The impact of autoantibodies on the efficacy of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of bDMARDs in patients with RA with RF/ACPA compared with patients without these autoantibodies. METHODS: Previous systematic literature reviews performed by EULAR RA management task forces were searched for qualifying RCTs. RCTs investigating the efficacy of bDMARDs and including both autoantibody-positive (≤80% of total population) and -negative RA patients were eligible. For trials comparing bDMARD+csDMARD vs csDMARD, relative risks (RR) comparing two groups (RF + vs RF-, ACPA+ vs ACPA-) were calculated for efficacy outcomes for each arm. Subsequently, relative risk ratios (RRRs) were computed, as the ratio of RR of the bDMARD-arm and the RR from the non-bDMARD-arm. Pooled effects were obtained with random effect meta-analyses. RESULTS: Data from 28 eligible RCTs were analyzed, pooling 23 studies in three subgroups: 6 including csDMARD-naïve patients, 14 csDMARD-IR, and 3 TNFi-IR patients. In csDMARD-naïve and csDMARD-IR patients, seropositivity was not associated with a better response to bDMARDs: pooled 6-month ACR20 RRRs 1.02 (0.88-1.18) and 1.09 (0.90-1.32), respectively. Other outcomes showed no difference between groups either. In TNFi-IR patients, based on 3 trials, the 6-month ACR20 RRR was 2.28 (1.31-3.95), favoring efficacy in seropositive patients. Other outcomes mostly showed no significant difference between the groups. Based on the mode of action, efficacy was comparable between RF-positive and RF-negative patients for both TNFi and non-TNFi treatment and also for the individual bDMARDs. CONCLUSION: The effect of bDMARDs is generally comparable in patients with and without RF/ACPA, regardless of the patient population, the mechanism of action or individual drug used.

Identification of a distinct imaging phenotype may improve the management of palindromic rheumatism.

OBJECTIVES: To use high-resolution imaging to characterise palindromic rheumatism (PR) and to compare the imaging pattern observed to that seen in new-onset rheumatoid arthritis (NORA). METHODS: Ultrasound (US) assessment of synovitis, tenosynovitis and non-synovial extracapsular inflammation (ECI) was performed during and between flares in a prospective treatment-naive PR cohort. MRI of the flaring region was performed where possible. For comparison, the same US assessment was also performed in anticyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) positive individuals with musculoskeletal symptoms (CCP+ at risk) and patients with NORA. RESULTS: Thirty-one of 79 patients with PR recruited were assessed during a flare. A high frequency of ECI was identified on US; 19/31 (61%) of patients had ECI including 12/19 (63%) in whom ECI was identified in the absence of synovitis. Only 7/31 (23%) patients with PR had synovitis (greyscale ≥1 and power Doppler ≥1) during flare. In the hands/wrists, ECI was more prevalent in PR compared with NORA and CCP+ at risk (65% vs 29 % vs 6%, p<0.05). Furthermore, ECI without synovitis was specific for PR (42% PR vs 4% NORA (p=0.003) and 6% CCP+ at risk (p=0.0012)). Eleven PR flares were captured by MRI, which was more sensitive than US for synovitis and ECI. 8/31 (26%) patients with PR developed RA and had a similar US phenotype to NORA at progression. CONCLUSION: PR has a distinct US pattern characterised by reversible ECI, often without synovitis. In patients presenting with new joint swelling, US may refine management by distinguishing relapsing from persistent arthritis.

