented “ORAL Surveillance Study” has suggested increased risk of serious adverse events (AEs) with tofacitinib, a JAK-inhibitor (JAKi), compared to a comparator TNF-inhibitor (TNFi). Currently, there is limited real world evidence for the tolerability and safety of JAKi (1).

Objectives

To assess the safety of JAKi compared to other biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in a real-world population, by evaluating treatment discontinuation for AEs.

Methods

Pooled patient database from 16 national RA registries from across Europe, Québec (Canada), Turkey, and Israel were used. Treatment discontinuation due to AEs by treatment groups, JAKi versus (vs) TNFi and JAKi vs bDMARDs with other modes of action (OMA), were compared as an overall measure of tolerability and safety of JAKi. Standard descriptive statistics were used for baseline characteristics. We plotted unadjusted cumulative incidence, then the cause-specific Cox model was used to account for competing risks, and to obtain association between covariates and the instantaneous hazard rate for AEs. Variables listed in Table 1 were used for adjustment in the fully-adjusted cause-specific Cox model.

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics of the study population

JAKi1(BARI, FILGO,TOFA,UPA)OMA2(ABA, ANAK, SARI, TOCI)TNFi3(ADA, CERT, ETAN, GOL, INFL)n = 9208n = 16737n = 64533Treatment duration* (yrs)0.7 [0.2, 1.7]1.1 [0.4, 2.8]1.5 [0.5, 3.9]Age57.556.853.2Female (%)81.380.773.2Disease duration (yrs)9.913.110.7Seropositivity (%)78.775.969.8Previous b/tsDMARD (%) 034.030.859.7 120.925.924.3 216.621.710.4 3 or more28.521.55.6Concomitant GC (%)44.650.741.3Concomitant CsDMARD (%)  MTX22.622.028.8  MTX + other9.59.713.1  None50.552.543.5  Other17.415.914.7CRP13.2 (24.1)13.3 (25.6)12.3 (24.1)CDAI23.7 (13.8)22.9 (13.5)22.6 (14.0)DAS 284.7 (1.5)4.7 (1.6)4.6 (1.6)HAQ1.2 (0.7)1.2 (0.7)1.1 (0.7)BMI27.1 (5.9)26.8 (5.8)26.8 (5.8)Patients with at least one Comorbidity (%)51.753.949.6

csDMARDs = classical synthetic DMARDs, MTX = methotrexate, GC = glucocorticoids, CRP = C-reactive protein, CDAI = Clinical Disease Activity Index, DAS 28 = Disease Activity Score 28, HAQ = Health Assessment Questionnaire, BMI = Body Mass Index, *Treatment duration (median [IQR]) = Last visit date – start date (if treatment is ongoing), treatment stop date – treatment start date (if treatment has stopped)

. 1BARI (baricitinib; 44.41 %), FILGO (filgotinib; 0.23%), TOFA (tofacitinib; 49.59%), UPA (upadacitinib; 5.78%); 2ABA (abatacept; 39.96%), ANAK (anakinra; 2.64%), SARI (sarilumab; 3.14%), TOCI (tocilizumab; 52.55%); 3ADA (adalimumab; 31.00%), CERT (certolizumab; 8.33%), ETAN (etanercept; 38.83%), GOLI (golimumab; 9.36%), INFL (infliximab; 12.56%)

Results

90,478 treatment courses were included in the analysis (Table 1). We observed similar crude incidence rate of treatment discontinuation due to AEs between JAKi and TNFi, but less in JAKi vs OMA (Figure 1). The fully adjusted hazard rate of treatment stop for AEs was also similar in JAKi vs TNFi (HR = 1.02 (95% CI 0.92 – 1.13)), and in JAKi vs OMA (HR= 1.08 (95% CI 0.97 – 1.20)). The rate of treatment stop for AEs was higher in women (HR = 1.29 (95% CI 1.21 – 1.37)) and with an increasing number of previous b/tsDMARDs (HR = 1.50; 1.48; 1.68 for 1, 2, and 3 or more previous b/ts DMARDs, respectively).

Figure 1.

Comparison of cumulative incidence of treatment discontinuation for adverse events in JAKi, TNFi, and OMA group

Conclusion

After adjusting for potential confounders, the rate of treatment discontinuation for AEs was comparable between JAKi and OMA or TNFi. Treatment discontinuation for AEs comprises a wide range of AEs; future analyses will be performed to investigate specific AEs, such as cancer, serious infections or major adverse cardiovascular events.

References

[1]Ann Rheum Dis 2022. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-221915.

Disclosure of Interests

Eric Nham: None declared, Romain Aymon: None declared, Denis Mongin: None declared, Sytske Anne Bergstra: None declared, Denis Choquette Speakers bureau: DC reports speaker or consultant fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Fresenius-Kabi,Pfizer, Novartis, Sandoz, Tevapharm, Consultant of: Stated above, Catalin Codreanu Speakers bureau: CC reports speaker/consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Richter, Consultant of: Stated above, Ori Elkayam Consultant of: OE has received consultant and honorary fees from Pfizer, Lilly, Abbvie, Novartis, Jansen, BI, Kimme Hyrich Speakers bureau: KLH has received speaker honoraria from Abbvie, Grant/research support from: KLH has received grant income from Pfizer and BMS, Florenzo Iannone Speakers bureau: FI has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, SOBI, Roche and UCB, Consultant of: Stated above, Nevsun Inanc Speakers bureau: NI has received consultant and speaker/honoraria from Abbvie, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Amgen, Celltrion,UCB., Consultant of: Stated above, Lianne Kearsley-Fleet: None declared, Eirik kristianslund: None declared, Tore K. Kvien Speakers bureau: TKK has received fees for speaking and/or consulting from several companies among them Pfizer, AbbVie, Lilly and Galapagos/Gilead, Consultant of: Stated above, Burkhard Leeb Speakers bureau: BFL has received speaker honoraria from Sandoz, Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Grünenthal, Biogen, Celgene, Galina Lukina Speakers bureau: GVL has received speaker fees from Abbvie, Lilly, Novartis, MSD, Roche, Pfizer, Dan Nordström Consultant of: DCN has acted as consultant for AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Karel Pavelka Speakers bureau: KP has received honoraria for lectures: MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Eli Lilly, Medac, UCB, SOBI, Biogen, Sandoz, Viatris, Manuel Pombo-Suarez Speakers bureau: MPS reports advisor and speaker honoraria from Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Sanofi, Consultant of: Stated above, Ziga Rotar Speakers bureau: ZR has received fees for speaking/consulting from several companies among them Pfizer, AbbVie, and Eli Lilly, Consultant of: Stated above, Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: MJS has received speaker fees from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Delphine Courvoisier: None declared, Kim Lauper Speakers bureau: KL reports speakers fees for Pfizer, Viatris and Celltrion, Consultant of: KL reports consulting fees for Pfizer, Axel Finckh Speakers bureau: AF reports honoraria and consultancies from Pfizer, BMS, MSD, Eli-Lilly, AbbVie, Galapagos, Mylan, UCB, Viatris, Consultant of: Stated above, Grant/research support from: AF reports grants from Pfizer INC, AbbVie, Galapagos, Eli Lilly

POS0208 GENDER DIFFERENCES IN RESPONSE TO BIOLOGICALS. WOMEN FARE WORSE ACROSS INFLAMMATORY ARTHRITIS DISEASES - DATA FROM THE BIOREG

Background:

Gender differences in prevalence and disease course are known in various rheumatic diseases; however, investigations of gender difference concerning therapeutical response have yielded variable results.

