Real-world evaluation of persistence, effectiveness and usage patterns of tofacitinib in treatment of psoriatic arthritis in Australia

OBJECTIVES

To describe treatment patterns and persistence of tofacitinib, interleukin 17 inhibitors (IL-17Ai) and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

Data from adult patients with PsA and who had received at least one prescription of tofacitinib, IL-17Ai or TNFi between May 2019 and September 2021 were sourced from the Australian OPAL dataset. Persistence, analysed via Kaplan-Meier methods, and propensity score matching between tofacitinib and bDMARD (IL-17Ai and TNFi) groups were conducted.

RESULTS

Of 16,692 patients with PsA, 1486 (n = 406 tofacitinib, n = 416 IL-17Ai and n = 664 TNFi) were included. More females were in the tofacitinib group (75.4%) than in the IL-17Ai (61.1%) and TNFi (64.8%) groups. Overall, 19.2% of tofacitinib patients were first line, compared with 41.8% of IL-17Ai and 62.8% of TNFi patients. In the overall population, the median persistence was 16.5 months (95% CI 13.8 to 19.5 months), 17.7 months (95% CI 15.8 to 19.6 months) and 17.2 months (95% CI 14.9 to 20.5 months) in the tofacitinib, IL-17Ai and TNFi groups, respectively. Persistence was similar in the tofacitinib/IL-17Ai matched population; however, in the tofacitinib/TNFi matched population, persistence was longer in the tofacitinib group (18.7 months, 95% CI 15.6 to 21.4 months) compared with the TNFi group (12.2 months, 95% CI 19.9 to 14.9 months).

CONCLUSIONS

In this Australian real-world dataset, tofacitinib was more frequently used in later lines and among a slightly higher proportion of female patients than IL-17Ai or TNFi. Overall, treatment persistence was similar for tofacitinib, IL-17Ai and TNFi, but tofacitinib exhibited longer persistence than TNFi in a matched population. Key Points • This is the first, large real-world study from Australia investigating the demographics, treatment patterns and comparative treatment persistence of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treated with tofacitinib and biologic disease-modifying drugs (bDMARDs). • The study suggests that tofacitinib is an effective intervention in PsA with at least comparable persistence to bDMARDs: tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and interleukin-17 A inhibitors (IL-17Ai).

Optimising patient outcomes: temporal trends in remission rates of rheumatoid arthritis patients in the Australian OPAL dataset between 2009 and 2022

OBJECTIVE

To describe the trends in remission rates among RA patients in the OPAL dataset, spanning from 2009 to 2022, and provide insights into the effectiveness of evolving RA management approaches in real-world clinical settings.

METHODS

Patients with a physician diagnosis of RA and at least 3 visits between 1 January 2009 and December 2022 were identified in the OPAL dataset, an aggregated collection of data extracted from the electronic medical records of patients managed by 117 Australian rheumatologists. Demographics, disease history, prescribed medications and proportions of patients in Disease Activity Score 28-joint count C-reactive protein (DAS28CRP)) categories (remission, low disease activity (LDA), moderate disease activity (MDA) and high disease activity (HDA)) were described.

RESULTS

A large population (n = 48,388) of eligible patients with RA were identified in the OPAL dataset. A consistent and substantial improvement in DAS28CRP remission rates were found in (i) all patients, (ii) patients managed on conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) and (iii) patients treated with biological or targeted synthetic (b/ts)DMARD therapy, increasing from approximately 50% in 2009 to over 70% by 2022. The increase in DAS28CRP remission was accompanied by reduced proportions of patients in MDA and HDA states.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights a consistent improvement in disease activity and rising remission rates among Australian RA patients within the OPAL dataset, offering the potential for enhanced patient outcomes and reduced disease burden.

Significant use of non-evidence-based therapeutics in a cohort of Australian fibromyalgia patients

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia is a common condition characterised by chronic widespread musculoskeletal pain and central sensitivity features. Appropriate management requires a multidisciplinary approach prioritising non-pharmacological strategies. Evidence-based fibromyalgia medications are not always easily available, effective or tolerated.

AIM

To characterise actual medication usage in Australian fibromyalgia patients.

METHODS

Demographic and clinical data, including medication use information, were gathered by chart review from patients attending the Monash Fibromyalgia Clinic between January 2019 and June 2022. Eligible patients were invited to complete an anonymous questionnaire between June and August 2022 to assess current therapeutic use. The questionnaire assessed fibromyalgia clinical features by using the Revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire and the 2016 modified American College of Rheumatology Fibromyalgia criteria.

RESULTS

The chart review included 474 patients, and 108 participants completed the questionnaire. Most chart review (78.7%) and questionnaire participants (85.2%) reported using at least one medication for their fibromyalgia. 48.5% of chart review patients and 58.3% of questionnaire participants reported using at least one evidence-based medication, usually amitriptyline, duloxetine or pregabalin. However, the most common individual medications for questionnaire participants were non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (48.2%), paracetamol (59.3%) and opioids (34.3%), with most opioids being typical opioids. Among questionnaire participants, 14.8% reported using cannabinoids, and 70.4% reported using at least one supplement, vitamin or herbal/naturopathic preparation. Not all medication or substance use was recorded during clinic appointments.

CONCLUSION

Fibromyalgia patients engage in various pharmacotherapeutic strategies that are not always evidence-based or disclosed to their treating clinicians.

Burden of disease and real-world treatment patterns of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in the Australian OPAL dataset

OBJECTIVE

To describe the demographics, disease burden and real-world management of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in Australian community practice.

METHODS

Patients with a physician diagnosis of SLE and at least 1 visit between 1 January 2009 and 31 March 2021 were identified in the OPAL dataset, an aggregated collection of data extracted from the electronic medical records of patients managed by 112 Australian rheumatologists. Demographics, basic clinical features and prescribed medications were described, with medication combinations used as a surrogate of disease severity.

RESULTS

Of 5133 patients with a diagnosis of lupus, 4260 (83%) had SLE. Of these SLE patients, almost 90% of patients were female, with a median age of 49 years [IQR 37-61] at first-recorded visit. Of the 2285 SLE patients whose most recent visit was between 1 January 2019 and 31 March 2021, 52.5% had mild disease, 29.9% had moderate-severe disease and 7.4% had very severe disease. Visit frequency increased with disease severity. Most patients (85.8%) were treated with hydroxychloroquine, typically prescribed as first line-of-therapy.

CONCLUSION

In this large real-world Australian cohort of patients with SLE, a substantial burden of disease was identified, with a significant proportion (almost one-third of patients) considered to have moderate to severe disease based on medication use. This study provides a greater understanding of the path from symptom onset to treatment and the heterogeneous presentation of patients with SLE who are treated in community practice in Australia. Key messages • Most published studies describing patients with SLE are derived from specialist lupus centres, typically in the hospital setting, therefore little is known about the characteristics of patients with SLE who are receiving routine care in community clinics. • The OPAL dataset is a large collection of clinical data from the electronic medical records of rheumatologists predominantly practising in private community clinics, which is where the majority (73-80%) of adult rheumatology services are conducted in Australia [1-3] . Since data from community care has not been widely available for SLE research, this study contributes important insight into this large and under-reported patient population. • To improve access to care and effective treatments, and reduce the burden of SLE in Australia, a greater understanding of the characteristics and unmet needs of patients with SLE managed in the community setting is required.

Comparative Effectiveness of First-Line Baricitinib in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis in the Australian OPAL Data Set

OBJECTIVE

To analyze comparative treatment persistence for first-line baricitinib (BARI) versus first-line tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and for first-line BARI initiated as monotherapy versus first-line BARI initiated with at least one conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD).

METHODS

Patients with RA who initiated BARI or TNFi as first-line biologic or targeted synthetic DMARD from October 1, 2015, to September 30, 2021, were identified in the OPAL data set. Drug survival times to 6, 12, and 24 months were analyzed using restricted mean survival time (RMST). Multiple imputation and inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to address missing data and nonrandom treatment assignment.

RESULTS

A total of 545 patients initiated first-line BARI, including 118 as monotherapy and 427 as csDMARD combination therapy. Three thousand five hundred patients initiated first-line TNFi. There was no difference in drug survival to 6 or 12 months for BARI compared with TNFi; differences in RMST were 0.02 months (95% CI: -0.08 to 0.013; P = 0.65) and 0.31 months (95% CI: -0.02 to 0.63; P = 0.06), respectively. Patients in the BARI group had 1.00 month (95% CI: 0.14 to 1.86; P = 0.02) longer drug survival to 24 months. There was no difference in drug survival for BARI monotherapy compared with combination therapy, with differences in RMST to 6, 12, and 24 months of -0.19 months (95% CI: -0.50 to 0.12; P = 0.12), -0.35 months (95% CI: -1.17 to 0.42; P = 0.41), and -0.56 months (95% CI: -2.66 to 1.54; P = 0.60), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this comparative analysis, treatment persistence up to 24 months was significantly longer for first-line BARI compared with TNFi, but the effect size of 1.00 month is not clinically meaningful. There was no difference in persistence for BARI monotherapy versus combination therapy.

