Evaluation of discontinuation for adverse events of JAK inhibitors and bDMARDs in an international collaboration of rheumatoid arthritis registers (the 'JAK-pot' study).

BACKGROUND: In a clinical trial setting, patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) taking the Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) tofacitinib demonstrated higher adverse events rates compared with those taking the tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) adalimumab or etanercept. OBJECTIVE: Compare treatment discontinuations for adverse events (AEs) among second-line therapies in an international real-world RA population. METHODS: Patients initiating JAKi, TNFi or a biological with another mode of action (OMA) from 17 registers participating in the 'JAK-pot' collaboration were included. The primary outcome was the rate of treatment discontinuation due to AEs. We used unadjusted and adjusted cause-specific Cox proportional hazard models to compare treatment discontinuations for AEs among treatment groups by class, but also evaluating separately the specific type of JAKi. RESULTS: Of the 46 913 treatment courses included, 12 523 were JAKi (43% baricitinib, 40% tofacitinib, 15% upadacitinib, 2% filgotinib), 23 391 TNFi and 10 999 OMA. The adjusted cause-specific hazard rate of treatment discontinuation for AEs was similar for TNFi versus JAKi (1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.10) and higher for OMA versus JAKi (1.11, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.23), lower with TNFi compared with tofacitinib (0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.90), but higher for TNFi versus baricitinib (1.15, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.30) and lower for TNFi versus JAKi in patients 65 or older with at least one cardiovascular risk factor (0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97). CONCLUSION: While JAKi overall were not associated with more treatment discontinuations for AEs, subgroup analyses suggest varying patterns with specific JAKi, such as tofacitinib, compared with TNFi. However, these observations should be interpreted cautiously, given the observational study design.

After JAK inhibitor failure: to cycle or to switch, that is the question - data from the JAK-pot collaboration of registries.

OBJECTIVES: The expanded therapeutic arsenal in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) raises new clinical questions. The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of cycling Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) with switching to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) in patients with RA after failure to the first JAKi. METHODS: This is a nested cohort study within data pooled from an international collaboration of 17 national registries (JAK-pot collaboration). Data from patients with RA with JAKi treatment failure and who were subsequently treated with either a second JAKi or with a bDMARD were prospectively collected. Differences in drug retention rates after second treatment initiation were assessed by log-rank test and Cox regression analysis adjusting for potential confounders. Change in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) over time was estimated using a linear regression model, adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: 365 cycling and 1635 switching patients were studied. Cyclers were older and received a higher number of previous bDMARDs. Both strategies showed similar observed retention rates after 2 years of follow-up. However, adjusted analysis revealed that cycling was associated with higher retention (p=0.04). Among cyclers, when the first JAKi was discontinued due to an adverse event (AE), it was more likely that the second JAKi would also be stopped due to an AE. Improvement in CDAI over time was similar in both strategies. CONCLUSIONS: After failing the first JAKi, cycling JAKi and switching to a bDMARD appear to have similar effectiveness. Caution is advised if an AE was the reason to stop the first JAKi.

Effectiveness of TNF-inhibitors, abatacept, IL6-inhibitors and JAK-inhibitors in 31 846 patients with rheumatoid arthritis in 19 registers from the 'JAK-pot' collaboration.

BACKGROUND: JAK-inhibitors (JAKi), recently approved in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), have changed the landscape of treatment choices. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of four current second-line therapies of RA with different modes of action, since JAKi approval, in an international collaboration of 19 registers. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, patients initiating tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), interleukin-6 inhibitors (IL-6i), abatacept (ABA) or JAKi were included. We compared the effectiveness of these treatments in terms of drug discontinuation and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) response rates at 1 year. Analyses were adjusted for patient, disease and treatment characteristics, including lines of therapy and accounted for competing risk. RESULTS: We included 31 846 treatment courses: 17 522 TNFi, 2775 ABA, 3863 IL-6i and 7686 JAKi. Adjusted analyses of overall discontinuation were similar across all treatments. The main single reason of stopping treatment was ineffectiveness. Compared with TNFi, JAKi were less often discontinued for ineffectiveness (adjusted HR (aHR) 0.75, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83), as was IL-6i (aHR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.85) and more often for adverse events (aHR 1.16, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.33). Adjusted CDAI response rates at 1 year were similar between TNFi, JAKi and IL-6i and slightly lower for ABA. CONCLUSION: The adjusted overall drug discontinuation and 1 year response rates of JAKi and IL-6i were similar to those observed with TNFi. Compared with TNFi, JAKi were more often discontinued for adverse events and less for ineffectiveness, as were IL-6i.