Objectives:

The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate, whether a gender difference in response rate to biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and apremilast in bDMARD-naïve patients could be observed across the three most prevalent inflammatory arthritis diseases: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondylarthritis (SpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Additionally, a response to individual TNF blockers was investigated in this respect.

Methods:

Data from bDMARD-naïve RA-, SpA- and PsA-patients from Bioreg, the Austrian registry for biological DMARDs in rheumatic diseases, were used. Patients with a baseline (Visit 1=V1) and follow-up visits at 6 months (Visit 2=V2) and 12 months (Visit 3=V3) were included and response to therapy with TNF-inhibitors (TNFi), furthermore to therapy with rituximab, tocilizumab and apremilast was analyzed according to gender. The remaining bDMARDs were not analyzed due to small numbers. Key response-parameter for RA was disease activity score (DAS28), whereas for PsoA the Stockerau Activity Score for Psoriatic Arthritis (SASPA) and for SpA the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) were employed; in addition, the Health assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) was used. Data were analyzed in R Statistic stratified by gender using Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon tests.

Results:

354 women and 123 men with RA (n=477), 81 women and 69 men with PsA (n=150), 121 women and 191 men with SpA (n=312) were included. No significant differences in biometrics was seen between female and male patients at baseline in all diseases.

In RA patients overall DAS28 decreased from baseline (V1) to V2 and V3 (DAS28: V1: male: 4.38 [3.66, 5.11], female: 4.30 [3.68, 5.03], p(m/f) = 0.905; V2: male: 2.66 [1.73, 3.63], female: 3.10 [2.17, 3.98], p(m/f) = 0.015; V3: male: 2.25 [1.39, 3.36], female: 3.01 [1.87, 3.87], p(m/f) = 0.002). For TNF inhibitors (n=311), there was a significant difference between genders at V2 (Fig.1a). Patients receiving Rituximab (n=41) displayed a significantly higher DAS28 at baseline in females, which diminished in the follow up: V1: (p(m/f) p=0.002; V2: p=0.019; V3: p=0.13); response to tocilizumab (n=63) did not show any gender differences.

In PsA patients overall SASPA decreased from baseline (V1) to V2 and V3 (SASPA: V1: male: 4.00 [2.80, 5.20], female: 4.40 [2.80, 5.80], p(m/f) = 0.399; V2: male: 2.20 [1.20, 3.50], female: 3.40 [2.00, 5.00], p(m/f) = 0.071; V3: male: 1.80 [0.80, 2.70], female: 3.01 [2.35, 4.80], p(m/f) = 0.001). For TNF inhibitors (n=79), there was a significant difference between genders at V3 (Fig 1a). For Apremilast (n=39), there was a significant difference between genders at V2 (Fig.1c).

In SpA patients overall BASDAI decreased from baseline (V1) to V2 and V3 (BASDAI: V1: male: 4.70 [2.88, 6.18], female: 4.80 [3.30, 6.20], p(m/f) = 0.463; V2: male: 3.05 [2.00, 4.60], female: 3.64 [2.62, 5.41], p(m/f) = 0.039; V3: male: 3.02 [1.67, 4.20], female: 3.65 [2.18, 5.47], p(m/f) = 0.016). In V3 a differential BASDAI in response to TNFi (n=299) was observed (Fig.1a).

Possible differences of response to individual TNFi (etanercept, infliximab, other TNFi) measured by HAQ were investigated in all diseases together. The difference between male and females was significant at baseline for all 3 TNFi; whereas with the use of ETA the significant difference was carried through to V2 and V3, it was lost with the use of IFX and was variable with the other TNFi (Fig.1b)

Figure 1.

Conclusion:

Female patients showed a statistically lower response to TNFi in all three disease entities (RA, SpA and PsoA) to a variable degree in our homogenous central european population. Interestingly, the difference was not uniform across individual TNFi when measured by HAQ. Gender differences were also seen in response to Apremilast.

Disclosure of Interests:

Elisabeth Loibner: None declared, Valentin Ritschl: None declared, Burkhard Leeb Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Actiopharm, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Kwizda, Celgene, Sandoz, Grünenthal, Eli-Lilly, Grant/research support from: TRB, Roche, Consultancies: AbbVie, Amgen, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Celgene, Grünenthal, Kwizda, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Sandoz;, Peter Spellitz: None declared, Gabriela Eichbauer-Sturm: None declared, Jochen Zwerina: None declared, Manfred Herold: None declared, Miriam Stetter: None declared, Rudolf Puchner Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Janssen, Kwizda, MSD, Pfizer, Celgene, Grünenthal, Eli-Lilly, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Pfizer, Celgene, Grünenthal, Eli-Lilly, Franz Singer: None declared, Ruth Fritsch-Stork: None declared

POS0093 HETEROGENEITY IN ADVERSE EVENT ASSESSMENT BETWEEN COUNTRIES PARTICIPATING IN AN INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION OF REGISTRIES OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS USING JANUS KINASE INHIBITORS (THE JAK-POT STUDY)

Background:

Industry, regulators, and the rheumatology community have recognized the need for observational studies to monitor the safety of new antirheumatic agents. Registries provide a unique opportunity to understand the safety of newer therapies, but pharmacovigilance studies require large number of patients to evaluate rare drug-related adverse-events (AEs). Because JAK-inhibitors (JAKi) have only recently been approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, it makes sense to combine data from several registries in order to obtain a sufficiently large sample size to promote earlier detection of adverse events.

Objectives:

The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate how AEs are assessed in the various registries in preparation for a collaborative pharmacovigilance analysis, and present preliminary results.

Methods:

The “JAK-pot” collaboration includes 19 RA registries. The principal investigators of the participating registries were sent a structured questionnaire on AE assessment and 18 (94%) provided complete responses on the AE assessment procedures of their registries. We present simple descriptive statistics of the AE assessment procedures employed by the participating registries.

Results:

The 19 registries represent 7186 patients initiating a JAKi (Table 1), who are on average 57 years old, with a mean disease duration 11 years, seropositive (83%), female (82%) and with moderate disease activity at treatment initiation.

Table 1.Country, registryN° of patients on JAKi includedAustria, BIOREG87Belgium, TARDIS2113Canada, RHUMADATA363Czech Republic, ATTRA197Denmark, DANBIO506Finland, ROB-FIN229Germany, RABBIT620Italy, GISEA244Israel, I-RECORD96Netherlands, METEOR4Norway, NOR-DMARD97Portugal, REUMA.PT44Romania, RRBR252Russia, ARBITER428Slovenia, biorx.si141Spain, BIOBADASER139Switzerland, SCQM738Turkey, TURKBIO404UK, BSRBR484

After ineffectiveness, AEs was the second most common reason for JAKi discontinuation (25.5%), with large differences between registries (Figure 1).