Comparative Effectiveness of Adalimumab vs Tofacitinib in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis in Australia

Importance

There is a need for observational studies to supplement evidence from clinical trials, and the target trial emulation (TTE) framework can help avoid biases that can be introduced when treatments are compared crudely using observational data by applying design principles for randomized clinical trials. Adalimumab (ADA) and tofacitinib (TOF) were shown to be equivalent in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a randomized clinical trial, but to our knowledge, these drugs have not been compared head-to-head using routinely collected clinical data and the TTE framework.

Objective

To emulate a randomized clinical trial comparing ADA vs TOF in patients with RA who were new users of a biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This comparative effectiveness study emulating a randomized clinical trial of ADA vs TOF included Australian adults aged 18 years or older with RA in the Optimising Patient Outcomes in Australian Rheumatology (OPAL) data set. Patients were included if they initiated ADA or TOF between October 1, 2015, and April 1, 2021; were new b/tsDMARD users; and had at least 1 component of the disease activity score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) recorded at baseline or during follow-up.

Intervention

Treatment with either ADA (40 mg every 14 days) or TOF (10 mg daily).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was the estimated average treatment effect, defined as the difference in mean DAS28-CRP among patients receiving TOF compared with those receiving ADA at 3 and 9 months after initiating treatment. Missing DAS28-CRP data were multiply imputed. Stable balancing weights were used to account for nonrandomized treatment assignment.

Results

A total of 842 patients were identified, including 569 treated with ADA (387 [68.0%] female; median age, 56 years [IQR, 47-66 years]) and 273 treated with TOF (201 [73.6%] female; median age, 59 years [IQR, 51-68 years]). After applying stable balancing weights, mean DAS28-CRP in the ADA group was 5.3 (95% CI, 5.2-5.4) at baseline, 2.6 (95% CI, 2.5-2.7) at 3 months, and 2.3 (95% CI, 2.2-2.4) at 9 months; in the TOF group, it was 5.3 (95% CI, 5.2-5.4) at baseline, 2.4 (95% CI, 2.2-2.5) at 3 months, and 2.3 (95% CI, 2.1-2.4) at 9 months. The estimated average treatment effect was -0.2 (95% CI, -0.4 to -0.03; P = .02) at 3 months and -0.03 (95% CI, -0.2 to 0.1; P = .60) at 9 months.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, there was a modest but statistically significant reduction in DAS28-CRP at 3 months for patients receiving TOF compared with those receiving ADA and no difference between treatment groups at 9 months. Three months of treatment with either drug led to clinically relevant average reductions in mean DAS28-CRP, consistent with remission.

A novel electronic patient-reported outcome delivery system to implement health-related quality of life measures in routine clinical care: An analysis of 5 years of experience

Objective

To develop a simple and secure technological solution to incorporate electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) into routine clinical care.

Methods

A novel ePRO questionnaire delivery system was developed by Software for Specialists (S4S) in partnership with OPAL Rheumatology Australia. Validated questionnaires were sent from the electronic medical record (EMR) (Audit4) of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), lupus or giant cell arteritis (GCA) and delivered to the patient's email address or completed in the clinic waiting room using a smart device (in-practice). Completed questionnaires were encrypted and returned to the patient's Audit4. Deidentified clinical data was extracted and aggregated across all sites. Data collected between April 2016-Dec 2020 were analysed descriptively.

Results

Between April 2016 to Dec 2020, 221,352 Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue (FACIT-F), Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) and/or HealthCare Resource Utilization (HCRU) questionnaires were sent from 39 of 42 contributing clinics (93%). 85% of questionnaires were delivered via email and 15% in-practice. Overall, 85% of patients completed at least one questionnaire, and of all questionnaires sent, 73% were completed. Females were more likely to engage with the questionnaires than males (87% vs. 81%), and older patients were slightly more likely to complete all questionnaires delivered.

Conclusions

The novel Audit4 ePRO delivery system is an effective tool for incorporating PROs into routine clinical care. The data generated provides a unique opportunity to understand the full burden of disease for patients in the real-world setting and the impact of interventions.

POS0691 EMULATING A TARGET TRIAL OF ADALIMUMAB VERSUS TOFACITINIB IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: A COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS USING THE OPAL REAL-WORLD DATASET

Background

There is increasing recognition of the complementary role for real-world evidence (RWE) in health care and regulatory decision-making (1). However, careful analysis is required when drugs are compared using observational data to account for differences between treatment groups. Electronic medical records (EMR) are an important source of real-world data (RWD), but outcomes are often recorded incompletely.

We emulated a target trial of adalimumab (ADA) versus tofacitinib (TOF) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using the OPAL dataset to illustrate the application of methodologies to address the challenges of non-random treatment assignment and incomplete data. The OPAL dataset is derived from EMR of 112 community-based rheumatologists around Australia, where practitioners have discretion to prescribe whichever b/tsDMARD they consider most clinically appropriate.

Objectives

To estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) of TOF compared to ADA at 3 and 9 months, defined as the difference in mean disease activity score (DAS28CRP), in patients with RA who are new users of a b/tsDMARD. This is equivalent to aiming to estimate the intention-to-treat effect in a randomised controlled trial.

Methods

OPAL patients diagnosed with RA were included if they initiated ADA or TOF between 1 October 2015 and 1 April 2021, were new b/tsDMARD users (no prior recorded b/tsDMARD, at least 6 months of prior csDMARD treatment), and had at least 1 component of DAS28CRP recorded at baseline or during follow-up. Data were also extracted on baseline characteristics. Baseline characteristics were DAS28CRP, patient demographics, regional location, disease duration, prescriber characteristics (including gender, experience), prior recorded comorbidities, and prior and concomitant treatment with csDMARDs and oral corticosteroids.

We used random forest multiple imputation to impute missing baseline and follow-up DAS28CRP components (2). Stable balancing weights (SBW) were then used to balance the treatment groups in terms of their baseline characteristics, including DAS28CRP (3). For each imputed dataset, the ATE at 3 months was estimated as the difference between the mean outcome in the two treatment groups after balancing (i.e. weighting) the sample, and then these estimates were averaged across the 10 imputed datasets. The ATE at 9 months was estimated similarly. The whole procedure was subsequently performed in 1000 bootstrap samples to estimate a 95% confidence interval (CI) for the ATEs using the percentile method (4).

Results

842 patients were identified including n=569 treated with ADA and n=273 treated with TOF. After applying the SBW, the maximum difference between the mean of each baseline characteristic in the ADA and TOF groups was less than 0.03% of the corresponding standard deviation in the whole sample, indicating reasonable balance was achieved in this complex dataset. After weighting, mean DAS28CRP reduced from 5.3 at baseline (both ADA and TOF groups) to 2.6 and 2.3 at 3 and 9 months for ADA, and 2.4 and 2.3 at 3 and 9 months for TOF.

The estimated ATE was -0.22 (95% CI -0.36, -0.03; p=0.02) at 3 months, indicating a modest but significant reduction in disease activity for patients on TOF. The estimated ATE was -0.03 (95% CI -0.19, 0.1; p=0.56) at 9 months, indicating no difference between groups.

Conclusion

DAS28CRP was significantly lower at 3 months for patients treated with TOF compared to ADA. However, 3 months of treatment with either drug led to substantive average reductions in mean DAS28CRP, consistent with remission. There was no difference between drugs at 9 months. Future work will estimate a per-protocol effect.

References

[1]Arlett et al. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2022;111(1):21–3.

[2]van Buuren and Groothuis-Oudshoorn J Stat Softw 201145(3):1–67

[3]Zubizarreta J Am Stat Assoc 2015;110(511):910–22

[4]Bartlett and Hughes Stat Methods Med Res 2020;29(12):3533–46

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the members of OPAL Rheumatology Ltd and their patients for providing clinical data for this study, and Software4Specialists Pty Ltd for providing the Audit4 platform.

Disclosure of Interests

Claire Deakin: None declared, Bianca De Stavola: None declared, Geoff Littlejohn Consultant of: Abbvie, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and MSD, Hedley Griffiths Consultant of: AbbVie and Eli Lilly, Sabina Ciciriello: None declared, Peter Youssef Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, David Mathers: None declared, Paul Bird Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Novartis, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Consultant of: Abbvie, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Novartis, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Imaging consulting for Synarc and Boston Imaging Core Lab., Tegan Smith: None declared, Catherine OSullivan: None declared, Tim Freeman: None declared, Dana Segelov: None declared, David Hoffman: None declared, Shaun Seaman: None declared

POS1019 REAL-WORLD EVALUATION OF TREATMENT PATTERNS AND PERSISTENCE OF TOFACITINIB IN TREATMENT OF PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS IN AUSTRALIA: AN ANALYSIS OF THE OPAL DATASET

Background

Tofacitinib (TOF), a potent selective inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK), is an approved treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In Australia, patients with active PsA despite six months of therapy with a pre-specified combination of csDMARDs are eligible to receive subsidised b/tsDMARDs. The clinician can prescribe the b/tsDMARD they deem to be the most clinically appropriate for the patient. Limited data exist to describe the real-world treatment patterns, characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with PsA who receive TOF in the real-world setting.

Objectives

To describe real-world treatment patterns and treatment persistence among patients with PsA treated with TOF in the Australian post-approval setting using the OPAL dataset.