Validity of a two-component imaging-derived disease activity score for improved assessment of synovitis in early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Imaging of joint inflammation provides a standard against which to derive an updated DAS for RA. Our objectives were to develop and validate a DAS based on reweighting the DAS28 components to maximize association with US-assessed synovitis. METHODS: Early RA patients from two observational cohorts (n = 434 and n = 117) and a clinical trial (n = 59) were assessed at intervals up to 104 weeks from baseline; all US scans were within 1 week of clinical exam. There were 899, 163 and 183 visits in each cohort. Associations of combined US grey scale and power Doppler scores (GSPD) with 28 tender joint count and 28 swollen joint count (SJC28), CRP, ESR and general health visual analogue scale were examined in linear mixed model regressions. Cross-validation evaluated model predictive ability. Coefficients learned from training data defined a re-weighted DAS28 that was validated against radiographic progression in independent data (3037 observations; 717 patients). RESULTS: Of the conventional DAS28 components only SJC28 and CRP were associated with GSPD in all three development cohorts. A two-component model including SJC28 and CRP outperformed a four-component model (R2 = 0.235, 0.392, 0.380 vs 0.232, 0.380, 0.375, respectively). The re-weighted two-component DAS28CRP outperformed conventional DAS28 definitions in predicting GSPD (Δtest log-likelihood <-2.6, P < 0.01), Larsen score and presence of erosions. CONCLUSION: A score based on SJC28 and CRP alone demonstrated stronger associations with synovitis and radiographic progression than the original DAS28 and should be considered in research on pathophysiological manifestations of early RA. Implications for clinical management of RA remain to be established.

Genome-wide association study of response to methotrexate in early rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy is a common first treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but many patients do not respond adequately. In order to identify genetic predictors of response, we have combined data from two consortia to carry out a genome-wide study of response to MTX in 1424 early RA patients of European ancestry. Clinical endpoints were change from baseline to 6 months after starting treatment in swollen 28-joint count, tender 28-joint count, C-reactive protein and the overall 3-component disease activity score (DAS28). No single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) reached genome-wide statistical significance for any outcome measure. The strongest evidence for association was with rs168201 in NRG3 (p = 10-7 for change in DAS28). Some support was also seen for association with ZMIZ1, previously highlighted in a study of response to MTX in juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Follow-up in two smaller cohorts of 429 and 177 RA patients did not support these findings, although these cohorts were more heterogeneous.

Efficacy of glucocorticoids, conventional and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a systematic literature review informing the 2016 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic literature review (SLR) informing the 2016 update of the recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: An SLR for the period between 2013 and 2016 was undertaken to assess the efficacy of glucocorticoids (GCs), conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) (tofacitinib and baricitinib) in randomised clinical trials. RESULTS: For GCs, four studies were included in the SLR. Patients without poor prognostic factors experienced benefit when GCs were added to methotrexate (MTX). Lower doses of GCs were similar to higher doses. For csDMARDs, two new studies comparing MTX monotherapy with combination csDMARD were included in the SLR. In the tREACH trial at the end of 12 months no difference between the groups in disease activity, functional ability and radiographic progression was seen, using principles of tight control (treat-to-target). In the CareRA trial, combination therapy with csDMARDs was not superior to MTX monotherapy and monotherapy was better tolerated.For tsDMARDs, tofacitinib and baricitinib were shown to be more effective than placebo (MTX) in different patient populations. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of GCs to csDMARD therapy may be beneficial but the benefits should be balanced against the risk of toxicity. Under tight control conditions MTX monotherapy is not less effective than combination csDMARDs, but better tolerated. Tofacitinib and baricitinib are efficacious in patients with RA, including those with refractory disease.

Efficacy of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a systematic literature review informing the 2016 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To update the evidence for the efficacy of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to inform European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Task Force treatment recommendations. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for phase III or IV (or phase II, if these studies were lacking) randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 2013 and February 2016. Abstracts from the American College of Rheumatology and EULAR conferences were obtained. RESULTS: The RCTs confirmed greater efficacy with a bDMARD+conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD) versus a csDMARDs alone (level 1A evidence). Using a treat-to-target strategy approach, commencing and escalating csDMARD therapy and adding a bDMARD in cases of non-response, is an effective approach (1B). If a bDMARD had failed, improvements in clinical response were seen on switching to another bDMARD (1A), but no clear advantage was seen for switching to an agent with another mode of action. Maintenance of clinical response in patients in remission or low disease activity was best when continuing rather than stopping a bDMARD, but bDMARD dose reduction or 'spacing' was possible, with a substantial proportion of patients achieving bDMARD-free remission (2B). RCTs have also demonstrated efficacy of several new bDMARDs and biosimilar DMARDs (1B). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic literature review consistently confirmed the previously reported efficacy of bDMARDs in RA and provided additional information on bDMARD switching and dose reduction.