Of the participating registries, 2 registries do not collect AEs, while 16 (89%) assess incident AEs, by means of a pre-specified extraction form (3 registries), by free text (5 registries), by a combination of both (6 registries) and/or the use of linkage to external electronic records (3registries). AEs are coded using a predefined coding system by 11 registries (MeDRA (8), other (3)), but nearly all are recording the severity of the AE (15, 94%), AE related-death (15, 94%), or AE-related hospitalisation (15, 94%). AEs of special interest, such as serious infections (15, 94%), thromboembolic events (15, 94%), or shingles (9, 56%), are recorded by most registries. Incident AEs are linked by the treating physician to specific therapies in 11 registries (69%), while the other 5 registries extrapolate potential causal associations based on therapy start and stop dates. A pre-specified adjudication process for AEs is made only by 5 registries (31%).

Conclusion:

Substantial heterogeneity exists among registries regarding AE assessment within the JAK-pot collaboration. These differences must be taken into account when analysing the safety of JAKi across different countries in collaborative studies. For comparative analyses, stratified analyses by country are required to account for differential AE assessment and varying degrees of potential under-reporting.

Disclosure of Interests:

Kim Lauper: None declared, Denis Mongin: None declared, Sytske Anne Bergstra: None declared, Denis Choquette: None declared, Catalin Codreanu: None declared, Diederik De Cock: None declared, Lene Dreyer: None declared, Ori Elkayam: None declared, Kimme Hyrich: None declared, Florenzo Iannone: None declared, Nevsun Inanc: None declared, Eirik kristianslund: None declared, Tore K. Kvien: None declared, Burkhard Leeb: None declared, Galina Lukina: None declared, Dan Nordström: None declared, Karel Pavelka: None declared, Manuel Pombo-Suarez: None declared, Ziga Rotar: None declared, Maria Jose Santos: None declared, Anja Strangfeld: None declared, Delphine Courvoisier: None declared, Axel Finckh Speakers bureau: Eli-Lilly, Pfizer, Consultant of: Eli-Lilly, Pfizer, Grant/research support from: BMS, Pfizer.

OP0231 COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF JAK-INHIBITORS, TNF-INHIBITORS, ABATACEPT AND IL-6 INHIBITORS IN AN INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION OF REGISTERS OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS (THE “JAK-POT” STUDY)

Background:

In many countries, JAK-inhibitors (JAKi) have only recently been approved as treatment for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Objectives:

To evaluate the effectiveness of JAKi compared to bDMARDs in RA patients in the real-world population in an international collaboration of registers (the “JAK-pot” collaboration).

Methods:

Patients initiating either JAKi, TNFi, IL-6i or abatacept (ABA) during a time period when JAKi were available in each country (19 registers, Table) were included. We compared the effectiveness of JAKi and bDMARDs in terms of retention using crude and adjusted survival analysis. Missing covariates were imputed using multiple imputation.

Results:

Among 25521 included patients, 6063 initiated a JAKi, 13879 a TNFi, 2348 ABA, and 3231 an IL-6i. Patients were on average 55 years old, with a mean disease duration 10 years, mostly seropositive (67%), female (77%) and with moderate disease activity at treatment initiation. The main reason of stopping treatment was ineffectiveness (49%), followed by adverse events (21%). Patients on JAKi were treated more often as monotherapy, had higher CRP and disease activity at baseline and had experienced more previous ts/bDMARDs. Crude median retention was 1.4 (95% CI 1.2-1.5) years for JAKi, 1.6 (1.6-1.7) for TNFi, 1.5 (1.3-1.7) for IL6i and 1.1 (1.0-1.3) for ABA. After adjustment, the hazard ratio (HR) for discontinuation tended to be lower for JAKi (HR 0.86 (0.65-1.13)) compared to TNFi, but comparable for ABA (1.02 (0.94-1.10)) and IL6i (0.99 (0.88-1.10)) (Figure 1). HRs differed notably between countries (Figure 2).

Table 1.

Registers

Country, registerNJAKi, n (%)Austria, BIOREG*Belgium, TARDIS62882113 (33.6)Canada, RHUMADATA528114 (21.6)Czech Republic, ATTRA374253 (67.6)Denmark, DANBIO4721506 (10.7)Finland, ROB-FIN807234 (29.0)Germany, RABBIT*Italy, GISEA757250 (33.0)Israel, I-RECORD40094 (23.5)Netherlands, METEOR16424 (0.2)Norway, NOR-DMARD50799 (19.5)Portugal, REUMA.PT79744 (5.5)Romania, RRBR593328 (55.3)Russia, ARBITER526483 (91.8)Slovenia, BIORX.SI583146 (25.0)Spain, BIOBADASER781139 (17.8)Switzerland, SCQM2956796 (26.9)Turkey, TURKBIO2150397 (18.5)UK, BSRBR111163 (5.7)

*Registers planning to participate in future studies but not included yet

Conclusion:

The adjusted overall drug retention of JAKi tended to be higher than for TNFi, with large variation between countries. Other measures of effectiveness, such as the evaluation of CDAI remission and low disease activity are planned to shape a more comprehensive picture of JAKi effectiveness in the real world.

Disclosure of Interests:

Kim Lauper: None declared, Denis Mongin: None declared, Sytske Anne Bergstra: None declared, Denis Choquette Grant/research support from: Rhumadata is supported by grants from Pfizer, Amgen, Abbvie, Gylead, BMS, Novartis, Sandoz, eli Lilly,, Consultant of: Pfizer, Amgen, Abbvie, Gylead, BMS, Novartis, Sandoz, eli Lilly,, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Amgen, Abbvie, Gylead, BMS, Novartis, Sandoz, eli Lilly,, Catalin Codreanu Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Diederik De Cock: None declared, Lene Dreyer: None declared, Ori Elkayam Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Novartis, Jansen, Kimme Hyrich Grant/research support from: Pfizer, UCB, BMS, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Florenzo Iannone Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Nevsun Inanc: None declared, Eirik kristianslund: None declared, Tore K. Kvien Grant/research support from: Received grants from Abbvie, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD and Roche (not relevant for this abstract)., Consultant of: Have received personal fees from Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lily, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Orion Pharma, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Sanofi and Mylan (not relevant for this abstract)., Paid instructor for: Have received personal fees from Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lily, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Orion Pharma, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Sanofi and Mylan (not relevant for this abstract)., Speakers bureau: Have received personal fees from Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lily, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Orion Pharma, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Sanofi and Mylan (not relevant for this abstract)., Burkhard Leeb Grant/research support from: chairman of BioReg, Consultant of: AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Lilly, Grünenthal, Gebro,, Paid instructor for: Lilly, Biogen, Speakers bureau: Biogen, Lilly, Pfizer, Grünenthal, Astropharma,, Galina Lukina Speakers bureau: Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Abbvie, Biocad, MSD, Roche, Dan Nordström Consultant of: Abbvie, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB., Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB., Karel Pavelka Consultant of: Abbvie, MSD, BMS, Egis, Roche, UCB, Medac, Pfizer, Biogen, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, MSD, BMS, Egis, Roche, UCB, Medac, Pfizer, Biogen, Manuel Pombo-Suarez Consultant of: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Ziga Rotar Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: Novartis and Pfizer, Anja Strangfeld Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Delphine Courvoisier: None declared, Axel Finckh Grant/research support from: Pfizer: Unrestricted research grant, Eli-Lilly: Unrestricted research grant, Consultant of: Sanofi, AB2BIO, Abbvie, Pfizer, MSD, Speakers bureau: Sanofi, Pfizer, Roche, Thermo Fisher Scientific

