Comparing Psoriatic Arthritis Low-field Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Ultrasound, and Clinical Outcomes: Data from the TICOPA Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The Tight Control of inflammation in Psoriatic arthritis (TICOPA; isrctn.com: ISRCTN30147736) trial compared standard care (StdC) and tight control (TC) in early psoriatic arthritis (PsA), demonstrating better outcomes for TC. This substudy evaluated the performance metrics of modern imaging outcomes and compared them to the clinical data. METHODS: Non-contrast 0.2T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; single hand) was assessed using the Outcomes in Rheumatology (OMERACT) PsA MRI Scoring System (PsAMRIS) with an additional global inflammation score. Ultrasound (US; same hand) was scored for greyscale, power Doppler, and erosions at the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) and proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints and scores summated. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients had paired (baseline and 48 weeks) US data and 61 paired MRI data; 50 had matched clinical, MR, and US data. Significant within-group changes were seen for the inflammatory PsAMRIS components at MCP level: MRI global inflammation [median difference (range), standardized response mean (SRM)]: 3.25 (-5.0 to 12.0), 0.68; 1.0 (-4.5 to 17.5), 0.45 for TC and StdC, respectively. Similar within-group differences were obtained for US: 1.0 (-13.0 to 23.0), 0.45; 3.0 (-6.0 to 21.0), 0.77 for TC and StdC, respectively. No differences were seen between treatment groups. Significant correlations were found between baseline and change MRI and US scores. A significant correlation was found between baseline PsA disease activity scores and MRI global inflammation scores (Spearman ρ for MCP, PIP: 0.46, 0.63, respectively). No differences in erosion progression were observed. CONCLUSION: The PsAMRIS and US inflammation scores demonstrated good responsiveness. No between-group differences were demonstrated, but this substudy was likely underpowered to determine differences between the 2 treatment strategies.

Cost-Effectiveness of Tight Control of Inflammation in Early Psoriatic Arthritis: Economic Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Treat-to-target approaches have proved to be effective in rheumatoid arthritis, but have not been studied in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This study was undertaken to examine the cost-effectiveness of tight control (TC) of inflammation in early PsA compared to standard care. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analyses were undertaken alongside a UK-based, open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Taking the perspective of the health care sector, effectiveness was measured using the 3-level EuroQol 5-domain, which allows for the calculation of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are presented, which represent the additional cost per QALY gained over a 48-week time horizon. Sensitivity analyses are presented assessing the impact of variations in the analytical approach and assumptions on the cost-effectiveness estimates. RESULTS: The mean cost and QALYs were higher in the TC group: £4,198 versus £2,000 and 0.602 versus 0.561. These values yielded an ICER of £53,948 per QALY. Bootstrapped uncertainty analysis suggests that the TC has a 0.07 probability of being cost-effective at a £20,000 threshold. Stratified analysis suggests that with certain costs being controlled, an ICER of £24,639 can be calculated for patients with a higher degree of disease severity. CONCLUSION: A tight control strategy to treat PsA is an effective intervention in the treatment pathway; however, this study does not find tight control to be cost-effective in most analyses. Lower drug prices, targeting polyarthritis patients, or reducing the frequency of rheumatology visits may improve value for money metrics in future studies.

An educational leaflet improves response to invitation for screening for arthritis in patients with psoriasis in primary care, but only in practices in the most deprived areas.

This study hypothesises that an educational leaflet about psoriatic arthritis (PsA) will improve psoriasis patients' attendance for screening for PsA. A random sample of patients ≥18 years old with a coded diagnosis of psoriasis and no diagnosis of PsA, rheumatoid arthritis or ankylosing spondylitis were identified from five GP surgeries in Yorkshire, UK. Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive study information alone or with the educational leaflet, with an invitation to attend for a screening examination by a dermatologist and rheumatologist. Nine hundred thirty-two invitation packs were sent to recruit 191 (20.5%) participants. One hundred sixty-nine (88.5%) had current or previous psoriasis and 17 (10.1%) had previously undiagnosed PsA. The estimated prevalence of PsA was 18.1% (95% CI: 16.2, 20.1%).The response rate was lower than expected and was not significantly higher when patients received the educational leaflet (22.8 vs 18.3%, p = 0.08). Response rates varied by practice (14.7 to 30.6%). However, deprivation scores for each practice revealed a significant increase in response with the leaflet for deprivation decile of 3 (p < 0.001) but no significant differences in the other practices. An educational leaflet about PsA improves attendance for screening in primary care, but only in those practices with higher levels of socioeconomic deprivation.