Methods

The OPAL dataset is a collection of deidentified clinical data derived from the electronic medical records of 112 rheumatologists at 43 sites around Australia. Adult patients with a diagnosis of PsA who received at least one prescription of TOF, a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) or an interleukin 17 inhibitor (IL-17Ai) between May 2019 and Sept 2020 were eligible, with data up to Sept 2021 included in the analysis. Results were summarised descriptively. Treatment persistence was summarised using Kaplan-Meier methods.

Results

Of 16,692 patients with PsA identified in the OPAL dataset, 1,486 (TOF n=406, IL-17Ai n=416, and TNFi n=664) were eligible for inclusion in this study. At the time of treatment initiation, the mean (SD) age of TOF, IL-17Ai and TNFi treated patients was 55.56 (12.68), 52.65 (12.72) and 50.32 (14.57) years, respectively. 19.2% of patients receiving TOF were first line compared with 41.8% of IL-17Ai and 62.8% of TNFi treated patients. The mean (SD) time from symptom onset to treatment initiation was longest for patients receiving TOF in first line (153.29 (127.50) months) compared to first line IL-17Ai (116.83 (113.97) months) and TNFi treated patients (92.37 (89.01) months). Overall, 34.2% of TOF, 32.9% of IL-17Ai and 26.4% of TNFi treated patients initiated therapy without concomitant cDMARDs being recorded.

Overall median persistence was 16.54 months (95% CI 13.84, 19.53) for TOF treated patients, 17.65 months (95% CI, 15.75, 19.56) for IL-17Ai treated patients and 17.16 months (95% CI 14.86, 20.48) for TNFi treated patients. As expected, persistence was generally longer in patients treated as first line (Figure 1) with patients receiving TOF observed to have slightly higher persistence in the first 15 months of treatment.

Figure 1.

Treatment persistence of patients receiving TOF, IL-17Ai and TNFi as first line therapy. Plot curtailed at 15 months as relatively few patients have information past this point. Where no stop date was recorded, censoring occurs at last recorded visit

Conclusion

In this analysis of a large Australian real-world dataset, TOF was more commonly utilised as a later line therapy for patients with PsA. Patients receiving TOF were observed to have slightly higher persistence within the first 15 months of starting first line therapy in this preliminary analysis.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the members of OPAL Rheumatology Ltd and their patients for providing clinical data for this study, and Software4Specialists Pty Ltd for providing the Audit4 platform. Financial support was provided by Pfizer Australia

Disclosure of Interests

Geoff Littlejohn Consultant of: Abbvie, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and MSD, Jo Leadbetter: None declared, Belinda Butcher: None declared, Marie Feletar: None declared, Catherine OSullivan: None declared, Tegan Smith: None declared, David Witcombe Employee of: Pfizer Australia, Ho Yin Employee of: Pfizer Australia, Peter Youssef Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Janssen and Eli Lilly

POS1034 EVOLVING MECHANISM OF ACTION PREFERENCE FOR THE TREATMENT OF PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS IN AUSTRALIA: AN ANALYSIS OF THE OPAL DATASET

Background

There are currently ten biologic and targeted synthetic (b/ts)DMARDs acting via five different modes of action (MOA) available for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in Australia. b/tsDMARDs are government-subsidised, and once the patient reaches the eligibility requirements, the clinician can prescribe the agent deemed most appropriate. Available agents include TNF inhibitors (TNFi, adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, golimumab, certolizumab pegol), IL-17A inhibitors (IL-17Ai, secukinumab, ixekizumab), and IL-12/23 inhibitor (IL-12/23i, ustekinumab). Two new MOAs were recently added to the rheumatologist’s armamentarium: the first JAK inhibitor (JAKi, tofacitinib) was subsidized from May 2019 followed by upadacitinib from Oct 2021, and an IL-23 inhibitor (IL-23i, guselkumab) was subsidized from July 2021.

Objectives

The aim of this analysis was to describe the changing patterns of b/tsDMARD use for the treatment of PsA in real-world practice in Australia.

Methods

Deidentified clinical data were sourced from the OPAL dataset, which is collected in a custom-built electronic medical record during the routine consultation1. Data from patients >18 years with a physician diagnosis of PsA who were prescribed a b/tsDMARD between Jan-2007 and Sept-2021 were included in the analysis. The software program Tableau was used to display the data.

Results

At Sept 2021, 6,150 (38% of the total) patients with PsA in the OPAL dataset were prescribed b/tsDMARDs. Of these patients, 3741 (61%) were currently prescribed a TNFi, 1503 (24%) an IL-17Ai, 556 (9%) a JAKi, 222 (4%) an IL-12/23i and 134 patients (2%) an IL-23i. Over time, the 1st line TNFi initiations have decreased from 79.5% in 2018 to 65.2% in 2021. Conversely, 1st line IL-17Ai initiations have increased from 14.4% in 2018 to 22.2% in 2021. In 2021, TNFi accounted for 53.4% of 2nd line initiations and 38.2% of 3rd line initiations. IL-17Ai accounted for 30.4% of 2nd and 37.0% of 3rd line initiations and JAKi accounted for 10.5% of 2nd line and 14.2% of 3rd line initiations. In the 3 months that IL-23i has been subsidised, this MOA was the most initiated agent for patients who had been treated with more than two prior b/tsDMARDs. In 2021, 52.1% of patients switching from a 1st line TNFi switched to an alternative TNFi, 33.3% switched to an IL-17Ai and 11.3% switched to a JAKi in 2nd line. Of those switching from a 1st line IL-17Ai, 59.6% initiated a TNFi, 21.2% switched to an alternative IL-17Ai and 11.5% switched to a JAKi.

Conclusion

The patterns of b/tsDMARD utilisation for the treatment of PsA, when the choice of agent is at the discretion of the rheumatologist, remains dynamic and is evolving as new MOAs become available. TNFi remains the most prescribed b/tsDMARD for first line therapy. However an increase in first line use of alternative MOAs has been observed. TNFi cycling remains a commonly utilised real world treatment strategy but appears to be declining as new MOAs become available.

References

[1]Littlejohn GO, Tymms KE, Smith T, Griffiths HT. Using big data from real-world Australian rheumatology encounters to enhance clinical care and research. Clin Exp Rheumatol. Sep-Oct 2020;38(5):874-880.

Figure 1.

Percentage of patients initiating b/tsDMARDs by year and line of therapy.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the members of OPAL Rheumatology Ltd and their patients for providing clinical data for this study, and Software4Specialists Pty Ltd for providing the Audit4 platform.

Disclosure of Interests

Peter Youssef Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Sabina Ciciriello: None declared, Gene-Siew Ngian: None declared, Juan Aw: None declared, Barry Kane: None declared, Catherine OSullivan: None declared, Tegan Smith: None declared, Claire Deakin: None declared, Geoff Littlejohn Consultant of: Abbvie, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and MSD

Prevalence of sleep disturbance and the association between poor disease control in people with ankylosing spondylitis within the Australian clinical setting (ASLEEP study): a real-world observational study using the OPAL dataset

Introduction

Sleep disturbance and fatigue are commonly reported in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) but specific prevalence and the relationship to disease control are unknown.

Method

This retrospective non-interventional observational study of data from the OPAL dataset included patients with AS (ICD code M45, M45.0 or M08.1), aged 18 to 95 years and had completed ≥ 1 sleep questionnaire between 1 January 2019 and 30 September 2020. The prevalence of insomnia and obstructive sleep apnoea were assessed using the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) and Multivariate Apnoea Prediction Index (MAPI), respectively. Propensity score (PS) matching based on sex, age and symptom duration increased comparability between patients administered tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and interleukin 17A inhibitors (IL-17Ai).

Results

Four hundred ninety-five patients were included. The mean ISI total score in the overall population was 8.6 ± 6.2. Self-reported moderate or severe clinical insomnia was present in 16% and 3.2% of patients, respectively. The mean MAPI score was 0.4 ± 0.3, self-reported apnoea was identified in 31.5% of patients and the mean FACIT-Fatigue score was 36.1 ± 10.7. In the PS matched population, the only treatment-related difference was the mean MAPI score (IL-17Ai 0.4 ± 0.3 and TNFi 0.3 ± 0.2, p = 0.046). Those with poor disease control (BASDAI ≥ 4) were more likely (odds ratio [OR] 7.29, 95% CI 2.37 to 22.46, p = 0.001) to have a greater severity of insomnia symptoms than those with good disease control.

Conclusion

In this real-world AS cohort, poor disease control was associated with sleep disturbance. Little difference in sleep disturbance was observed between biologic TNFi and IL-17Ai treatment.

Key Points

• Sleep disturbance and fatigue are common in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. • In our real-world cohort, self-reported apnoea was reported in one-third of patients; and one in five patients reported moderate to severe insomnia. • Those with poor disease control were more likely to experience greater sleep disturbance than those with good disease control.

Real-world evaluation of effectiveness, persistence, and usage patterns of monotherapy and combination therapy tofacitinib in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Australia

Objective

This study aimed to describe the real-world effectiveness and treatment persistence among patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with monotherapy and combination therapy tofacitinib and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs).