Safety of synthetic and biological DMARDs: a systematic literature review informing the 2016 update of the EULAR recommendations for management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety of synthetic (s) and biological (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to inform the European League Against Rheumatism recommendations for the management of RA. METHODS: Systematic literature review (SLR) of observational studies comparing any DMARD with another intervention for the management of patients with RA. All safety outcomes were included. A comparator group was required for the study to be included. Risk of bias was assessed with the Hayden's tool. RESULTS: Twenty-six observational studies addressing diverse safety outcomes of therapy with bDMARDs met eligibility criteria (15 on serious infections, 4 on malignancies). Substantial heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Together with the evidence from the 2013 SLR, based on 15 studies, 7 at low risk of bias, patients on bDMARDs compared with patients on conventional sDMARDs had a higher risk of serious infections (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.1 to 1.8)-without differences across bDMARDs-a higher risk of tuberculosis (aHR 2.7 to 12.5), but no increased risk of infection by herpes zoster. Patients on bDMARDs did not have an increased risk of malignancies in general, lymphoma or non-melanoma skin cancer, but the risk of melanoma may be slightly increased (aHR 1.5). CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm the known safety pattern of bDMARDs, including both tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor (TNFi) and non-TNFi, for the treatment of RA.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update.

Recent insights in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) necessitated updating the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) RA management recommendations. A large international Task Force based decisions on evidence from 3 systematic literature reviews, developing 4 overarching principles and 12 recommendations (vs 3 and 14, respectively, in 2013). The recommendations address conventional synthetic (cs) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GC); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, clazakizumab, sarilumab and sirukumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (Janus kinase (Jak) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib). Monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and the targets of sustained clinical remission (as defined by the American College of Rheumatology-(ACR)-EULAR Boolean or index criteria) or low disease activity are discussed. Cost aspects were taken into consideration. As first strategy, the Task Force recommends MTX (rapid escalation to 25 mg/week) plus short-term GC, aiming at >50% improvement within 3 and target attainment within 6 months. If this fails stratification is recommended. Without unfavourable prognostic markers, switching to-or adding-another csDMARDs (plus short-term GC) is suggested. In the presence of unfavourable prognostic markers (autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions, failure of 2 csDMARDs), any bDMARD (current practice) or Jak-inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD or tsDMARD is recommended. If a patient is in sustained remission, bDMARDs can be tapered. For each recommendation, levels of evidence and Task Force agreement are provided, both mostly very high. These recommendations intend informing rheumatologists, patients, national rheumatology societies, hospital officials, social security agencies and regulators about EULAR's most recent consensus on the management of RA, aimed at attaining best outcomes with current therapies.

Rheumatoid arthritis management of early disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Early effective treatment has led to major improvements in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. This review aims to address the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis, in particular the different therapeutic strategies evaluated in clinical trials to achieve optimal disease control. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) has significantly improved patient outcomes. Overall, studies using bDMARD induction have shown early clinical improvements, with high proportions achieving remission with minimal radiographic progression. As these drugs are still relatively costly, conventional synthetic DMARDs, as monotherapy or in combination, remain the mainstay of treatment initiation. Good, albeit somewhat slower, responses can be achieved with these drugs. Strategies incorporating glucocorticoids and a treat-to-target approach (i.e. regular monitoring of disease activity and early treatment escalation with a conventional synthetic or b-DMARD, if needed) have shown additional benefit. In patients achieving low disease activity or remission, bDMARD dose reduction and withdrawal, and even drug-free remission have been possible in some. SUMMARY: In patients with early rheumatoid arthritis, conventional synthetic DMARDs and glucocorticoids used within a treat-to-target setting, and the addition of a bDMARD if required, outcomes have improved significantly. A proportion of patients are able to deescalate treatment after bDMARD therapy, with a significant minority achieving drug-free remission.