Let's Talk about Inclusion: A Report on Patient Research Partner Involvement in the GRAPPA 2015 Annual Meeting.

Members of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) have worked since 2012 to include the patient perspective in their psoriatic arthritis (PsA) research as well as in their annual meetings. Herein, patient research partners (PRP) report the progress made in their experience at these GRAPPA meetings and discuss their perception of the challenges that remain in ensuring that patients have a voice in PsA outcome research.

Development of a Flare Instrument for Use in Psoriatic Disease: A Report from the 2015 GRAPPA Annual Meeting.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) initiative is to develop a questionnaire to determine the presence of a flare of disease activity in psoriatic disease (PsD), for use in clinical care and research settings. METHODS: In 2014 and 2015, 2 online Delphi surveys of patients and physicians attempted to achieve consensus about items that might discriminate a flare of disease. In the first round, items were derived from previous qualitative studies with patients; in the second round, new items, suggested by both patients and physicians, were added. Survey results were discussed at the 2015 GRAPPA annual meeting, and 8 breakout groups discussed specific aspects of PsD flares. RESULTS: Survey participants were patients (n = 103 and n = 57 in rounds 1 and 2) and physicians (n = 125 and n = 81). Items for flare covered 6 domains (joints, skin, emotion, participation, fatigue, and unclassified). Patients agreed that 20 items were important (10 joints, 1 participation, 8 fatigue, 1 unclassified), and physicians agreed on 23 items (5 skin, 11 joints, 4 participation, 3 unclassified). Eight items were selected as important by both groups: 7 joint items and 1 unclassified. Patients emphasized fatigue and physicians emphasized skin and participation. Breakout groups concluded that the components of a flare instrument should be derived from patients. A flare should be defined as a change in disease state requiring intervention. CONCLUSION: The concept of flare in PsD covers articular, skin, emotional, participation, and fatigue domains. Further work is required to specify items that represent these domains.

Effect of tight control of inflammation in early psoriatic arthritis (TICOPA): a UK multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Early intervention and tight control of inflammation optimise outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis but these approaches have not yet been studied in psoriatic arthritis. We aimed to assess the effect of tight control on early psoriatic arthritis using a treat-to-target approach. METHODS: For this open-label multicentre randomised controlled trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with early psoriatic arthritis (<24 months symptom duration), who had not previously received treatment with any disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, were enrolled from eight secondary care rheumatology centres in the UK. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either tight control (with review every 4 weeks and with escalation of treatment if minimal disease activity criteria not met) or standard care (standard therapy according to the treating clinician, with review every 12 weeks) for 48 weeks. Randomisation was done by minimisation incorporating a random element, to ensure treatment groups were balanced for randomising centre and pattern of arthritis (oligoarticular vs polyarticular). The randomisation procedure was done through a central 24-h automated telephone system based at the Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research (Leeds, UK). This was an open-label study in which patients and clinicians were aware of treatment group assignment. Clinical outcomes were recorded by a masked assessor every 12 weeks. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% (ACR20) response at 48 weeks, analysed by intention to treat with multiple imputation for missing ACR components. Cost-effectiveness was also assessed. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01106079, and the ISCRCTN registry, number ISCRCTN30147736. FINDINGS: Between May 28, 2008, and March 21, 2012, 206 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive tight control (n=101) or standard care (n=105). In the intention-to-treat patient population, the odds of achieving an ACR20 response at 48 weeks were higher in the tight control group than in the standard care group (odds ratio 1·91, 95% CI 1·03-3·55; p=0·0392). Serious adverse events were reported by 20 (10%) patients (25 events in 14 [14%] patients in the tight control group and eight events in six [6%] patients in the standard care group) during the course of the study. No unexpected serious adverse events or deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Tight control of psoriatic arthritis disease activity through a treat-to-target approach significantly improves joint outcomes for newly diagnosed patients, with no unexpected serious adverse events reported. FUNDING: Arthritis Research UK and Pfizer.