Methods

This was a post hoc analysis of a retrospective, non-interventional study that extracted data for patients treated with tofacitinib or bDMARDs from the Australian OPAL dataset between March 2015 and September 2018. Monotherapy tofacitinib and bDMARDs and combination therapy tofactinib and bDMARDs were propensity score matched and treatment effectiveness and persistence of the groups were evaluated.

Results

In the bDMARD and tofacitinib monotherapy and combination therapy matched populations there were 1300 bDMARD initiators (n = 564 monotherapy) and 650 tofacitinib initiators (n = 282 monotherapy). In the bDMARD and tofacitinib monotherapy matched groups, 62.9% and 66.7% were in DAS-28 CRP disease remission after 18 months of treatment, respectively. In the combination therapy bDMARD and tofacitinib groups, 50% and 58.9% were in DAS-28 CRP disease remission after 18 months, respectively. The median treatment persistence was similar between the monotherapy bDMARD and tofacitinib treatment groups (36.7 months (95% CI 27.4 to “not reached’) and 34.2 months (95%CI 30.3 to “not reached”) respectively) as well as the combination therapy bDMARD and tofacitinib groups (32.2 months (95% CI 25.7 to 34.4) and 32.7 months (95%CI 28.7 to “not reached”, respectively).

Conclusions

Patients receiving combination therapy with tofacitinib or bDMARDs had higher disease activity scores at index than patients receiving monotherapy. Monotherapy with tofacitinib or bDMARDs, and combination therapy with tofacitinib or bDMARDs demonstrated similar treatment effectiveness and persistence, respectively.

Key Points • This study provides real-world evidence regarding effectiveness, treatment persistence, and treatment patterns, among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with monotherapy or combination therapy tofacitinib. • The study suggests that monotherapy and combination therapy tofacitinib is an effective intervention in RA with persistence and effectiveness comparable to bDMARDs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10067-021-05853-x.

Central Sensitivity and Fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia presents with symptoms of widespread pain, fatigue, sleeping and cognitive disturbances as well as other somatic symptoms. It often overlaps with other conditions termed 'central sensitivity syndromes' such as irritable bowel syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome and temporomandibular disorder. Central sensitisation, mediated by amplified processing in the central nervous system, has been identified as the key pathogenic mechanism in these disorders. The term 'central sensitivity' can be used to collectively describe the clinical presentation of these disorders. Fibromyalgia is highly prevalent in most rheumatic diseases as well as non-rheumatic chronic diseases and if unrecognised results in high morbidity. It is diagnosed clinically after excluding important differential diagnoses. Diagnostic criteria have been developed as tools to help identify and diagnose fibromyalgia. Such tools can fulfill an important need when managing patients with rheumatic disease and other chronic diseases as a way to identify fibromyalgia and improve patient outcomes. Treatment involves an integrated approach including education, exercise, stress reduction and pharmacological therapies targeting the central nervous system. This approach is suitable for all presentations of central sensitivity and some central sensitivity syndromes have additional treatment options specific to the clinical presentation. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

POS0906 PREVALENCE OF SLEEP DISTURBANCE IN PATIENTS WITH ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS WITHIN THE AUSTRALIAN CLINICAL SETTING (ASLEEP STUDY): A REAL-WORLD OBSERVATIONAL STUDY USING THE OPAL DATASET

Background:

Sleep disorders are more prevalent in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) compared to the general population. Sleep disturbance in AS, in addition to pain and fatigue, can lead to impaired physical function and reduced quality of life.

Objectives:

The primary objective was to determine the prevalence of sleep disturbance in patients with AS in a real-world Australian cohort using the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) and Multivariate Apnoea Prediction Index (MAPI). ISI score of ≥ 15 is considered clinical insomnia. MAPI values below 0.05 are suggestive of clinical apnoea.

Methods:

Routinely collected, de-identified clinical data were sourced from the OPAL dataset. Patients aged between 18 and 95 years with a diagnosis of AS and who had completed at least one ISI or MAPI questionnaire between Jan-2019 and Sept-2020 were included. ISI and MAPI questionnaires were emailed to patients using OPAL’s electronic patient reported outcome (ePRO) delivery method or completed in the clinic using a smart device and returned to the patient’s file using a QR code. Disease activity was assessed using BASDAI collected at the same time as the sleep questionnaires. Age, sex and duration of symptoms were used to propensity match patients in the Il-17ai and TNFi group in a 1:2 ratio.

Results:

495 of the 5,323 patients identified with AS completed a questionnaire and were included in the analysis (n=395 TNFi, n=48 Il-17ai (secukinumab), n=52 other therapies). 142 were included in the propensity score matched population (n = 94 TNFi, and n = 48 Il-17ai). In the overall population the mean (SD) age was 48.3 (13.6), 55.4% were males, the mean (SD) BMI was 30.1 (19.6) at the index date and 4.8% reported depression. 51.7% had an optimal disease control (BASDAI <4). The mean (SD) ISI score was 8.6 (6.2). 48.1% reported no clinical significant insomnia, 32.7% reported subthreshold insomnia, 16% reported clinical insomnia (moderate severity) and 3.2% reported clinical insomnia (severe). The mean (SD) MAPI score was 0.4 (0.3). 292 patients (59.0%) had low risk of clinical apnoea, 134 patients (27.1%) had high risk of clinical apnoea and 69 patients 13.9% had not completed the MAPI questionnaire. In the propensity scored matched population, the TNFi and Il-17ai groups had mean (SD) ISI scores of 9.1 (6.6) and 8.9 (5.9) at index, respectively (p = 0.83) and mean (SD) MAPI scores of 0.3 (0.2) and 0.4 (0.3) at index, respectively (p=0.046), however a higher percentage of overweight and obese patients were identified in the Il-17ai treatment group. Ordered logistic regression analysis of the relationship between demographics and ISI in the matched population found that patients with BASDAI ≥4 were seven times more likely to experience greater sleep disturbance (OR 7.29, 95%CI 2.37 to 22.46, p=0.001) than those with BASDAI <4.

Conclusion:

In this real-world AS cohort, poor disease control was associated with sleep disturbance, despite bDMARD therapy. Little difference was observed between TNFi and Il-17ai treatment. Screening for sleep disturbance and fatigue in routine clinical care may provide a more holistic view of the burden of this disease.

Table 1.

Patient characteristics and outcome scores in the propensity score matched population at index.

TNFi (n=94)Il-17ai (n=48)p valueBMI category Underweight2 (2%)1 (2%)0.094 Normal weight33 (35%)8 (17%) Overweight24 (26%)16 (33%) Obese27 (29%)21 (44%) Missing8 (9%)2 (4%)Duration of treatment (months), mean (SD)61.0 (156.7)23.7 (20.1)0.18BASDAI <443 (46%)23 (48%)0.89BASDAI > 416 (17%)8 (17%)Missing35 (37%)17 (35%)ISI score, mean (SD)9.1 (6.6)8.9 (5.9)0.83ISI category (n (%)0.83 No clinically significant insomnia44 (57%)24 (50%) Subthreshold insomnia30 (32%)15 (31%) Clinical insomnia (moderate)15 (16%)8 (17%) Clinical insomnia (severe)5 (5%)1 (2%)MAPI score, mean (SD)0.3 (0.2)0.4 (0.3)0.046MAPI, high apnoea risk Yes17 (18%)16 (33%)0.051 No62 (66%)26 (54%) Missing15 (16%)6 (12%)

Acknowledgements:

The authors acknowledge the members of OPAL Rheumatology Ltd and their patients for providing clinical data for this study, and Software4Specialists Pty Ltd for providing the Audit4 platform. We acknowledge WriteSource Medical Pty Ltd for providing statistical services. Funding for this study was provided by Novartis.

Disclosure of Interests:

Kathleen Tymms: None declared, Belinda Butcher: None declared, Tracey Sletten: None declared, Tegan Smith: None declared, Catherine OSullivan: None declared, Geoff Littlejohn Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Sandoz, Sanofi and Seqirus., Ricky Sadler Employee of: Current employee of Novartis, Rebecca Tronnberg Employee of: Current employee of Novartis, Hedley Griffiths Consultant of: AbbVie, Gilead, Novartis and Lilly.

POS0619 MODELLING OF DISEASE ACTIVITY IN PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY ARTHROPATHIES TREATED WITH ETANERCEPT ORIGINATOR OR BIOSIMILAR AS FIRST-LINE BIOLOGIC IN AN AUSTRALIAN REAL-WORLD DATASET

Background:

The availability of biosimilars as non-proprietary versions of established biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) is enabling greater access for patients with rheumatic diseases to effective medications at a lower cost. Since April 2017 both the originator and a biosimilar for etanercept (trade names Enbrel and Brenzys, respectively) have been available for use in Australia.

Objectives:

[1]To model effectiveness of etanercept originator or biosimilar in reducing Disease Activity Score 28-joint count C reactive protein (DAS28CRP) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) treated with either drug as first-line bDMARD

[2]To describe persistence on etanercept originator or biosimilar as first-line bDMARD in patients with RA, PsA or AS

Methods:

Clinical data were obtained from the Optimising Patient outcomes in Australian rheumatoLogy (OPAL) dataset, derived from electronic medical records. Eligible patients with RA, PsA or AS who initiated etanercept originator (n=856) or biosimilar (n=477) as first-line bDMARD between 1 April 2017 and 31 December 2020 were identified. Propensity score matching was performed to select patients on originator (n=230) or biosimilar (n=136) with similar characteristics in terms of diagnosis, disease duration, joint count, age, sex and concomitant medications. Data on clinical outcomes were recorded at 3 months after baseline, and then at 6-monthly intervals. Outcomes data that were missing at a recorded visit were imputed.

