Increasing uptake through collaboration in the development of core outcome sets: Lessons learned at OMERACT 2023

OBJECTIVE

This manuscript highlights the importance of enhancing the uptake of Core Outcome Sets (COS) by building partnerships with Collaborators and addressing their needs in COS development.

METHODS AND SETTING

This session was structured as a simulation, resembling a format akin to a classic television game show. The moderator posed a series of questions to eight different Collaborator groups who briefly described the importance of COS within their areas of interest. Previous studies examining the uptake of individual core outcomes revealed disparities in uptake rates. The Identified barriers to the uptake of COS include the lack of recommendations for validated instruments for each domain, insufficient involvement of patients and key Collaborator groups in COS development, and a lack of awareness regarding the existence of COS.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis underscores the need for COS development approaches that prioritize the inclusion of patients and diverse Collaborator groups at every stage. While current studies on COS uptake are limited, future research should explore the broader implementation of COS across diverse disease categories and delve into the factors that hinder or facilitate their uptake such as, the importance of COS developers extending their work to recommending domains with well validated instruments. Embracing patient leadership and multifaceted engagement is essential for advancing the relevance and impact of COS in clinical research.

Routine follow-up may not be needed for people undergoing joint replacement surgery

The studyKingsbury SR, Smith LK, Czoski Murray CJ, et al. Safety of disinvestment in mid- to late-term follow-up post primary hip and knee replacement: the UK SAFE evidence synthesis and recommendations. Health Soc Care Deliv Res 2022;10. doi:10.3310/KODQ0769To read the full NIHR Alert, go to: https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/alert/joint-replacement-many-people-can-safely-wait-10-years-for-follow-up/.

Tackling Unmet Medical Need: How Slow-Release Intra-articular Corticosteroids Could Play a Role in Improving Quality of Life and Reducing Risk in Osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the fastest growing cause of disability worldwide, but, with few proven therapeutic options, it is an underserved condition. With increasingly ageing populations contributing to a rising global prevalence, this unmet need only threatens to worsen in the coming years. To date, researchers have tried and failed in their bids to develop new ways to treat the pain and loss of function that significantly impacts health-related quality of life (HrQoL) and leaves people vulnerable to accumulating disability and at risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), comorbidities, and mortality. Now, a novel way to deliver one of the only proven interventions for pain and inflammation, corticosteroid injections, is on the horizon for knee OA. Slow-release formulations could possibly prolong the clinical benefit of a single injection from 6 weeks to 6 months, providing a new option to improve HrQoL for people with OA, and maybe even breaking the cycle of inflammation that likely contributes to progression. In this key opinion leader article, Philip Conaghan and Lee Simon discuss OA’s significant Quality of life (QoL) and long-term health impact. They also outline the current, inadequate treatment landscape, and explain how slow-release corticosteroids could potentially help tackle a huge unmet medical need.

Benefit-Risk Analysis of Upadacitinib Compared with Adalimumab in the Treatment of Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease requiring long-term treatment. Upadacitinib (UPA), a Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor, is a new treatment for RA. The benefit-risk profile of a medication is best understood by evaluating the number needed to treat (NNT) and the number needed to harm (NNH). This analysis evaluated the comparative risk-benefit of UPA versus adalimumab (ADA).

METHODS

Post-hoc analyses were performed using data from the SELECT-COMPARE trial of UPA versus placebo (PBO) and UPA versus ADA among patients with active RA who remained on stable methotrexate (MTX) treatment and had an inadequate response; patients who failed to achieve response were rescued by predefined criteria-PBO or ADA switch to UPA, and UPA switch to ADA (all patients on PBO were switched to UPA at week 26). This analysis assessed efficacy and adverse events of special interest (AESIs) at week 26, 48, and 156 (3 years). NNT and NNH (95% confidence intervals) values were calculated between UPA versus ADA for all time points, and between UPA versus PBO for week 26. NNT and NNH values were applied to a hypothetical cohort of 100 patients to estimate the comparative efficacy and safety profiles.

RESULTS

UPA consistently showed greater efficacy than ADA, as evidenced by NNT values < 10 for achievement of Disease Activity Score in 28 joints based on C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) of < 2.6 and ≤ 3.2, respectively, and functional improvement. Based on indices for disease assessment other than the DAS28-CRP, remission outcomes were higher with UPA versus ADA over 26 weeks (NNTs: 7-12), 48 weeks (NNTs: 9-16), and 156 weeks (NNTs: 9-15). With the exception of herpes zoster, other AESIs demonstrated a similar risk with UPA versus ADA.

CONCLUSION

In patients with active RA despite MTX use, UPA demonstrated an incremental achievement of clinical outcomes compared to ADA together with a similar profile of AESIs with ADA (with the exception of herpes zoster).