It's not just the joints, it's the whole thing: qualitative analysis of patients' experience of flare in psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Flare is a commonly used term in arthritis, including PsA, but remains undefined. This study seeks to explore patients' experience of flare. METHODS: Eighteen semi-structured interviews were undertaken with patients with PsA in an informal clinical setting. Patients were purposively sampled from specialist clinic lists to reflect the major elements of the psoriatic disease spectrum. Approximately one-third of patients reported themselves to be in a flare state at the time of the interview. Transcripts underwent thematic analysis according to the recommendations of Braun and Clarke (Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006;3:77-101). NVivo software was utilized, with initial coding reflecting the source data, such as pain, feeling miserable and feeling slowed down. Codes were then grouped into associated clusters. These clusters and the interrelationships were then summarized into emergent themes. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 44 years, and patients' average disease duration was 4.5 years. Nine main overarching themes pertaining to flare were identified: physical symptoms, social withdrawal, psychological symptoms, fatigue, loss of normal function, triggers, management of pre-flare, management of flare and timing. These show some degree of overlap and are interlinked, with some degree of temporality emerging as related to patients' experience of flare. CONCLUSION: This study has identified a number of components of flare in PsA from the patient perspective. Although the emergent themes are of an overlapping and interactive nature, it is clear that flare in PsA is more than a swollen or tender joint count as measured in clinical practice.

Is there subclinical synovitis in early psoriatic arthritis? A clinical comparison with gray-scale and power Doppler ultrasound.

OBJECTIVE: Arthritis activity assessments in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) have traditionally relied on tender and swollen joint counts, but in rheumatoid arthritis, multiple studies have demonstrated subclinical inflammation using modern imaging. The aim of this study was to compare clinical examination and ultrasound (US) findings in an early PsA cohort. METHODS: Forty-nine disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-naive patients with recent-onset PsA (median disease duration 10 months) underwent gray-scale (GS) and power Doppler (PD) US of 40 joints plus tender and swollen joint counts of 68/66 joints. GS and PD were scored on a 0-3 semiquantitative scale for each joint. Clinically active joints were defined as tender and/or swollen and US active joints were defined as a GS score ≥2 and/or a PD score ≥1. RESULTS: The most common sites for subclinical synovitis were the wrist (30.6%), knee (21.4%), metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joints (26.5-33.7%), and metacarpophalangeal joints (10.2-19.4%). Excluding MTP joints and ankles, 37 (75.5%) of 49 patients had subclinical synovitis with a median of 3 (interquartile range [IQR] 1-4) joints involved. In contrast, clinical overestimation of synovitis occurred most commonly at the shoulder (38%) and ankle (28.6%). Twelve of 49 patients were classified clinically as having oligoarthritis; of these, subclinical synovitis identified 8 (75%) as having polyarthritis with an increase in their median joint count from 3 (IQR 1-4) to 6 (IQR 5-7). CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated that subclinical synovitis, as identified by US, is very common in early PsA and led to the majority of oligoarthritis patients being reclassified as having polyarthritis. Further research is required into the relationship of such subclinical synovitis to structural progression.

Can biologic therapies be withdrawn or tapered in psoriatic arthritis?

There is a paucity of data on tapering and withdrawing therapy in psoriatic arthritis but advances in treatment and outcome measures suggest it is now time to be looking more closely at this. Several highly effective therapies are available providing the opportunity to achieve low disease activity. However, these therapies are associated with a marked increase in direct costs and patients are exposed to potentially life threatening adverse events. In addition to effective therapies the science of outcome assessment means that there are now suitable validated criteria for low disease activity which will allow both treat-to-target and a suitable measure of continuing low disease. Given these conditions, suitably designed randomized controlled trials of treatment withdrawal are now needed. Such studies will allow us to determine disease characteristics predictive of flare upon treatment withdrawal. In this way identifying which patients can successfully stop therapy will allow a more personalized approach to treatment decisions in PsA and will minimise risks and costs associated with ongoing therapy.