Effectiveness of the originator, relative to the biosimilar, for reducing DAS28CRP over time was modelled in the matched population using linear mixed models with both random intercepts and slopes to allow for individual heterogeneity, and weighting of individuals by inverse probability of treatment weights to ensure comparability between treatment groups. Time was modelled as a combination of linear, quadratic and cubic continuous variables.

Persistence on the originator or biosimilar was analysed using survival analysis (log-rank test).

Results:

Reduction in DAS28CRP was associated with both time and etanercept originator treatment (Table 1). The conditional R-squared for the model was 0.31. The average predicted DAS28CRP at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months and 12 months were 4.0 and 4.4, 3.1 and 3.4, 2.6 and 2.8, 2.3 and 2.6, and 2.2 and 2.4 for the originator and biosimilar, respectively, indicating a clinically meaningful effect of time for patients on either drug and an additional modest improvement for patients on the originator.

Median time to 50% of patients stopping treatment was 25.5 months for the originator and 24.1 months for the biosimilar (p=0.53). An adverse event was the reason for discontinuing treatment in 33 patients (14.5%) on the originator and 18 patients (12.9%) on the biosimilar.

Conclusion:

Analysis using a large national real-world dataset showed treatment with either the etanercept originator or the biosimilar was associated with a reduction in DAS28CRP over time, with the originator being associated with a further modest reduction in DAS28CRP that was not clinically significant. Persistence on treatment was not different between the two drugs.

Table 1.

Respondent characteristics.

Fixed EffectEstimate95% Confidence Intervalp-valueTime (linear)0.900.89, 0.911.5e-63Time (quadratic)1.011.00, 1.011.3e-33Time (cubic)1.001.00, 1.007.1e-23Originator0.910.86, 0.960.0013

Acknowledgements:

The authors acknowledge the members of OPAL Rheumatology Ltd and their patients for providing clinical data for this study, and Software4Specialists Pty Ltd for providing the Audit4 platform.

Supported in part by a research grant from Investigator-Initiated Studies Program of Merck & Co Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA. The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Merck & Co Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Disclosure of Interests:

Claire Deakin: None declared, Geoff Littlejohn Consultant of: Over the last 5 years Geoffrey Littlejohn has received educational grants and consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Sandoz, Sanofi and Seqirus., Hedley Griffiths Consultant of: AbbVie, Gilead, Novartis and Lilly., Tegan Smith: None declared, Catherine OSullivan: None declared, Paul Bird Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly, abbvie, pfizer, BMS, UCB, Gilead, Novartis

POS1461-HPR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NOVEL EPRO DELIVERY SYSTEM TO MEASURE PATIENT QUALITY OF LIFE IN ROUTINE CLINICAL CARE: AN ANALYSIS OF 5 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE

Background:

Registry studies and clinical trials are increasingly incorporating patient reported outcomes (PROs) to measure the full burden of disease and better measure the efficacy and value of medicines; however, the burden of paper-based surveys, time constraints, and privacy concerns impede the widespread use of PROs in routine clinical care.

Objectives:

To develop a simple and secure technological solution to incorporate validated PROs into routine clinical care for patients with rheumatic diseases, and to assess the patient response to functional assessment of chronic illness therapy fatigue (FACIT-F), patient health questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2), and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) questionnaires delivered using this ePRO method.

Methods:

A novel ePRO questionnaire delivery system was developed by Software4Specialists in partnership with OPAL Rheumatology. Validated PRO questionnaires were sent from the patient’s electronic medical record (Audit4, Software4Specialists) and delivered to the patient’s email address at time intervals specified by the rheumatologist (defaults to quarterly) or completed in the clinic waiting room prior to the consultation using a tablet or the patient’s smart phone (in-practice). Completed questionnaires were encrypted and returned directly to the patient’s Audit4 electronic medical record held on the clinician’s server for review at the next clinical consultation. The link to the PRO questionnaire expired within 28 days if the questionnaire was not completed, and the questionnaires were automatically cancelled if 2 consecutive links expired. This technology was made available to up to 111 rheumatologists located in 42 clinics in 6 states/territories in Australia, and the use of this technology to furnish the clinical consultation was voluntary for clinicians and patients. Deidentified clinical data was extracted from the servers of participating rheumatologists and aggregated across all sites.1 Data collected between April 2016-Dec 2020 was analysed descriptively.

Results:

Between April 2016-Dec 2020, 99,505 FACIT-F, PHQ-2 and HCRU questionnaires have been delivered to 5,784 patients from 39 of 42 contributing clinics (93%). 85% of questionnaires were delivered via email and 15% in-practice. Overall, 85% of patients completed at least one questionnaire, and of all questionnaires sent, 73% were completed. These rates have remained consistent over time. The completion rates were higher when questionnaires were delivered to patients in-practice compared to email (96% vs 69%). Females were more likely to engage with the questionnaires than males (87% vs 81%), and older patients were slightly more likely to complete all questionnaires delivered. 69% of questionnaires sent via email were completed on the day they were delivered and 94% were completed within 7 days. The median (IQR) number of questionnaires completed per patient was 3 (1,7) and the median (IQR) time since the first questionnaire was completed was 13 months (5,26).

Conclusion:

The novel Audit4 ePRO delivery system is an effective tool for incorporating PROs into routine clinical care to capture data directly from the patient on the impact of their condition on their quality of life. The data generated provides a unique opportunity to understand the full burden of disease for patients in the real-world setting and the impact of interventions.

References:

[1]Littlejohn GO, Tymms KE, Smith T, Griffiths HT. Using big data from real-world Australian rheumatology encounters to enhance clinical care and research. Clin Exp Rheum 2020:38(5): 874 -880.

Acknowledgements:

The authors acknowledge the members of OPAL Rheumatology Ltd and their patients for providing clinical data for this study, and Software4Specialists Pty Ltd for providing the Audit4 platform.

Disclosure of Interests:

Kathleen Tymms: None declared, Tegan Smith: None declared, Claire Deakin: None declared, Tim Freeman: None declared, David Hoffman: None declared, Dana Segelov: None declared, Hedley Griffiths Consultant of: AbbVie, Gilead, Novartis and Lilly., Sabina Ciciriello: None declared, Peter Youssef: None declared, David Mathers: None declared, Catherine OSullivan: None declared, Geoff Littlejohn Consultant of: Over the last 5 years Geoffrey Littlejohn has received educational grants and consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Sandoz, Sanofi and Seqirus

POS0753 SUBSPECIALTY LUPUS CLINIC CARE IS ASSOCIATED WITH HIGHER QUALITY FOR PATIENTS WITH SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS

Background:

Healthcare quality for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a modifiable target for improving patient outcomes. Disease-specific subspecialty clinics offer experienced healthcare professionals, collaborative multidisciplinary teams and streamlined care processes. A single centre study in the USA has suggested superior performance of the subspecialty lupus clinic in the provision of quality care (1), but this has not been examined outside the USA where access to care may be influential.

Objectives:

To assess the quality of SLE care provided in a subspecialty lupus clinic compared with hospital general rheumatology and private rheumatology clinics in a non-US, universal healthcare setting.

Methods:

Lupus patients (n = 258) were recruited in 2016 from various clinic settings in Australia, including a subspecialty lupus clinic (n = 147), two hospital general rheumatology clinics (n = 56) and two private clinics (n = 55). Quality of care was assessed using 31 validated SLE quality indicators (QI) encompassing diagnostic work-up, disease and comorbidities assessment, drug monitoring, preventative care and reproductive health (2,3). Data were collected from medical records and patient questionnaires. Overall and individual QI performance was calculated and compared between the three clinic settings, and multivariable regression was performed to adjust for sociodemographic, disease and healthcare factors.

Results:

Median [IQR] overall performance on eligible QIs was higher in the lupus clinic (66.7% [16.9]) than the hospital general rheumatology (52.7% [10.6]) and private rheumatology (50.00% [18.0]) clinics (p <0.01), and remained significant with multivariable adjustment. This trend was still observed when the overall performance was reassessed to include patient self-report (73.1% [14.8] vs 68.1% [11.5] vs 63.2% [13.4], p <0.01). This difference may be due to consistent formal assessments of disease activity (100% vs 0% vs 0%, p <0.01) and disease damage (95.9% vs 0% vs 0%, p <0.01) at the lupus clinic. Performance was high across all clinic settings for diagnostic work-up, comorbidity assessment, drug monitoring, prednisolone taper, osteoporosis management, lupus nephritis and pregnancy quality indicators. However, the lupus clinic significantly outperformed the other clinic settings on eligible quality indicators for new medication counselling, pre-immunosuppression hepatitis and tuberculosis screening, drug toxicity assessment, sun avoidance education, vaccinations, cardiovascular risk factor assessment and contraception counselling.