Ultrasound findings predict progression to inflammatory arthritis in anti-CCP antibody-positive patients without clinical synovitis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether ultrasound can identify anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP) antibody-positive patients without clinical synovitis (CS) who progress to inflammatory arthritis (IA). METHODS: In a prospective study, anti-CCP-positive patients without CS underwent ultrasound imaging of 32 joints (wrists, metacarpophalangeal joints, proximal interphalangeal joints and metatarsophalangeal joints (MTPs)) and were monitored for the development of IA. Associations between baseline ultrasound findings (grey scale (GS), power Doppler (PD) and erosions) and (1) progression to IA and (2) development of CS within an individual joint were measured. RESULTS: Consecutive anti-CCP-positive patients (n=136; mean age 51 years, 100 women) were followed up for median of 18.3 months (range 0.1-79.6). At baseline 96% had GS, 30% had PD and 21% had one or more erosions. IA developed in 57 patients (42%) after median of 8.6 months (range 0.1-52.4). Ultrasound abnormalities (GS ≥2, PD ≥1 or erosion ≥1) were found in 86% at baseline compared with 67% of non-progressors (χ2=6.3, p=0.012). Progression to IA was significantly higher in those with ultrasound findings in any joint (excluding MTPs for GS) (GS ≥2: 55% vs 24%, HR (95% CI) 2.3 (1.0 to 4.9), p=0.038; PD ≥2: 75% vs 32%, 3.7 (2.0 to 6.9), p<0.001 and erosion ≥1: 71% vs 34%, 2.9 (1.7 to 5.1), p<0.001). Furthermore, progression occurred earlier with PD ≥2 (median 7.1 vs 52.4 months) and erosion ≥1 (15.4 vs 46.5). At the individual joint level, the trend for progression to CS was more significant for GS and PD (GS ≥2: 26% vs 3%, 9.4 (5.1 to 17.5), p<0.001; PD ≥2: 55% vs 4%, 31.3 (15.6 to 62.9), p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound features of joint inflammation may be detected in anti-CCP-positive patients without CS. Ultrasound findings predict progression (and rate of progression) to IA, with the risk of progression highest in those with PD signal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02012764; Results.

Efficacy of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, glucocorticoids and tofacitinib: a systematic literature review informing the 2013 update of the EULAR recommendations for management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To update a previous systematic review assessing the efficacy of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Two systematic reviews of the literature using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library were performed from 2009 until January 2013 to assess the efficacy of csDMARDs (as monotherapy or combination therapy) in adults with RA, and the efficacy of glucocorticoids in early RA. A third systematic review was performed until March 2013 to assess the efficacy of tofacitinib by meta-analysis. RESULTS: For glucocorticoids, of 222 hits, five publications relating to four new trials were analysed for efficacy, confirming that initial treatment of RA with low-dose prednisone plus methotrexate (MTX) results in better clinical and structural outcomes at 1 and 2 years than treatment with MTX alone. For csDMARDs, of 498 studies, only two new studies were randomised controlled trials comparing MTX monotherapy with MTX in combination with another csDMARD without differences in glucocorticoid usage. Using tight control principles, clinical outcomes were no better with immediate triple therapy than with 'step-up' therapy. For tofacitinib, the pooled analysis of 10 trials showed that tofacitinib was more efficacious on signs and symptoms, disability and appeared to be more efficacious on structural damage than control treatment with placebo (OR (95% CI)--American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response: 2.44 (1.97 to 3.02)) or treatment with MTX (ACR20 response: 2.38 (1.66 to 3.43)). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of low-dose glucocorticoids to csDMARD therapy produces benefits in early RA. Under tight control conditions, combination therapy with csDMARDs is no better than MTX monotherapy. Tofacitinib is a new DMARD with proven efficacy.

Safety of synthetic and biological DMARDs: a systematic literature review informing the 2013 update of the EULAR recommendations for management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To update the evidence for the safety of synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (sDMARDs), glucocorticoids (GC) and biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to inform the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of RA. METHODS: Systematic literature review (SLR) of observational studies (including registries). Interventions were any bDMARD (anakinra, infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, rituximab, abatacept, tocilizumab, golimumab or certolizumab pegol) or sDMARD (methotrexate, leflunomide, hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, gold/auranofin, azathioprine, chlorambucil, chloroquine, cyclosporin, cyclophosphamide, mycophenolate, minocycline, penicillamine, tacrolimus or tofacitinib) and a comparator was required. Information on GCs was collected from the included studies. All safety outcomes were included. RESULTS: Forty-nine observational studies addressing diverse safety outcomes of therapy with bDMARDs met eligibility criteria. Substantial heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis of any of the outcomes. Patients on tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) compared to patients on conventional sDMARDs had a higher risk of serious infections (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.1-1.8), a higher risk of tuberculosis, and an increased risk of infection by herpes zoster cannot be excluded. Patients on TNFi did not have an increased risk for malignancies in general, lymphoma or non-melanoma skin cancer, but the risk of melanoma may be slightly increased (aHR 1.5). From the studies identified on conventional sDMARDs, no new safety signals were found. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this SLR confirm the known safety pattern of sDMARDs and bDMARDs for the treatment of RA.