Biologika-Therapien in Österreich. Daten aus dem Österreichischen Biologika-Register BioReg

In Österreich wurde vergleichsweise spät im Jahre 2009, das „Biologikaregister für entzündlich rheumatische Erkrankungen e. V.“, kurz BioReg, gegründet, mit den auch in anderen Ländern verfolgten Zielen, jene PatientInnen, die mit Biologika behandelt werden, hinsichtlich Tolerabilität und Effektivität zu dokumentieren. Aus dem Vereinsmodell ergibt sich die Freiwilligkeit der Teilnahme von Verschreibern, vergleichbar dem deutschen RABBIT Register. Mit Ende Mai 2017 waren insgesamt 2132 PatientInnen in die Datenbank eingeschlossen, davon waren 1157 PatientInnen mit Rheumatoider Arthritis (RA), 497 mit Spondylitis ankylosans (SpA), 401 mit Arthritis psoriatica (PsA) und 77 PatientInnen mit sonstigen rheumatischen Erkrankungen (SERE). Österreichs Rheumatologen initiieren – im Vergleich zu europäischen Kollegen – eine bDMARD-Therapie bereits bei RA Patienten mit hoch moderater Krankheitsaktivität. Der Behinderungsgrad der Patienten unter Biologika-Therapie kann insgesamt niedrig gehalten werden, was natürlich auch für den Erhalt der Berufsfähigkeit von Bedeutung ist. Außergewöhnliche Nebenwirkungen wurden bisher nicht beobachtet, die in BioReg aufgetretenen Nebenwirkungen entsprechen den bereits aus Studien bekannten. Die Häufigkeit der Anwendung der einzelnen Präparate ist durchaus mit der in Deutschland vergleichbar, auch die Retentionsraten sind nicht wesentlich unterschiedlich. Register, wie auch BioReg, zeigen den „heimlichen“ Normalfall der Behandlung von Patientinnen und Patienten mit entzündlich rheumatischen Erkrankungen und liefern damit einen wesentlichen Beitrag zur Qualitätssicherung.

Improving inflammatory arthritis management through tighter monitoring of patients and the use of innovative electronic tools

Treating to target by monitoring disease activity and adjusting therapy to attain remission or low disease activity has been shown to lead to improved outcomes in chronic rheumatic diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritis. Patient-reported outcomes, used in conjunction with clinical measures, add an important perspective of disease activity as perceived by the patient. Several validated PROs are available for inflammatory arthritis, and advances in electronic patient monitoring tools are helping patients with chronic diseases to self-monitor and assess their symptoms and health. Frequent patient monitoring could potentially lead to the early identification of disease flares or adverse events, early intervention for patients who may require treatment adaptation, and possibly reduced appointment frequency for those with stable disease. A literature search was conducted to evaluate the potential role of patient self-monitoring and innovative monitoring of tools in optimising disease control in inflammatory arthritis. Experience from the treatment of congestive heart failure, diabetes and hypertension shows improved outcomes with remote electronic self-monitoring by patients. In inflammatory arthritis, electronic self-monitoring has been shown to be feasible in patients despite manual disability and to be acceptable to older patients. Patients' self-assessment of disease activity using such methods correlates well with disease activity assessed by rheumatologists. This review also describes several remote monitoring tools that are being developed and used in inflammatory arthritis, offering the potential to improve disease management and reduce pressure on specialists.

Multinational evidence-based recommendations for pain management by pharmacotherapy in inflammatory arthritis: integrating systematic literature research and expert opinion of a broad panel of rheumatologists in the 3e Initiative

OBJECTIVE

To develop evidence-based recommendations for pain management by pharmacotherapy in patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA).

METHODS

A total of 453 rheumatologists from 17 countries participated in the 2010 3e (Evidence, Expertise, Exchange) Initiative. Using a formal voting process, 89 rheumatologists representing all 17 countries selected 10 clinical questions regarding the use of pain medications in IA. Bibliographic fellows undertook a systematic literature review for each question, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and 2008-09 European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR abstracts. Relevant studies were retrieved for data extraction and quality assessment. Rheumatologists from each country used this evidence to develop a set of national recommendations. Multinational recommendations were then formulated and assessed for agreement and the potential impact on clinical practice.

RESULTS

A total of 49,242 references were identified, from which 167 studies were included in the systematic reviews. One clinical question regarding different comorbidities was divided into two separate reviews, resulting in 11 recommendations in total. Oxford levels of evidence were applied to each recommendation. The recommendations related to the efficacy and safety of various analgesic medications, pain measurement scales and pain management in the pre-conception period, pregnancy and lactation. Finally, an algorithm for the pharmacological management of pain in IA was developed. Twenty per cent of rheumatologists reported that the algorithm would change their practice, and 75% felt the algorithm was in accordance with their current practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Eleven evidence-based recommendations on the management of pain by pharmacotherapy in IA were developed. They are supported by a large panel of rheumatologists from 17 countries, thus enhancing their utility in clinical practice.

Rituximab in psoriatic arthritis: an exploratory evaluation

Background/objective

Current therapies for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) comprise synthetic drugs and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. In contrast, other biologicals including rituximab (RTX) are available for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). RTX is effective in autoantibody positive RA patients, although some efficacy has been reported in seronegative individuals. RTX has not yet been assessed in PsA. Therefore, an open label study of RTX in PsA was performed.

Patients and methods

Nine patients with PsA and 14 with RA received RTX at 1000 mg twice within 14 days and were evaluated over 6 months.

Results

A PsA response criteria response was attained in 56% of patients. DAS28 improved from 6.2 to 4.9 (medians) in PsA and 6.4 to 5.2 in RA, and Health Assessment Questionnaire from 1.5 to 1.0 and from 2.1 to 1.4, respectively (all p≤0.05). Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis changed from 52.0 to 32.5 (p<0.05); C reactive protein and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index did not change significantly. RTX was tolerated well.

Conclusions

In this exploratory open study, RTX exhibited significant efficacy in PsA patients with long-standing disease. Thus, RTX may have efficacy in PsA warranting a randomised controlled clinical trial.

EULAR evidence based recommendations for gout. Part II: Management. Report of a task force of the EULAR Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutics (ESCISIT)

OBJECTIVE

To develop evidence based recommendations for the management of gout.