Conclusion:

SLE patients managed in a subspecialty lupus clinic received higher overall quality of care when compared to hospital general rheumatology and private rheumatology clinics. Regular assessment of QI performance can improve quality of care for patients in all clinic settings.

References:

[1]Arora, S et al. Does Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Care Provided in a Lupus Clinic Result in Higher Quality of Care Than That Provided in a General Rheumatology Clinic? Arthritis Care Res. 2018;70(12):1771-1777.

[2]Mosca, M et al. Development of quality indicators to evaluate the monitoring of SLE patients in routine clinical practice. Autoimmune Rev. 2011;10(7):383-8.

[3]Yazdany, J et al. A quality indicator set for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;61(3):370-7.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

POS0223 PATTERNS OF JANUS KINASE INHIBITOR CYCLING FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS IN REAL-WORLD CLINICAL PRACTICE: AN ANALYSIS OF THE OPAL DATASET

Background:

There are currently eleven biologic and targeted synthetic (b/ts)DMARDs acting via five different modes of action available for the treatment of RA in Australia. The cost of b/tsDMARDs is subsidized by government for patients that have active RA despite six months of combination csDMARD therapy. Once a patient is eligible, the clinician can prescribe the b/tsDMARD they deem to be the most clinically appropriate for the patient. In Oct 2015 the first JAK inhibitor (JAKi) became available in Australia (tofacitinib, TOF), baricitinib (BARI) became available in Sept 2018, and upadacitinib (UPA) in May 2020. Each of these oral tsDMARDs possess different selectivity profiles towards different members of the JAK family (JAK1–3 and Tyk2).

Objectives:

The aim of this analysis was to determine the patterns of JAKi cycling in real-world practice in Australia.

Methods:

Deidentified clinical data were sourced from the OPAL dataset, which is collected in a custom-built electronic medical record during the routine consultation1. Data from patients >18 years with RA who commenced a b/tsDMARD between Jan-2007 and Dec-2020 were included in the analysis. A visual analytics software program was used to display data on medication initiation and cessation dates, and reasons for stopping tsDMARDs, which is recorded in the medical record at the time of the decision.

Results:

At Dec 2020, 28% of the 52,190 patients with RA in the OPAL dataset were prescribed b/tsDMARDs. Of these patients, 3,850 (26.3%) were currently prescribed a JAKi with 51.4% receiving TOF, 29.2% BARI and 19.4% UPA. In 2020, JAKi initiations accounted for 48.8% of all initiations and 30.7% of 1st line initiations; an increase of 6.1% and 3.5% from 2019, respectively. The percentage of patients switching from a first line JAKi to a second line JAKi rather than an agent with another mode of action increased from 33.1% in 2019 to 42.6% in 2020. This is despite 26.2% in 2019 and 45.8% in 2020 of the patients switching to another JAKi citing lack of efficacy as the reason for JAKi discontinuation. In the period between May 2020, when a third JAKi (UPA) become available, and Dec 2020, the majority of patients switching from first line TOF or BARI to another JAKI switched to UPA (69.4% and 83.9%, respectively), whilst 30.6% of first line TOF patients switched to BARI (30.6%), and 16.1% of first line BARI patients switched to TOF in second line. The majority of patients switching from second line TOF or BARI to a third line JAKi switched to UPA (73% and 96%, respectively), with 27% of second line TOF patients switching to BARI and a very low number moving from second line BARI to TOF (4%). JAKi choice after a third line TOF or BARI was almost exclusively UPA (86.2% and 95.5%, respectively).

Conclusion:

There has been significant and sustained uptake of JAKi for the management of RA in Australia and JAKi cycling is increasingly common in routine clinical care. Clinical outcomes and persistence following JAKi cycling requires further investigation.

References:

[1]Littlejohn GO, Tymms KE, Smith T, Griffiths HT. Using big data from real-world Australian rheumatology encounters to enhance clinical care and research. Clin Exp Rheumatol. Sep-Oct 2020;38(5):874-880.

Figure 1.

Patterns of JAKi cycling for the management of rheumatoid arthritis in first, second and third line switching.

Acknowledgements:

The authors acknowledge the members of OPAL Rheumatology Ltd and their patients for providing clinical data for this study, and Software4Specialists Pty Ltd for providing the Audit4 platform

Disclosure of Interests:

Sabina Ciciriello: None declared, Tegan Smith: None declared, Catherine OSullivan: None declared, Kathleen Tymms: None declared, Peter Youssef: None declared, David Mathers: None declared, Claire Deakin: None declared, Hedley Griffiths Consultant of: AbbVie, Gilead, Novartis and Lilly., Geoff Littlejohn Speakers bureau: Over the last 5 years Geoffrey Littlejohn has received educational grants and consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Sandoz, Sanofi and Seqirus.

Nociplastic pain: towards an understanding of prevalent pain conditions

Nociplastic pain is the semantic term suggested by the international community of pain researchers to describe a third category of pain that is mechanistically distinct from nociceptive pain, which is caused by ongoing inflammation and damage of tissues, and neuropathic pain, which is caused by nerve damage. The mechanisms that underlie this type of pain are not entirely understood, but it is thought that augmented CNS pain and sensory processing and altered pain modulation play prominent roles. The symptoms observed in nociplastic pain include multifocal pain that is more widespread or intense, or both, than would be expected given the amount of identifiable tissue or nerve damage, as well as other CNS-derived symptoms, such as fatigue, sleep, memory, and mood problems. This type of pain can occur in isolation, as often occurs in conditions such as fibromyalgia or tension-type headache, or as part of a mixed-pain state in combination with ongoing nociceptive or neuropathic pain, as might occur in chronic low back pain. It is important to recognise this type of pain, since it will respond to different therapies than nociceptive pain, with a decreased responsiveness to peripherally directed therapies such as anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids, surgery, or injections.

Impact of anti-citrullinated protein antibody on tumor necrosis factor inhibitor or abatacept response in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) serostatus on response to treatment with either tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Data was obtained from the Optimizing Patient outcomes in Australian RheumatoLogy (OPAL) dataset. Patient data were included in the analysis if they commenced treatment with abatacept or TNFi between 01 August 2006 and 30 June 2017 and had at least 12 months' follow-up. The primary outcome was the mean change in the clinical disease activity index (CDAI) score from baseline to 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 2,052 patients were included of which 1,415 were in the TNFi cohort (n=1,053 ACPA positive) and 637 in the abatacept cohort (n=445 ACPA positive). Patients were predominantly female (75% TNFi; 80% abatacept) with no significant difference in age between cohorts. Patients with ACPA positivity had longer disease duration before commencing treatment in both the TNFi and abatacept cohorts compared to ACPA negative patients. No difference in disease severity was observed in those with ACPA negativity compared to those with ACPA positivity. Patients treated with TNFi and abatacept had significantly improved mean change in CDAI after 12 months; ACPA positivity was associated with greater response to treatment with abatacept compared to that in patients with ACPA negativity (p=0.011). No difference in response was observed based on ACPA serostatus in patients treated with TNFi (p=0.73).

CONCLUSION

Baseline ACPA positivity was associated with improved clinical response using CDAI outcome measure at 12 months for abatacept but not for TNFi therapies.

Key Milestones Contributing to the Understanding of the Mechanisms Underlying Fibromyalgia

The promulgation of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1990 criteria for fibromyalgia (FM) classification has significantly contributed to an era of increased research into mechanisms that underlie the disorder. The previous emphasis on putative peripheral nociceptive mechanisms has advanced to identifying of changes in central neural networks that modulate pain and other sensory processes. The influences of psychosocial factors on the dynamic and complex neurobiological mechanisms involved in the fibromyalgia clinical phenotype are now better defined. This review highlights key milestones that have directed knowledge concerning the fundamental mechanisms contributing to fibromyalgia.

Dynamic CTA and MRA in a case of severe Raynaud's phenomenon

Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) is a condition where arterial spasm, usually in the fingers, causes episodes of reduced blood flow. The condition is either idiopathic (primary) or related to a connective tissue disorder or drug response (secondary). We present a case of severe RP where we performed a novel-sequenced CTA and MRA during a prolonged active episode of peripheral vasospasm. Real-time multidisciplinary consultation resulted in appropriate therapy with symptoms alleviation within hours of presentation.

THU0209 UPTAKE OF JANUS KINASE INHIBITORS FOR MANAGEMENT OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS IN AUSTRALIA

Background:

JAK inhibitors (JAKi) are oral tsDMARDs with a different mode of action (MOA) to both oral cs- and parenteral bDMARDs. In Australia the cost of b/tsDMARDs for treatment of RA is subsidized if the patient has documented high levels of clinical/laboratory disease activity and has not responded to a pre-specified combination of csDMARDs, including MTX. Once eligible for subsidy the clinician can prescribe the b/tsDMARD deemed most clinically appropriate.

Objectives:

To determine the patterns of use and reasons for initiation and discontinuation of JAKi in real-world rheumatology practice in Australia.

Methods:

Deidentified clinical data were sourced from the OPAL dataset, which is collected in a custom-built electronic medical record at the time of the consultation1by 94 rheumatologists in Australia, representing one third of Australian clinical rheumatologists. Data from patients >18 years with a diagnosis of RA who commenced a b/tsDMARD between Jan-2007 and Sept-2019 were included in the analysis. Tableau®was used to display data on medication initiation and cessation dates, and reasons for starting and stopping b/tsDMARDs, which is recorded at the time of the decision.