What is the added value of ultrasound joint examination for monitoring synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis and can it be used to guide treatment decisions? A systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Synovitis (inflamed joint synovial lining) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be assessed by clinical examination (CE) or ultrasound (US).

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the added value of US, compared with CE alone, in RA synovitis in terms of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane databases were searched from inception to October 2015.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review sought RA studies that compared additional US with CE. Heterogeneity of the studies with regard to interventions, comparators and outcomes precluded meta-analyses. Systematic searches for studies of cost-effectiveness and US and treatment-tapering studies (not necessarily including US) were undertaken.

MATHEMATICAL MODEL

A model was constructed that estimated, for patients in whom drug tapering was considered, the reduction in costs of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and serious infections at which the addition of US had a cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained of £20,000 and £30,000. Furthermore, the reduction in the costs of DMARDs at which US becomes cost neutral was also estimated. For patients in whom dose escalation was being considered, the reduction in number of patients escalating treatment and in serious infections at which the addition of US had a cost per QALY gained of £20,000 and £30,000 was estimated. The reduction in number of patients escalating treatment for US to become cost neutral was also estimated.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight studies were included. Two randomised controlled trials compared adding US to a Disease Activity Score (DAS)-based treat-to-target strategy for early RA patients. The addition of power Doppler ultrasound (PDUS) to a Disease Activity Score 28 joints-based treat-to-target strategy in the Targeting Synovitis in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (TaSER) trial resulted in no significant between-group difference for change in Disease Activity Score 44 joints (DAS44). This study found that significantly more patients in the PDUS group attained DAS44 remission (p = 0.03). The Aiming for Remission in Rheumatoid Arthritis (ARCTIC) trial found that the addition of PDUS and grey-scale ultrasound (GSUS) to a DAS-based strategy did not produce a significant between-group difference in the primary end point: composite DAS of < 1.6, no swollen joints and no progression in van der Heijde-modified total Sharp score (vdHSS). The ARCTIC trial did find that the erosion score of the vdHS had a significant advantage for the US group (p = 0.04). In the TaSER trial there was no significant group difference for erosion. Other studies suggested that PDUS was significantly associated with radiographic progression and that US had added value for wrist and hand joints rather than foot and ankle joints. Heterogeneity between trials made conclusions uncertain. No studies were identified that reported the cost-effectiveness of US in monitoring synovitis. The model estimated that an average reduction of 2.5% in the costs of biological DMARDs would be sufficient to offset the costs of 3-monthly US. The money could not be recouped if oral methotrexate was the only drug used.

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity of the trials precluded meta-analysis. Therefore, no summary estimates of effect were available. Additional costs and health-related quality of life decrements, relating to a flare following tapering or disease progression, have not been included. The feasibility of increased US monitoring has not been assessed.

CONCLUSION

Limited evidence suggests that US monitoring of synovitis could provide a cost-effective approach to selecting RA patients for treatment tapering or escalation avoidance. Considerable uncertainty exists for all conclusions. Future research priorities include evaluating US monitoring of RA synovitis in longitudinal clinical studies.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015017216.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Topical NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Use of topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to treat chronic musculoskeletal conditions has become widely accepted because they can provide pain relief without associated systemic adverse events. This review is an update of 'Topical NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults', originally published in Issue 9, 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To review the evidence from randomised, double-blind, controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of topically applied NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and our own in-house database; the date of the last search was February 2016. We also searched the references lists of included studies and reviews, and sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching online clinical trial registers and manufacturers' web sites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, active or inert carrier (placebo) controlled trials in which treatments were administered to adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain of moderate or severe intensity. Studies had to meet stringent quality criteria and there had to be at least 10 participants in each treatment arm, with application of treatment at least once daily.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. We used numbers of participants achieving each outcome to calculate risk ratio and numbers needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to carrier or other active treatment. We were particularly interested to compare different formulations (gel, cream, plaster) of individual NSAIDs. The primary outcome was 'clinical success', defined as at least a 50% reduction in pain, or an equivalent measure such as a 'very good' or 'excellent' global assessment of treatment, or 'none' or 'slight' pain on rest or movement, measured on a categorical scale.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five new studies for this update, which now has information from 10,631 participants in 39 studies, a 38% increase in participants from the earlier review; 33 studies compared a topical NSAID with carrier. All studies examined topical NSAIDs for treatment of osteoarthritis, and for pooled analyses studies were generally of moderate or high methodological quality, although we considered some at risk of bias from short duration and small size.In studies lasting 6 to 12 weeks, topical diclofenac and topical ketoprofen were significantly more effective than carrier for reducing pain; about 60% of participants had much reduced pain. With topical diclofenac, the NNT for clinical success in six trials (2343 participants) was 9.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 7.1 to 16) (moderate quality evidence). With topical ketoprofen, the NNT for clinical success in four trials (2573 participants) was 6.9 (5.4 to 9.3) (moderate quality evidence). There was too little information for analysis of other individual topical NSAIDs compared with carrier. Few trials compared a topical NSAID to an oral NSAID, but overall they showed similar efficacy (low quality evidence). These efficacy results were almost completely derived from people with knee osteoarthritis.There was an increase in local adverse events (mostly mild skin reactions) with topical diclofenac compared with carrier or oral NSAIDs, but no increase with topical ketoprofen (moderate quality evidence). Reporting of systemic adverse events (such as gastrointestinal upsets) was poor, but where reported there was no difference between topical NSAID and carrier (very low quality evidence). Serious adverse events were infrequent and not different between topical NSAID and carrier (very low quality evidence).Clinical success with carrier occurred commonly - in around half the participants in studies lasting 6 to 12 weeks. Both direct and indirect comparison of clinical success with oral placebo indicates that response rates with carrier (topical placebo) are about twice those seen with oral placebo.A substantial amount of data from completed, unpublished studies was unavailable (up to 6000 participants). To the best of our knowledge, much of this probably relates to formulations that have never been marketed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Topical diclofenac and topical ketoprofen can provide good levels of pain relief beyond carrier in osteoarthritis for a minority of people, but there is no evidence for other chronic painful conditions. There is emerging evidence that at least some of the substantial placebo effects seen in longer duration studies derive from effects imparted by the NSAID carrier itself, and that NSAIDs add to that.