Efficacy of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a systematic literature review informing the 2013 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To update the evidence for the efficacy of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to inform the European League Against Rheumatism(EULAR) Task Force treatment recommendations. METHODS: Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for articles published between January 2009 and February 2013 on infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, certolizumab-pegol, golimumab, anakinra, abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab and biosimilar DMARDs (bsDMARDs) in phase 3 development. Abstracts from 2011 to 2012 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and 2011-2013 EULAR conferences were obtained. RESULTS: Fifty-one full papers, and 57 abstracts were identified. The randomised controlled trials (RCT) confirmed the efficacy of bDMARD+conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) versus csDMARDs alone (level 1B evidence). There was some additional evidence for the use of bDMARD monotherapy, however bDMARD and MTX combination therapy for all bDMARD classes was more efficacious (1B). Clinical and radiographic responses were high with treat-to-target strategies. Earlier improvement in signs and symptoms were seen with more intensive initial treatment strategies, but outcomes were similar upon addition of bDMARDs in patients with insufficient response to MTX. In general, radiographic progression was lower with bDMARD use, mainly due to initial treatment effects. Although patients may achieve bDMARD- and drug-free remission, maintenance of clinical responses was higher with bDMARD continuation (1B), but bDMARD dose reduction could be applied (1B). There was still no RCT data for bDMARD switching. CONCLUSIONS: The systematic literature review confirms efficacy of biological DMARDs in RA. It addresses different treatment strategies with the potential for reduction in therapy, particularly with early disease control, and highlights emerging therapies.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2013 update.

In this article, the 2010 European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (sDMARDs and bDMARDs, respectively) have been updated. The 2013 update has been developed by an international task force, which based its decisions mostly on evidence from three systematic literature reviews (one each on sDMARDs, including glucocorticoids, bDMARDs and safety aspects of DMARD therapy); treatment strategies were also covered by the searches. The evidence presented was discussed and summarised by the experts in the course of a consensus finding and voting process. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations were derived and levels of agreement (strengths of recommendations) were determined. Fourteen recommendations were developed (instead of 15 in 2010). Some of the 2010 recommendations were deleted, and others were amended or split. The recommendations cover general aspects, such as attainment of remission or low disease activity using a treat-to-target approach, and the need for shared decision-making between rheumatologists and patients. The more specific items relate to starting DMARD therapy using a conventional sDMARD (csDMARD) strategy in combination with glucocorticoids, followed by the addition of a bDMARD or another csDMARD strategy (after stratification by presence or absence of adverse risk factors) if the treatment target is not reached within 6 months (or improvement not seen at 3 months). Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, biosimilars), abatacept, tocilizumab and, under certain circumstances, rituximab are essentially considered to have similar efficacy and safety. If the first bDMARD strategy fails, any other bDMARD may be used. The recommendations also address tofacitinib as a targeted sDMARD (tsDMARD), which is recommended, where licensed, after use of at least one bDMARD. Biosimilars are also addressed. These recommendations are intended to inform rheumatologists, patients, national rheumatology societies and other stakeholders about EULAR's most recent consensus on the management of RA with sDMARDs, glucocorticoids and bDMARDs. They are based on evidence and expert opinion and intended to improve outcome in patients with RA.

