Conventional versus ultrasound treat to target: no difference in magnetic resonance imaging inflammation or joint damage over 2 years in early rheumatoid arthritis.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether an ultrasound-guided treat-to-target strategy for early RA would lead to reduced MRI inflammation or less structural damage progression compared with a conventional treat-to-target strategy. METHODS: A total of 230 DMARD-naïve early RA patients were randomized to an ultrasound tight control strategy targeting DAS <1.6, no swollen joints and no power Doppler signal in any joint or a conventional strategy targeting DAS <1.6 and no swollen joints. Patients in both arms were treated according to the same DMARD escalation strategy. MRI of the dominant hand was performed at six time points over 2 years and scored according to the OMERACT RA MRI scoring system. A total of 218 patients had baseline and one or more follow-up MRIs and were included in the analysis. The mean MRI score change from baseline to each follow-up and the 2 year risk for erosive progression were compared between arms. RESULTS: MRI bone marrow oedema, synovitis and tenosynovitis improved over the first year and was sustained during the second year of follow-up, with no statistically significant differences between the ultrasound and the conventional arms at any time point. The 2 year risk for progression of MRI erosions was similar in both treatment arms ultrasound arm 39%, conventional arm 33% [relative risk 1.16 (95% CI 0.81, 1.66), P = 0.40]. CONCLUSION: Incorporating ultrasound information in treatment decisions did not lead to reduced MRI inflammation or less structural damage compared with a conventional treatment strategy. The findings support that systematic use of ultrasound does not provide a benefit in the follow-up of patients with early RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Clinicaltrials.gov, http//clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01205854.