METHODS

The multidisciplinary guideline development group comprised 19 rheumatologists and one evidence based medicine expert representing 13 European countries. Key propositions on management were generated using a Delphi consensus approach. Research evidence was searched systematically for each proposition. Where possible, effect size (ES), number needed to treat, relative risk, odds ratio, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated. The quality of evidence was categorised according to the level of evidence. The strength of recommendation (SOR) was assessed using the EULAR visual analogue and ordinal scales.

RESULTS

12 key propositions were generated after three Delphi rounds. Propositions included both non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments and addressed symptomatic control of acute gout, urate lowering therapy (ULT), and prophylaxis of acute attacks. The importance of patient education, modification of adverse lifestyle (weight loss if obese; reduced alcohol consumption; low animal purine diet) and treatment of associated comorbidity and risk factors were emphasised. Recommended drugs for acute attacks were oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), oral colchicine (ES = 0.87 (95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 1.50)), or joint aspiration and injection of corticosteroid. ULT is indicated in patients with recurrent acute attacks, arthropathy, tophi, or radiographic changes of gout. Allopurinol was confirmed as effective long term ULT (ES = 1.39 (0.78 to 2.01)). If allopurinol toxicity occurs, options include other xanthine oxidase inhibitors, allopurinol desensitisation, or a uricosuric. The uricosuric benzbromarone is more effective than allopurinol (ES = 1.50 (0.76 to 2.24)) and can be used in patients with mild to moderate renal insufficiency but may be hepatotoxic. When gout is associated with the use of diuretics, the diuretic should be stopped if possible. For prophylaxis against acute attacks, either colchicine 0.5-1 mg daily or an NSAID (with gastroprotection if indicated) are recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

12 key recommendations for management of gout were developed, using a combination of research based evidence and expert consensus. The evidence was evaluated and the SOR provided for each proposition.

EULAR evidence based recommendations for gout. Part I: Diagnosis. Report of a task force of the Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutics (ESCISIT)

OBJECTIVE

To develop evidence based recommendations for the diagnosis of gout.

METHODS

The multidisciplinary guideline development group comprised 19 rheumatologists and one evidence based medicine expert, representing 13 European countries. Ten key propositions regarding diagnosis were generated using a Delphi consensus approach. Research evidence was searched systematically for each proposition. Wherever possible the sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio (LR), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated for diagnostic tests. Relative risk and odds ratios were estimated for risk factors and co-morbidities associated with gout. The quality of evidence was categorised according to the evidence hierarchy. The strength of recommendation (SOR) was assessed using the EULAR visual analogue and ordinal scales.

RESULTS

10 key propositions were generated though three Delphi rounds including diagnostic topics in clinical manifestations, urate crystal identification, biochemical tests, radiographs, and risk factors/co-morbidities. Urate crystal identification varies according to symptoms and observer skill but is very likely to be positive in symptomatic gout (LR = 567 (95% confidence interval (CI), 35.5 to 9053)). Classic podagra and presence of tophi have the highest clinical diagnostic value for gout (LR = 30.64 (95% CI, 20.51 to 45.77), and LR = 39.95 (21.06 to 75.79), respectively). Hyperuricaemia is a major risk factor for gout and may be a useful diagnostic marker when defined by the normal range of the local population (LR = 9.74 (7.45 to 12.72)), although some gouty patients may have normal serum uric acid concentrations at the time of investigation. Radiographs have little role in diagnosis, though in late or severe gout radiographic changes of asymmetrical swelling (LR = 4.13 (2.97 to 5.74)) and subcortical cysts without erosion (LR = 6.39 (3.00 to 13.57)) may be useful to differentiate chronic gout from other joint conditions. In addition, risk factors (sex, diuretics, purine-rich foods, alcohol, lead) and co-morbidities (cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and chronic renal failure) are associated with gout. SOR for each proposition varied according to both the research evidence and expert opinion.

CONCLUSIONS

10 key recommendations for diagnosis of gout were developed using a combination of research based evidence and expert consensus. The evidence for diagnostic tests, risk factors, and co-morbidities was evaluated and the strength of recommendation was provided.

EULAR evidence based recommendations for the management of hip osteoarthritis: report of a task force of the EULAR Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutics (ESCISIT)

OBJECTIVE

To develop evidence based recommendations for the management of hip osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

The multidisciplinary guideline development group comprised 18 rheumatologists, 4 orthopaedic surgeons, and 1 epidemiologist, representing 14 European countries. Each participant contributed up to 10 propositions describing key clinical aspects of hip OA management. Ten final recommendations were agreed using a Delphi consensus approach. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and HTA reports were searched systematically to obtain research evidence for each proposition. Where possible, outcome data for efficacy, adverse effects, and cost effectiveness were abstracted. Effect size, rate ratio, number needed to treat, and incremental cost effectiveness ratio were calculated. The quality of evidence was categorised according to the evidence hierarchy. The strength of recommendation was assessed using the traditional A-D grading scale and a visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

Ten key treatment propositions were generated through three Delphi rounds. They included 21 interventions, such as paracetamol, NSAIDs, symptomatic slow acting disease modifying drugs, opioids, intra-articular steroids, non-pharmacological treatment, total hip replacement, osteotomy, and two general propositions. 461 studies were identified from the literature search for the proposed interventions of efficacy, side effects, and cost effectiveness. Research evidence supported 15 interventions in the treatment of hip OA. Evidence specific for the hip was strikingly lacking. Strength of recommendation varied according to category of research evidence and expert opinion.

CONCLUSION

Ten key recommendations for the treatment of hip OA were developed based on research evidence and expert consensus. The effectiveness and cost effectiveness of these recommendations were evaluated and the strength of recommendation was scored.

Expression of resistance markers to methotrexate predicts clinical improvement in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate is transported into the cell by the reduced folate carrier (RFC) and out of the cell by members of the multidrug resistance protein family (MRP). Transport proteins may affect the therapeutic efficacy of this drug in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the potential benefit of the presence of RFC and the absence of functional MRP for the efficacy of methotrexate treatment.

METHODS

The study involved 163 patients (116 female, 47 male; mean age 59.5 years) on methotrexate (mean weekly dose 12.2 mg). RFC was determined using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, and MRP function by flow cytometry, using a calcein acetoxymethylesther/probenecid assay. Clinical response to methotrexate was evaluated by the EULAR response criteria and the ACR 20% improvement criteria. The clinical data were obtained at the beginning of methotrexate treatment and at the time of blood sampling during ongoing therapy. Patients were divided into four groups according to the presence (+) or absence (-) of RFC and functional (f) MRP.

RESULTS

fMRP+/RFC+ and fMRP-/RFC- patients more often had good EULAR response rates (60%, p = 0.014, and 53%, p = 0.035, respectively) in comparison with the fMRP-/RFC+ group (29%); fMRP+/RFC- patients had a low frequency of good disease activity responses.

CONCLUSIONS

Absence of fMRP plus presence of RFC did not prove to be related to beneficial effects of methotrexate, but the lack or the presence of both fMRP and RFC led to a significantly better therapeutic outcome. Determination of these markers may predict responsiveness to methotrexate.