A systematic literature review of strategies promoting early referral and reducing delays in the diagnosis and management of inflammatory arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the importance of timely management of patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA), delays exist in its diagnosis and treatment. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic literature review to identify strategies addressing these delays to inform an American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) taskforce. METHODS: The authors searched literature published between January 1985 and November 2010, and ACR and EULAR abstracts between 2007-2010. Additional information was obtained through a grey literature search, a survey conducted through ACR and EULAR, and a hand search of the literature. RESULTS: (1) From symptom onset to primary care, community case-finding strategies, including the use of a questionnaire and autoantibody testing, have been designed to identify patients with early IA. Several websites provided information on IA but were of varying quality and insufficient to aid early referral. (2) At a primary care level, education programmes and patient self-administered questionnaires identified patients with potential IA for referral to rheumatology. Many guidelines emphasised the need for early referral with one providing specific referral criteria. (3) Once referred, early arthritis clinics provided a point of early access for rheumatology assessment. Triage systems, including triage clinics, helped prioritise clinic appointments for patients with IA. Use of referral forms standardised information required, further optimising the triage process. Wait times for patients with acute IA were also reduced with development of rapid access systems. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified three main areas of delay to care for patients with IA and potential solutions for each. A co-ordinated effort will be required by the rheumatology and primary care community to address these effectively.

A systematic literature review of strategies promoting early referral and reducing delays in the diagnosis and management of inflammatory arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the importance of timely management of patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA), delays exist in its diagnosis and treatment. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic literature review to identify strategies addressing these delays to inform an American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) taskforce. METHODS: The authors searched literature published between January 1985 and November 2010, and ACR and EULAR abstracts between 2007-2010. Additional information was obtained through a grey literature search, a survey conducted through ACR and EULAR, and a hand search of the literature. RESULTS: (1) From symptom onset to primary care, community case-finding strategies, including the use of a questionnaire and autoantibody testing, have been designed to identify patients with early IA. Several websites provided information on IA but were of varying quality and insufficient to aid early referral. (2) At a primary care level, education programmes and patient self-administered questionnaires identified patients with potential IA for referral to rheumatology. Many guidelines emphasised the need for early referral with one providing specific referral criteria. (3) Once referred, early arthritis clinics provided a point of early access for rheumatology assessment. Triage systems, including triage clinics, helped prioritise clinic appointments for patients with IA. Use of referral forms standardised information required, further optimising the triage process. Wait times for patients with acute IA were also reduced with development of rapid access systems. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified three main areas of delay to care for patients with IA and potential solutions for each. A co-ordinated effort will be required by the rheumatology and primary care community to address these effectively.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may differ among rheumatologists and currently, clear and consensual international recommendations on RA treatment are not available. In this paper recommendations for the treatment of RA with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs) that also account for strategic algorithms and deal with economic aspects, are described. The recommendations are based on evidence from five systematic literature reviews (SLRs) performed for synthetic DMARDs, biological DMARDs, GCs, treatment strategies and economic issues. The SLR-derived evidence was discussed and summarised as an expert opinion in the course of a Delphi-like process. Levels of evidence, strength of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived. Fifteen recommendations were developed covering an area from general aspects such as remission/low disease activity as treatment aim via the preference for methotrexate monotherapy with or without GCs vis-à-vis combination of synthetic DMARDs to the use of biological agents mainly in patients for whom synthetic DMARDs and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors had failed. Cost effectiveness of the treatments was additionally examined. These recommendations are intended to inform rheumatologists, patients and other stakeholders about a European consensus on the management of RA with DMARDs and GCs as well as strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA, based on evidence and expert opinion.

Aspects of TNF inhibitor therapy in rheumatoid arthritis.

Treatment outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have improved considerably with the use of biological therapies. Since the discovery of the role of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) alpha in the pathogenesis of the disease, three TNF inhibitors, infliximab, etanercept and adalimumab, have become widely used for the treatment of RA. More recently, two newer TNF inhibitors-certolizumab pegol and golimumab-have become available, increasing the armamentarium of therapy. With improved therapies, treatment strategies have also changed, with the aims now being to achieve and maintain remission. This article addresses some of these aspects of treating RA, reviewing the studies on these two newer TNF inhibitors, certolizumab pegol and golimumab, and those addressing the induction of remission or low disease activity with TNF inhibitors and maintenance with less intensive treatment.