Results:

At Sept 2019, there were 45,317 patients with RA in the data set, with 27% prescribed b/tsDMARDs. Of patients currently on treatment at Sept 2019, 53% were receiving a TNFi and 21% a JAKi, with the remainder receiving tocilizumab, abatacept or rituximab. Of patients who commenced their current treatment after JAKi’s become available in Sept 2015, 46% were treated with a TNFi, and 32% were treated with a JAKi. Tofacitinib (TOF) has been the most prescribed b/tsDMARD since Sept 2015 with 22% of all initiations; however, since baricitinib (BARI) became available in Sept 2018, it has taken over as the preferred JAKi with 24% of new initiations compared to 14% for TOF. From Sept 2018-Sept 2019 etanercept and adalimumab were the most commonly prescribed agents in first line, followed by TOF then BARI; however, BARI was the most prescribed agent in lines 2-6+ (figure 1). The main clinician-listed reason for choice of TOF was MOA in 54%, efficacy compared with alternatives in 30%, mode of administration in 7%, efficacy as monotherapy in 7%, and safety in 1%. BARI was chosen for MOA in 35%, efficacy compared with alternatives in 38%, mode of administration in 12%, efficacy as monotherapy in 12%, and safety in 1%. The main reasons for stopping TOF were lack of efficacy (34%), better alternative (25%) and adverse reaction (13%); those for BARI were lack of efficacy (35%) and adverse reaction (25%) which is consistent with the rates observed in the first 12-months of clinical experience with TOF, and better alternative (12%). Patient non-adherence was listed in 1% and 2% of cessations for TOF and BARI, respectively. 45% of patients discontinuing a JAKi in first line switched to a TNFi in second line, and 40% switched to another JAKi, citing lack of efficacy, adverse reaction, and better alternative as the reason for switching.

Figure 1.

Rank of new initiations by line of therapy (Sept 2018-Sept 2019)

Conclusion:

There has been significant and sustained uptake of JAKi for the management of RA in Australia. MOA and perceived efficacy rate much higher than mode of administration for clinicians when selecting a JAKi. Clinical outcomes and persistence following JAKi cycling requires further investigation.

References:

Littlejohn GO, Tymms KE, Smith T, Griffiths HT. Using big data from real-world Australian rheumatology encounters to enhance clinical care and research. Clin Exp Rheum Nov 2019

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

Real-world evaluation of effectiveness, persistence, and usage patterns of tofacitinib in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Australia

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to describe the real-world evidence for effectiveness, treatment persistence, and treatment patterns among patients in the community with rheumatoid arthritis treated with the JAK inhibitor tofacitinib.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, non-interventional cohort study that extracted data for new users of tofacitinib or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) from the Australian Optimizing Patient outcomes in Australian RheumatoLogy (OPAL) dataset between March 2015 and September 2018. Patients were propensity score matched at a 1:2 tofacitinib to bDMARD ratio based on age, sex, and selected baseline treatment combinations. Treatment effectiveness was evaluated using disease status measures. Treatment persistence was calculated and the percentage of patients receiving monotherapy or combination therapy at treatment initiation was evaluated.

RESULTS

Data from 2810 patients were extracted and 1950 patients were included in the matched population (1300 bDMARD initiators and 650 tofacitinib initiators). Patients were predominantly aged 55 to 74 years (57.8%) and female (81.2%). After 18 months of treatment, 52.4% and 57.8% of patients had achieved disease activity score (DAS) remission in the bDMARD and tofacitinib groups, respectively. The median treatment persistence for tofacitinib was similar to that for bDMARDs: 34.2 months (95% CI 32.2 to not reached) and 33.8 months (95% CI 28.8 to 40.4), respectively. In the overall population, more patients were prescribed tofacitinib as monotherapy (43.4%) compared with bDMARD monotherapy (33.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Tofacitinib demonstrated treatment effectiveness and persistence similar to bDMARDs. Overall, there was a trend for more use of tofacitinib as monotherapy than bDMARDs. Key Points • This study provides real-world evidence regarding effectiveness, treatment persistence, and treatment patterns, among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the community being treated with tofacitinib. • The study suggests that tofacitinib is an effective and enduring intervention in RA with tofacitinib persistence and effectiveness comparable to bDMARDs.

Effectiveness of biologics in Australian patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a large observational study: REAL

BACKGROUND

The comparative effectiveness of biologic treatment regimens in a real world Australian population is unknown.

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD) as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate and/or other conventional DMARD (cDMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

A retrospective, non-interventional study was conducted that investigated the use of bDMARD in adult patients with RA in routine clinical practice. Data were extracted from the Optimising Patient Outcomes in Australian Rheumatology - Quality Use of Medicines Initiative database. Real-world effectiveness was measured using the 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28) and clinical disease activity index (CDAI) by treatment group at baseline, weeks 12 and 24.

RESULTS

A total of 2970 patients was included with a median (min-max) age of 60.0 (19.0-94.0) years and median (min-max) duration of RA before first bDMARD treatment of 6.0 (0.2-58.3) years. A total of 1177 patients received more than one bDMARD during the analysis period of 1 January 1997 to 15 August 2015. Patients had 4922 treatment 'episodes' (defined as a cycle of continuous individual bDMARD prescribing in a single patient). Patients received a mean (SD) of 1.7 (1.0) episodes of treatment with median (min-max) treatment duration of 0.7 (0-11.8) years; median treatment duration was higher with the first treatment episode. bDMARD were most commonly initiated in combination with methotrexate (73.9% of episodes) and least commonly as monotherapy (9.9% of episodes). Median (min-max) baseline DAS28 decreased from 5.3 (0-8.7) with the first bDMARD to 3.7 (0-8.8) with the second. Median baseline CDAI similarly decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients tended to persist longer on their first bDMARD treatment. bDMARD as monotherapy or in combination appear to be accepted treatment strategies in the real world.

Modulation of NMDA Receptor Activity in Fibromyalgia

Activation of the N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) results in increased sensitivity of spinal cord and brain pathways that process sensory information, particularly those which relate to pain. The NMDAR shows increased activity in fibromyalgia and hence modulation of the NMDAR is a target for therapeutic intervention. A literature review of interventions impacting on the NMDAR shows a number of drugs to be active on the NMDAR mechanism in fibromyalgia patients, with variable clinical effects. Low-dose intravenous ketamine and oral memantine both show clinically useful benefit in fibromyalgia. However, consideration of side-effects, logistics and cost need to be factored into management decisions regarding use of these drugs in this clinical setting. Overall benefits with current NMDAR antagonists appear modest and there is a need for better strategy trials to clarify optimal dose schedules and to delineate potential longer–term adverse events. Further investigation of the role of the NMDAR in fibromyalgia and the effect of other molecules that modulate this receptor appear important to enhance treatment targets in fibromyalgia.

Longitudinal study of clinical prognostic factors in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: the PREDICT study

AIM

To assess the association between baseline clinical prognostic factors and subsequent Disease Activity Score of 28 joints (DAS28) remission in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Data were collected using point of care clinical software from participating rheumatology centres. Patients aged 18 years or over whose date of clinical onset of RA was within the previous 12-24 months, who had at least 6 months of follow-up data and a DAS28-ESR (erythrocyte sedimentation rate) score recorded between 12 and 24 months from first being seen for RA were included. Data collected included baseline demographics, mode of disease onset, pattern of joint involvement at onset, smoking status, DAS28, rheumatoid factor (RF), anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA), time from symptom onset to presentation and disease activity at baseline. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression of DAS28-ESR remission between 12 and 24 months after first assessment were performed.

RESULTS

Data from 1017 patients were analyzed: 70% female; mean age 60 years (SD: 14.7); 70% RF-positive, 58% ACPA-positive. The strongest age and sex adjusted baseline predictors of DAS28-ESR remission at 12-24 months were remission at baseline (odds ratio [OR]: 4.49, 95% CI: 2.17-9.29, P < 0.001), being male (OR: 2.42, 95% CI: 1.46-4.01, P < 0.001), abstaining from alcohol (P < 0.001) and being lower weight (OR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.97-1.00, P = 0.015). There was no statistically significant association between joint onset patterns, mode of onset, RF, ACPA or smoking status.

CONCLUSION

In this observational study, patients with early RA at risk of not achieving remission include those with high disease activity at baseline, women, those who drink alcohol and those with higher body weight.

International travel in the immunocompromised patient: a cross-sectional survey of travel advice in 254 consecutive patients

AIMS

Our primary aim was to determine the rate of overseas travel in immunocompromised individuals attending appropriate clinics at an Australian tertiary care hospital. We also aimed to characterise health-seeking behaviour prior to travel and investigated sources of pre-travel advice, compared travel patterns and activities between three specific immunosuppressed groups, and examined pre-immunosuppression patient serology.

METHODS

We implemented a cross-sectional survey of patients between February and August 2012. This survey was implemented among three outpatient populations at Monash Medical Centre, an Australian tertiary care hospital.