EULAR Recommendations 2003: an evidence based approach to the management of knee osteoarthritis: Report of a Task Force of the Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutic Trials (ESCISIT)

OBJECTIVES

To update the EULAR recommendations for management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) by an evidence based medicine and expert opinion approach.

METHODS

The literature search and guidelines were restricted to treatments for knee OA pertaining to clinical and/or radiological OA of any compartment of the knee. Papers for combined treatment of knee and other types of OA were excluded. Medline and Embase were searched using a combination of subject headings and key words. Searches for those treatments previously investigated were conducted for January 1999 to February 2002 and for those treatments not previously investigated for 1966 to February 2002. The level of evidence found for each treatment was documented. Quality scores were determined for each paper, an effect size comparing the treatment with placebo was calculated, where possible, and a toxicity profile was determined for each treatment modality.

RESULTS

497 new publications were identified by the search. Of these, 103 were intervention trials and included in the overall analysis, and 33 treatment modalities were identified. Previously identified publications which were not exclusively knee OA in the initial analysis were rejected. In total, 545 publications were included. Based on the results of the literature search and expert opinion, 10 recommendations for the treatment of knee OA were devised using a five stage Delphi technique. Based on expert opinion, a further set of 10 items was identified by a five stage Delphi technique as important for future research.

CONCLUSION

The updated recommendations support some of the previous propositions published in 2000 but also include modified statements and new propositions. Although a large number of treatment options for knee OA exist, the evidence based format of the EULAR Recommendations continues to identify key clinical questions that currently are unanswered.

Patient and physician satisfaction with aceclofenac: results of the European Observational Cohort Study (experience with aceclofenac for inflammatory pain in daily practice). Aceclofenac is the treatment of choice for patients and physicians in the management of inflammatory pain

A pan-European study involving 23407 patients with pain due to various inflammatory or degenerative rheumatic diseases was undertaken in Austria, Belgium, Germany and Greece, to evaluate overall pain relief and satisfaction with aceclofenac therapy. Aceclofenac was considered by patients to be a highly efficacious treatment with excellent and fast analgesic activity that was maintained throughout the study period. At the conclusion of the study, assessment of patient status, a parameter encompassing both efficacy against inflammatory pain and tolerability, by both patient and physician, was either much improved or improved in 84% of cases. These evaluations were similar irrespective of the country or whether the indication was acute (e.g. post-pain) or chronic pain (e.g. osteoarthritis). Patient satisfaction with, and compliance of, aceclofenac therapy was similarly impressive; 90% of patients were satisfied and over 90% of patients were treatment compliant. In combination with the recently published SAMM study results, the findings of the European Observational Cohort study validate aceclofenac, in everyday clinical practice, as an effective, well-tolerated and well-accepted therapy for both acute and chronic inflammatory and degenerative disease. The availability of a powerful anti-inflammatory agent with a low incidence of side-effects is of considerable value to both the patient and physician in the management of inflammatory pain. This objective has been fulfilled with aceclofenac therapy.

EULAR recommendations for the management of knee osteoarthritis: report of a task force of the Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutic Trials (ESCISIT)

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disease encountered throughout Europe. A task force for the EULAR Standing Committee for Clinical Trials met in 1998 to determine the methodological and logistical approach required for the development of evidence based guidelines for treatment of knee OA. The guidelines were restricted to cover all currently available treatments for knee OA diagnosed either clinically and/or radiographically affecting any compartment of the knee.

METHODS

The first stage was the selection of treatment modalities to be considered. The second stage comprised a search of the electronic databases Medline and Embase using a combination of subject headings and keywords. All European language publications in the form of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials, controlled trials, and observational studies were included. During stage three all the relevant studies were quality scored. The summary statistics for validated outcome measures, when available, were recorded and, where practical, the numbers needed to treat and the effect size for each treatment were calculated. In the fourth stage key clinical propositions were determined by expert consensus employing a Delphi approach. The final stage ranked these propositions according to the available evidence. A second set of propositions relating to a future research agenda was determined by expert consensus using a Delphi approach.

RESULTS

Over 2400 English language publications and 400 non-English language publications were identified. Seven hundred and forty four studies presented outcome data of the effects of specific treatments on knee OA. Quantitative analysis of treatment effect was possible in only 61 studies. Recommendations for the management of knee OA based on currently available data and expert opinion are presented. Proposals for a future research agenda are highlighted.

CONCLUSIONS

These are the first clinical guidelines on knee OA to combine an evidence based approach and a consensus approach across a wide range of treatment modalities. It is apparent that certain clinical propositions are supported by substantial research based evidence, while others are not. There is thus an urgent need for future well designed trials to consider key clinical questions.

Therapeutic efficacy of multiple intravenous infusions of anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody combined with low-dose weekly methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and safety of multiple infusions of a chimeric monoclonal anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha antibody (cA2) (infliximab; Remicade, Centocor, Malvern, PA) given alone or in combination with low-dose methotrexate (MTX) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.

METHODS

In a 26-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, 101 patients with active RA exhibiting an incomplete response or flare of disease activity while receiving low-dose MTX were randomized to 1 of 7 groups of 14-15 patients each. The patients received either intravenous cA2 at 1, 3, or 10 mg/kg, with or without MTX 7.5 mg/week, or intravenous placebo plus MTX 7.5 mg/week at weeks 0, 2, 6, 10, and 14 and were followed up through week 26.

RESULTS

Approximately 60% of patients receiving cA2 at 3 or 10 mg/kg with or without MTX achieved the 20% Paulus criteria for response to treatment, for a median duration of 10.4 to >18.1 weeks (P < 0.001 versus placebo). Patients receiving cA2 at 1 mg/kg without MTX became unresponsive to repeated infusions of cA2 (median duration 2.6 weeks; P=0.126 versus placebo). However, coadministration of cA2 at 1 mg/kg with MTX appeared to be synergistic, prolonging the duration of the 20% response in >60% of patients to a median of 16.5 weeks (P < 0.001 versus placebo; P=0.006 versus no MTX) and the 50% response to 12.2 weeks (P < 0.001 versus placebo; P=0.002 versus no MTX). Patients receiving placebo infusions plus suboptimal low-dose MTX continued to have active disease, with a Paulus response lasting a median of 0 weeks. A 70-90% reduction in the swollen joint count, tender joint count, and C-reactive protein level was maintained for the entire 26 weeks in patients receiving 10 mg/kg of cA2 with MTX. In general, treatment was well tolerated and stable blood levels of cA2 were achieved in all groups, except for the group receiving 1 mg/kg of cA2 alone, at which dosage antibodies to cA2 were observed in approximately 50% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Multiple infusions of cA2 were effective and well tolerated, with the best results occurring at 3 and 10 mg/kg either alone or in combination with MTX in approximately 60% of patients with active RA despite therapy with low-dose MTX. When cA2 at 1 mg/kg was given with low-dose MTX, synergy was observed. The results of the trial provide a strategy for further evaluation of the efficacy and safety of longer-term treatment with cA2.