Living with osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-ethnography

OBJECTIVES

To review and synthesize the existing literature on the experience of living with a diagnosis of hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHOD

A systematic review was undertaken using meta-ethnography. A search of both published (AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychINFO, SportsDisc, MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Trials Registry, PubMed) and unpublished/trial registry databases [World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Current Controlled Trials, the United States National Institute of Health Trials Registry, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Portfolio Database] was undertaken from their inception to 5 June 2013.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies formed the meta-ethnography of the lived experiences of people with OA. In total, 1643 people with OA were sampled, the majority diagnosed with knee OA. The evidence base was weak to moderate in quality. The majority of studies indicated that people viewed living with OA negatively. Four key factors influenced their attitudes to the condition: the severity of their symptoms; the impact of these symptoms on their functional capability; their attitude towards understanding their disease; and their perceptions of other people's beliefs towards their disease.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature suggests that greater knowledge of the pathology of OA, management of symptoms, promotion of functional activity for patients and their family/friends networks, and understanding to better inform OA patient's role in society are all important elements that affect a person's attitude to OA. By better understanding these factors during future consultations, clinicians may forge stronger relationships with their patients to more effectively manage this long-term disabling condition.

Allele-dose association of the C5orf30 rs26232 variant with joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

There is increasing evidence to indicate that genetic factors contribute significantly to radiologic joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of the present study was to determine whether genotypes of 10 recently identified RA susceptibility loci are associated with radiologic severity.

METHODS

A 2-stage study was performed using 3 Northern European RA populations: a British cross-sectional population (discovery cohort; n=885) and the Leiden Early Arthritis Clinic (EAC) cohort (n=581) and Yorkshire Early Arthritis Register (YEAR) cohort (n=418) (validation cohorts). Radiologic damage was assessed using a modified Larsen method for scoring radiographs (in the discovery cohort) or modified Sharp/van der Heijde score (in the 2 validation cohorts). A meta-analysis was performed to bring together the evidence from the 3 studies, using data on radiologic severity of joint damage from a single time point.

RESULTS

An allele-dose association of rs26232 was present in the discovery population (P=4×10(-4)); the median modified Larsen scores of radiologic joint damage per genotype were 31 (for those with CC), 27 (for those with CT), and 16 (for those with TT). The allele-dose association of rs26232 was replicated in both the Leiden EAC cohort during the initial 7 years of RA (P=0.04) and the YEAR cohort (P=0.039). In a fixed-effects meta-analysis of all 3 studies, the per T allele effect on the ratio of radiologic severity scores was 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.84, 0.96; P=0.004).

CONCLUSION

The variant rs26232, in the first intron of the C5orf30 locus, is associated with the severity of radiologic damage in RA and is independent of established prognostic biomarkers. The biologic activities of C5orf30 are unknown, but our genetic data suggest that it is involved in mediating joint damage in RA.