RESULTS

We recruited 254 immunosuppressed adults from three patient populations: human immunodeficiency virus-positive individuals, renal transplant patients and rheumatology patients requiring immunosuppressive therapy. No clinical intervention was performed. In the 10 years preceding the survey, 153 (60.2%) participants reported international travel. Of these, 105 (68.6%) were immunosuppressed at the time of travel. These patients were 47.6% male and 60% Australian born. Forty per cent were visiting friends and relatives as part of their travel. Fifty-four per cent of those immunocompromised at the time of travel were going to high-risk destinations. Pathology files indicated that serological screening was frequently not performed prior to immunosuppression in the renal transplant and rheumatology groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunocompromised patients often travel to high-risk destinations with limited or inadequate pre-travel preparations. Doctors caring for the immunocompromised should be aware of travel risks, suitable vaccination protocols and when to refer to specialist travel clinics.

Terminology, criteria, and definitions in complex regional pain syndrome: challenges and solutions

Complex regional pain syndrome has long been recognized as a severe and high impact chronic pain disorder. However, the condition has historically been difficult to define and classify and little attention has been given to where complex regional pain syndrome sits within other apparently similar chronic pain disorders, such as fibromyalgia and regional pain syndrome. In this review challenges in regard to nomenclature, definitions, and classification of complex regional pain syndrome are reviewed and suggestions are provided about future directions.

Fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia is a common illness characterized by chronic widespread pain, sleep problems (including unrefreshing sleep), physical exhaustion and cognitive difficulties. The definition, pathogenesis and treatment are controversial, and some even contest the existence of this disorder. In 1990, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) defined classification criteria that required multiple tender points (areas of tenderness occurring in muscles and muscle-tendon junctions) and chronic widespread pain. In 2010, the ACR preliminary diagnostic criteria excluded tender points, allowed less extensive pain and placed reliance on patient-reported somatic symptoms and cognitive difficulties. Fibromyalgia occurs in all populations worldwide, and symptom prevalence ranges between 2% and 4% in the general population. The prevalence of people who are actually diagnosed with fibromyalgia ('administrative prevalence') is much lower. A model of fibromyalgia pathogenesis has been suggested in which biological and psychosocial variables interact to influence the predisposition, triggering and aggravation of a chronic disease, but the details are unclear. Diagnosis requires the history of a typical cluster of symptoms and the exclusion of a somatic disease that sufficiently explains the symptoms by medical examination. Current evidence-based guidelines emphasize the value of multimodal treatments, which encompass both non-pharmacological and selected pharmacological treatments tailored to individual symptoms, including pain, fatigue, sleep problems and mood problems. For an illustrated summary of this Primer, visit: http://go.nature.com/LIBdDX.

Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in the Australian OPAL Cohort Show Significant Improvement in Disease Activity over 5 Years: A Multicenter Observational Study

Objective.

To evaluate disease activity trends in a large cohort of Australian patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from 2009 to 2014.

Methods.

This is a multicenter, cross-sectional, noninterventional study of patients with RA treated in Australia. Patients with RA treated at participating OPAL (Optimising Patient outcome in Australian RheumatoLogy) clinics were included in the study. Data, deidentified by patient, clinic, and clinician, were identified using a purpose-written electronic medical record. Patient demographics, disease onset, medications, and disease measures were analyzed. The Disease Activity Score at 28 joints (DAS28) was used to classify patients into the disease activity states of remission: low disease activity, moderate disease activity (MDA), and high disease activity. Choice of therapy was at the discretion of the treating clinician.

Results.

At the time of analysis, the database contained 15,679 patients with RA, 8998 of whom fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Mean age was 63.2 years, mean disease duration was 13.8 years, and the majority were women (72.4%). A total of 37,274 individual DAS28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate scores were recorded for the 8998 patients. The frequency of remission increased significantly from 36.7% in 2009 to 53.5% in 2014 (p < 0.001), and that of MDA decreased from 33% (2009) to 22.2% (2014). The use of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs for the patients in remission increased from 17% in 2009 to 36.9% in 2014.

Conclusion.

Contemporary management of RA in Australia shows improvements in disease activity toward the target of remission over a 5-year period.

Metabolic factors in diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis - a review of clinical data

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to review the literature linking metabolic factors to Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH), in order to assess associations between growth factors and DISH.

METHOD

We identified studies in our personal database and PubMed using the following keywords in various combinations: "diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis", "ankylosing hyperostosis", "Forestier's disease", "diabetes", "insulin", "obesity", "metabolic", "growth factors", "adipokines", "glucose tolerance" and "chondrocytes".

RESULTS

We were not able to do a systematic review due to variability in methodology of studies. We found positive associations between obesity (especially abdominal obesity), Type 2 diabetes mellitus, glucose intolerance, hyperinsulinemia and DISH.

CONCLUSION

Current research indicates that certain metabolic factors associate with DISH. More precise studies deriving from these findings on these and other newly identified bone-growth factors are needed.

OPAL: a clinician driven point of care observational data management consortium

A vast amount of important information on the various rheumatic diseases that the rheumatologist treats is available in the medical records derived from the patient consultation. Until recently, it has been difficult to assemble and interpret this data. Moreover, the 'everyday' rheumatologist seeing the 'everyday' patient often does not contribute data to better understanding of 'everyday' clinical issues. We discuss an approach to this problem by describing a blending of a customised electronic medical record with a consortium of like-minded clinicians. We feel that this approach demonstrates the powerful potential for targeted point of care data collection in rheumatology research and patient management.

A multi-center, observational study shows high proportion of Australian rheumatoid arthritis patients have inadequate disease control

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the disease activity and current pharmacological interventions used to achieve remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in Australia.

METHODS

Rheumatoid arthritis patients treated in participating Australian clinics were included in the study. Patient demographics, disease onset, medications and disease measures were analyzed. Data, de-identified to the patient, clinic and clinician were captured using an electronic clinical management program. The disease activity score (DAS28) was used to classify patients into the disease activity states of remission, low disease activity (LDA), moderate disease activity (MDA) and high disease activity (HDA). Choice of therapy was at the discretion of the treating clinician.

RESULTS

A total of 5686 patients, 72.9% female, 26.9% male, with mean age 61.1 (SD 13.6) years and mean disease duration of 11.5 (SD 10.5) years were analyzed. DAS28 ESR (erythrocyte sedimentation rate) scores were recorded for 2973 patients, with 41.6% in remission, 18.6% LDA, 31.6% MDA and 8.2% HDA. Of those in remission, 17% received a biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (bDMARD), 73% methotrexate (MTX), 19% leflunomide (LEF) and 28% prednisolone. Of the patients with MDA, 20% received a bDMARD, 76% MTX, 24% LEF and 39% prednisolone. Of the patients in HDA, 27% received a bDMARD, 78% MTX, 31% LEF and 60% with prednisolone.

CONCLUSIONS

Cross-sectional assessment of this large cohort of Australian RA patients found a large proportion remain in moderate or high disease activity; suggesting a considerable evidence-practice gap. Improvement in disease control in this group may reduce future health burdens.

Australian and New Zealand evidence-based recommendations for pain management by pharmacotherapy in adult patients with inflammatory arthritis

AIM

To develop Australian and New Zealand evidence-based recommendations for pain management by pharmacotherapy in adult patients with optimally treated inflammatory arthritis (IA).

METHODS

Four hundred and fifty-three rheumatologists from 17 countries including 46 rheumatologists from Australia and New Zealand participated in the 2010 3e (Evidence, Expertise, Exchange) Initiative. Using a formal voting process, rheumatologists from 15 national scientific committees 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 EULAR/ACR abstracts. Relevant studies were retrieved for data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Rheumatologists from Australia and New Zealand used the evidence to develop a set of national recommendations. These recommendations were then formulated and assessed for agreement and the potential impact on clinical practice. The Oxford Levels of Evidence and Grade of Recommendation were applied to each recommendation.

RESULTS

The systematic reviews identified 49 242 references, from which 167 studies which met the pre-specified inclusion criteria. Combining this evidence with expert opinion led to the development of 10 final Australian and New Zealand recommendations. The recommendations relate to pain measurement, and the use of analgesic medications in patients with and without co-morbidities and during pregnancy and lactation. The recommendations reflect the clinical practice of the majority of the participating rheumatologists (mean level of agreement 7.24-9.65).

CONCLUSIONS

Ten Australian and New Zealand evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of pain by pharmacotherapy in adults with optimally treated IA were developed. They are supported by a large panel of rheumatologists, thus enhancing their utility in everyday clinical practice.

Fibromylagia

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia is a common and debilitating condition. The cardinal feature of fibromyalgia is musculoskeletal pain, usually accompanied by other problems, such as fatigue, sleep disturbance and cognitive difficulties. Fibromyalgia commonly coexists with other chronic illnesses and can result in poorer outcomes if untreated.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to discuss when fibromyalgia should be considered as a diagnosis, how it is diagnosed, the current understanding of the pathophysiology of fibromyalgia and the management strategies available.

DISCUSSION

The features of fibromyalgia are similar to those of many other chronic illnesses, sometimes resulting in diagnostic confusion. Fibromyalgia can co-exist with other disorders and it is important to consider the possibility of fibromyalgia contributing to symptoms in any chronically ill patient.