Therapeutic efficacy of multiple intravenous infusions of anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody combined with low-dose weekly methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and safety of multiple infusions of a chimeric monoclonal anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha antibody (cA2) (infliximab; Remicade, Centocor, Malvern, PA) given alone or in combination with low-dose methotrexate (MTX) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.

METHODS

In a 26-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, 101 patients with active RA exhibiting an incomplete response or flare of disease activity while receiving low-dose MTX were randomized to 1 of 7 groups of 14-15 patients each. The patients received either intravenous cA2 at 1, 3, or 10 mg/kg, with or without MTX 7.5 mg/week, or intravenous placebo plus MTX 7.5 mg/week at weeks 0, 2, 6, 10, and 14 and were followed up through week 26.

RESULTS

Approximately 60% of patients receiving cA2 at 3 or 10 mg/kg with or without MTX achieved the 20% Paulus criteria for response to treatment, for a median duration of 10.4 to >18.1 weeks (P < 0.001 versus placebo). Patients receiving cA2 at 1 mg/kg without MTX became unresponsive to repeated infusions of cA2 (median duration 2.6 weeks; P=0.126 versus placebo). However, coadministration of cA2 at 1 mg/kg with MTX appeared to be synergistic, prolonging the duration of the 20% response in >60% of patients to a median of 16.5 weeks (P < 0.001 versus placebo; P=0.006 versus no MTX) and the 50% response to 12.2 weeks (P < 0.001 versus placebo; P=0.002 versus no MTX). Patients receiving placebo infusions plus suboptimal low-dose MTX continued to have active disease, with a Paulus response lasting a median of 0 weeks. A 70-90% reduction in the swollen joint count, tender joint count, and C-reactive protein level was maintained for the entire 26 weeks in patients receiving 10 mg/kg of cA2 with MTX. In general, treatment was well tolerated and stable blood levels of cA2 were achieved in all groups, except for the group receiving 1 mg/kg of cA2 alone, at which dosage antibodies to cA2 were observed in approximately 50% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Multiple infusions of cA2 were effective and well tolerated, with the best results occurring at 3 and 10 mg/kg either alone or in combination with MTX in approximately 60% of patients with active RA despite therapy with low-dose MTX. When cA2 at 1 mg/kg was given with low-dose MTX, synergy was observed. The results of the trial provide a strategy for further evaluation of the efficacy and safety of longer-term treatment with cA2.

Low serum hyaluronan in psoriatic arthritis patients in comparison to rheumatoid arthritis patients

OBJECTIVE

Serum hyaluronan (HA) was determined in 37 patients suffering from psoriatic arthritis (PSA), 39 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 31 with osteoarthritic joint disease (OA) and 26 healthy controls (C) in order to examine earlier reports that HA levels are increased in the serum of RA and to assess whether this finding is also relevant for PSA, another inflammatory joint disease, since HA in serum is considered a sign of inflammation in general.

METHOD

HA in the serum samples was measured with an enzyme linked microplate assay.

RESULTS

Sera from PSA, RA and OA patients showed a significantly higher HA concentration than those of healthy controls (56.0 +/- 16.0 micrograms/l). The serum HA concentration in PSA patients amounted to 107.8 +/- 57.2 micrograms/l, which was not significantly different from OA patients (104.9 +/- 16 micrograms/l). A significant difference, however, could be observed between the HA concentrations of the PSA subgroups: the mean HA level of patients suffering from symmetrical polyarthritis was 134 +/- 79.6 micrograms/l, which turned out to be significantly higher than in patients suffering from symmetrical oligoarthritis (89.9 +/- 42.8 micrograms/l; P < 0.04), but was insignificantly increased in comparison to patients with ankylosing spondylitis as the predominant feature (109 +/- 27.8 micrograms/l; P = 0.49). The mean HA concentration for RA sera was 197.1 +/- 122.9 micrograms/l, which was statistically significantly increased compared to PSA (P < 0.001) and OA (P < 0.001) sera. The sera of seropositive RA patients showed significantly higher HA levels than PSA patients with symmetrical polyarthritis (P < 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The data obtained support recent studies which have shown HA levels to be higher in RA patients than in OA patients. Seronegative and seropositive RA patients showed the same HA concentrations, while patients suffering from "seronegative" PSA were found to have lower HA concentrations. Therefore, HA serum levels may reflect cartilage degradation in general or the degree of articular inflammatory processes, indicating different pathogenetic pathways.

Rheumatoid arthritis of the craniocervical region by MR imaging: detection and characterization

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study was to evaluate the potential of contrast-enhanced MR imaging to detect and to characterize craniocervical rheumatoid arthritis in a large population group, to compare MR imaging with clinical and conventional radiographic findings, and to examine the relationship between the histopathologic and MR imaging findings in seven patients.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We performed contrast-enhanced MR imaging using T2-weighted gradient-echo sequences and T1-weighted spin-echo sequences in 136 patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Sequential T1-weighted images were obtained before, 3 min after, and 15 min after injection of contrast material. Plain films were acquired in all patients. Serologic status and neurologic status were determined in each patient within 2 days of MR imaging. Patients were categorized into one of four groups, depending upon whether they had joint effusion, hypervascular pannus, hypovascular pannus, or fibrous pannus according to signal patterns on contrast-enhanced MR images. Signal intensity was measured to assess the enhancement of synovial hypertrophy, joint capsule, joint effusion, and the various stages of pannus tissue. Histologic specimens were obtained from seven patients and were correlated with MR imaging findings.

RESULTS

Acute and chronic synovitis were differentiated with contrast-enhanced MR imaging as follows: joint effusion (n = 29), hypervascular pannus (n = 54), hypovascular pannus tissue (n = 8), and fibrous pannus (n = 22). Signal intensity differed significantly among the four groups on contrast-enhanced T1-weighted images. In 59 patients with effusion or hypervascular pannus tissue, atlantoaxial subluxation was diagnosed with plain films. Patients with negative findings on radiographic studies (n = 20) had joint effusion, hypervascular pannus tissue, hypovascular pannus formation, or fibrous pannus tissue on MR imaging studies. Cord compression was found in 10% of all cases and isolated sac compression in 16%. Neurologic findings showed no correlation with MR imaging features.

CONCLUSION

Contrast-enhanced T1-weighted spin-echo MR imaging can discriminate between joint effusion and various forms of pannus in patients with rheumatoid arthritis of the craniocervical region. MR imaging also can detect joint effusion and pannus tissue in patients with negative radiographic findings. No relationship between MR imaging findings and clinical symptoms were found. Tissue enhancement and histopathologic findings correlated in a limited number of autopsies.