Methodologies for semiquantitative evaluation of hip osteoarthritis by magnetic resonance imaging: approaches based on the whole organ and focused on active lesions

OBJECTIVE

As a wider variety of therapeutic options for osteoarthritis (OA) becomes available, there is an increasing need to objectively evaluate disease severity on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This is more technically challenging at the hip than at the knee, and as a result, few systematic scoring systems exist. The OMERACT (Outcome Measures in Rheumatology) filter of truth, discrimination, and feasibility can be used to validate image-based scoring systems. Our objective was (1) to review the imaging features relevant to the assessment of severity and progression of hip OA; and (2) to review currently used methods to grade these features in existing hip OA scoring systems.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted. MEDLINE keyword search was performed for features of arthropathy (such as hip + bone marrow edema or lesion, synovitis, cyst, effusion, cartilage, etc.) and scoring system (hip + OA + MRI + score or grade), with a secondary manual search for additional references in the retrieved publications.

RESULTS

Findings relevant to the severity of hip OA include imaging markers associated with inflammation (bone marrow lesion, synovitis, effusion), structural damage (cartilage loss, osteophytes, subchondral cysts, labral tears), and predisposing geometric factors (hip dysplasia, femoral-acetabular impingement). Two approaches to the semiquantitative assessment of hip OA are represented by Hip OA MRI Scoring System (HOAMS), a comprehensive whole organ assessment of nearly all findings, and the Hip Inflammation MRI Scoring System (HIMRISS), which selectively scores only active lesions (bone marrow lesion, synovitis/effusion). Validation is presently confined to limited assessment of reliability.

CONCLUSION

Two methods for semiquantitative assessment of hip OA on MRI have been described and validation according to the OMERACT Filter is limited to evaluation of reliability.

A systematic literature review on the application of Rasch analysis in musculoskeletal disease -- a special interest group report of OMERACT 11

OBJECTIVE

The Rasch measurement model provides robust analysis of the internal construct validity of outcome measures. We reviewed the application of Rasch analysis in musculoskeletal medicine as part of the work leading to discussion in a Special Interest Group in Rasch Analysis at Outcome Measures in Rheumatology 11.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of SCOPUS and MEDLINE was performed (January 1, 1985, to February 29, 2012. Original research reports in English using "Rasch" or "Item Response Theory" in musculoskeletal diseases were assessed by 2 independent reviewers. The topics of focus and analysis methodology details were recorded.

RESULTS

Of 212 articles reviewed, 114 were included. The number of publications rose from 1 in 1991-1992 to 23 in 2011-February 2012. Disease areas included rheumatoid arthritis (28%), osteoarthritis (16.6%), and general musculoskeletal disorders (43%). Sixty-six reports (57.9%) evaluated psychometric properties of existing scales and 35 (30.7%) involved development of new scales. Nine articles (7.9%) were on methodology illustration. Four articles were on item banking and computer adaptive testing. A majority of the articles reported fit statistics, while the basic Rasch model assumption (i.e., unidimensionality) was examined in only 57.2% of the articles. An improvement in reporting qualities with Rasch articles was noted over time. In addition, only 11.4% of the articles provided a transformation table for interval scale measurement in clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

The Rasch model has been increasingly used in rheumatology over the last 2 decades in a wide range of applications. The majority of the articles demonstrated reasonable quality of reporting. Improvements in quality of reporting over time were revealed.

The ability of synovitis to predict structural damage in rheumatoid arthritis: a comparative study between clinical examination and ultrasound

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate synovitis (clinical vs ultrasound (US)) to predict structural progression in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Patients with RA.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, 2-year follow-up.

DATA COLLECTED

Synovitis (32 joints (2 wrists, 10 metacarpophalangeal, 10 proximal interphalangeal, 10 metatarsophalangeal)) at baseline and after 4 months of therapy by clinical, US grey scale (GS-US) and power doppler (PD-US); x-rays at baseline and at year 2.

ANALYSIS

Measures of association (OR) were tested between structural deterioration and the presence of baseline synovitis, or its persistence, after 4 months of therapy using generalised estimating equation analysis.

RESULTS

Structural deterioration was observed in 9% of the 1888 evaluated joints in 59 patients. Baseline synovitis increased the risk of structural progression: OR=2.01 (1.36-2.98) p<0.001 versus 1.61 (1.06-2.45) p=0.026 versus 1.75 (1.18-2.58) p=0.005 for the clinical versus US-GS versus US-PD evaluation, respectively. In the joints with normal baseline examination (clinical or US), an increased probability for structural progression in the presence of synovitis for the other modality was also observed (OR=2.16 (1.16-4.02) p=0.015 and 3.50 (1.77-6.95) p<0.001 for US-GS and US-PD and 2.79 (1.35-5.76) p=0.002) for clinical examination. Persistent (vs disappearance) synovitis after 4 months of therapy was also predictive of subsequent structural progression.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the validity of synovitis for predicting subsequent structural deterioration irrespective of the modality of examination of joints, but also suggests that both clinical and ultrasonographic examinations may be relevant to optimally evaluate the risk of subsequent structural deterioration.