Randomised double-blind comparison of chimeric monoclonal antibody to tumour necrosis factor alpha (cA2) versus placebo in rheumatoid arthritis

Tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF alpha) is a critical inflammatory mediator in rheumatoid arthritis, and may therefore be a useful target for specific immunotherapy. In support of this hypothesis, we previously observed beneficial responses in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis after open-label administration of a chimeric monoclonal antibody to TNF alpha (cA2). We now report the results of a four-centre, randomised double-blind trial of a single infusion of 1 or 10 mg/kg cA2 compared with placebo in 73 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. The primary endpoint of the study was the achievement at week 4 of a Paulus 20% response, an amalgam of six clinical, observational, and laboratory variables. Intention-to-treat analysis of data from individual patients showed only 2 of 24 placebo recipients responding at this time, compared with 11 of 25 patients treated with low-dose cA2 (p = 0.0083) and 19 of 24 patients treated with high-dose cA2 (p < 0.0001). Over half of the high-dose cA2 patients responded by the more stringent 50% Paulus criteria at this time (p = 0.0005). The magnitude of these responses was impressive, with maximum mean improvements in individual disease-activity assessments, such as tender or swollen-joint counts and in serum C-reactive protein, exceeding 60% for patients on high-dose treatment. There were two severe adverse events. 1 patient on 1 mg/kg cA2 developed pneumonia ("possibly" treatment-related) and 1 on 10 mg/kg had a fracture ("probably not" treatment-related). The results provide the first good evidence that specific cytokine blockade can be effective in human inflammatory disease and define a new direction for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

High free and latent collagenase activity in psoriatic arthritis synovial fluids

Collagenase activity has been studied intensively in SF from OA and RA patients. Less is known about collagenolytic activity in PsA SF. Therefore we examined collagenolytic activity in crude and trypsin treated SF as well as the alpha 1-antitrypsin and alpha 2-macroglobulin concentrations in 50 patients suffering from OA (n = 13), RA (n = 17), and PsA (n = 20). Free collagenolytic activity was low in the crude OA SF (1.80 +/- 1.35 micrograms released collagen/min/ml SF) and almost equally low in RA SF (2.35 +/- 1.80 micrograms released collagen/min/ml SF; P > 0.3). The PsA SF, however, exhibited a significantly higher free collagenolytic activity (5.63 +/- 5.69 micrograms released collagen/min/ml SF; P < 0.05 in comparison to OA and RA SF). The treatment of the SF with trypsin further activated collagenolytic activity in each group (OA 2.17 +/- 1.35 micrograms released collagen/min/ml SF; RA 6.48 +/- 6.73 micrograms released collagen/min/ml SF; PsA 11.24 +/- 5.02 micrograms released collagen/min/ml SF) and yielded significant differences between OA and RA, OA and PsA, and RA and PsA SF (P < 0.05). Concomitantly with the collagenolytic activity, the alpha 1-antitrypsin and alpha 2-macroglobulin concentrations of the SF were measured. In SF from patients with PsA (172.9 +/- 69.4 mg/100 ml) and RA (190.6 +/- 64.7 mg/100 ml) the alpha 1-antitrypsin was significantly higher than in those from OA SF (106.1 +/- 39.2 mg/100 ml).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

[Topical felbinac in therapy of athletic injuries]

In the treatment of acute soft tissue injuries, topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are both highly effective and well tolerated. Target is a monopreparation that meets the demands made on a modern topical agent. The active substance, felbinac, readily, penetrates into the tissue affected and accumulates locally, selectively inhibiting inflammation and alleviating pain. This synoptic report on the clinical trials confirm the significant clinical superiority of felbinac over placebo. As compared with piroxicam, felbinac, is more successful in eliminating symptoms. The rapid alleviation of pain by the topical felbinac results in an improvement in the restriction of mobility and rapid restitution of function. The cooling, nongreasy gel base further favors the high level of acceptance of this well-tolerated preparation.

["Covert criticism"--a new criterion for determining the expressed emotion index in a five-minute speech sample of partners of depressed patients]

The expressed emotion (EE) index is a measure of affective attitudes held by relatives toward a mentally ill family member. In several studies it has been shown to be a predictor of relapse in the course of schizophrenia and depression. Since the Camberwell Family Interview (CFI) as the traditional method for assessing EE is time-consuming, a brief method--the Five-Minute Speech Sample (FMSS)--has been developed as an alternative for research and clinical work. The FMSS is also suitable for repeated application. Reliability and concurrent validity of the FMSS-EE have been demonstrated in cross-cultural samples of families with a schizophrenic member. However, application of the FMSS coding system to relatives of depressed patients in our sample proved to be problematic. Criticism, the most important EE-component, could not be assessed using the existing rating procedure. Therefore a modified version of the rating system has been developed. A new category named "covert criticism" has been defined which also includes indirect criticism. In an ongoing study a high degree of interrater reliability was achieved with the new system. Available data concerning concurrent validity indicate that clinically meaningful results can be derived by using the EE-ratings based on "covert criticism".

Cross-national reliability, concurrent validity, and stability of a brief method for assessing expressed emotion

The Five-Minute Speech Sample (FMSS; Magana et al., 1986) is a brief method designed to assess the "expressed emotion" (EE) status of a respondent. The FMSS-EE rating is derived from statements made by a patient's key relative during a 5-minute monologue, with codes similar to those used in the original EE rating system (e.g., criticism and emotional overinvolvement). Rating is done from the audiotape and takes about 15-30 minutes. The article reports on the results of a cross-national study carried out in Germany using the FMSS with a sample of 60 relatives of schizophrenic patients. Results indicated that (1) German investigators could readily learn the system and could achieve a high degree of interrater reliability; (2) the association with the original index of EE, the Camberwell Family Interview, was comparable to that found by Magana et al.; and (3) the method yields very stable data over a 4-5 week retest period.

Evaluation of immunoassays for cannabinoids in urine

A comparison was made of several cannabinoid urine assays. Two hundred randomly selected urine specimens were initially screened by two enzyme immunoassays (EMIT-st and EMIT-d.a.u.) and a radioimmunoassay (Abuscreen RIA). Selected specimens found positive by any of these methods were further analyzed by gas-liquid chromatography with flame ionization detection (GLC/FID), gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS), and an experimental RIA from Research Triangle Institute (RTI RIA). The GLC/FID method gave confirmations in 69 to 92% of the samples, depending on the method used and the cut-off employed. GC/MS confirmed 98% of the EMIT and RIA positives using a low cut-off (20 ng/mL). All RIA positives at 100 ng/mL were confirmed by GC/MS. There was complete agreement between the RTI RIA and the EMIT assays, but not with the Abuscreen RIA at the 100 ng/mL cut-off. The study illustrates that care must be exercised in establishing assay cut-offs and the designation of false positive results.

Immunoblastic lymphoma with extracellular and intravascular immunoglobulin deposits: immunocytochemical and electron microscopic studies

Immunoblastic lymphoma (IBL) showing features of angioimmunoblastic lymphadenopathy (AIBL) is described. Abundant eosinophilic extracellular deposits were present in lymph nodes. Electron microscopic and immunoperoxidase studies showed this material was composed of degenerating tumor cells and polyclonal immunoglobulins (Mu and Alpha heavy chains and Kappa and Lambda light chains). Numerous arborizing vessels were thickened with monoclonal IgM(K) immunoglobulins. The tumor cell lysis and degeneration are though to be due to the high cell turnover and immune reaction to unrecognized substances.