[Pain and pain management in old age: special features and recommendations]. / Schmerzen und Schmerzerfassung im Alter: Besonderheiten und Empfehlungen.

INTRODUCTION: Pain is highly prevalent in older persons and has a variety of causes. In geriatric patients, especially in patients with dementia, pain is often not sufficiently recognized and therefore frequently remains untreated. For the affected patient group this can have far-reaching consequences for their functional and cognitive abilities and may consequently lead to loss of autonomy. OBJECTIVE: Existing deficits of pain assessment for geriatric patients are described, with a primary focus on those patients suffering from cognitive impairments and pain. In addition, the influence of multimorbidity on pain management in old age is considered in detail. METHODS: The diagnostics and measurement of pain in older individuals are described based on recent literature and corresponding instruments used in the assessment of pain are outloned. The authors pay special attention to the possibilities of pain measurement in patients with higher grade cognitive impairments and non-communicative patients. CONCLUSION: A standardized pain assessment should be an integral component in the care and treatment of geriatric patients and individuals suffering from dementia. Validated instruments for pain measurement exist for both groups and should be integrated into daily clinical practice.

[Pain treatment in old age: special features and recommendations]. / Schmerztherapie im Alter: Besonderheiten und Empfehlungen.

BACKGROUND: For geriatric patients with chronic pain, a comprehensive well-coordinated pain management is pivotal to ensure the best possible pain relief and to minimize as far as possible preventable negative side effects of treatment. OBJECTIVE: Description of the difficulties in pain management of geriatric patients with respect to general basic rules that are worth paying attention to and presentation of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment options. METHODS: This article describes the special features of pain management in older patients and gives recommendations on the use of analgesics and potential drug interactions in geriatric patients with organ dysfunction. Furthermore, individual substance groups are described with respect to their use in geriatric patients based on the recent literature. CONCLUSION: The aim of an individualized pain treatment in older and multimorbid patients is the relief of pain to an appropriate level, preservation of mobility, self-reliance and autonomy of each individual. The ability to participate in social activities as well as improvement in the quality of life need to be the focus of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment.

RADAI-5 and electronic monitoring tools.

Tighter monitoring of patients is regarded one of the key approaches to improve management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It could be demonstrated that the patient relevant disease course is not simply the linear link between two observation points, but fluctuates significantly in up to 80% of patients surveyed three times over two months, which understandably compromises quality of life. Patient self-report questionnaires such as the Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index-Five (RADAI-5) have been shown to provide reliable information about disease activity, functionality, and other important aspects of daily life. The internal consistency of such questionnaires was shown to be significantly higher than the one of the DAS28 or the CDAI. Innovative electronic tools can be easily foreseen to constitute the media to enhance the dialogue between healthcare professionals and patients to improve disease care. These tools collect patient-recorded outcomes (PROs) data, through which physicians can monitor the course of the individual disease. Electronic versions can enable patients to receive additional medical attention between visits and provide a more detailed record of disease course over time. Applying the RADAI-5 or other questionnaires in electronic assessment tools will allow for the individual assessment of health levels, well-being, joint pain and the quality of life. Such tools will enable more frequent patient monitoring, with the potential to improve the patient's situation as well as to enhance physicians' time management, and to prioritise patients who may need further attention.

Validity of data collected in BIOREG, the Austrian register for biological treatment in rheumatology: current practice of bDMARD therapy in rheumatoid arthritis in Austria.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present study was to check the validity of data collected in BIOREG, the Austrian register for biological treatment in rheumatology, and to elucidate eventual differences with respect to disease activity (DA) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on established biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) before inclusion into the register (EST) and beginners at the time point of inclusion (NEW) after 1 year of treatment. METHODS: RA patients with a complete follow-up of 1 year in BIOREG were divided into EST and NEW and compared with respect to DA, remission rates, concomitant synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) and glucocorticoid therapy (GC) at baseline and after 1-year follow-up. Safety concerns are listed. Descriptive statistics are applied. RESULTS: For 346 RA patients (284 EST, 62 NEW) out of 970 RA patients included into BIOREG, a full data set for a 1-year follow-up was available. No differences in DA were observed after 1 year as expressed by DAS28 or RADAI-5, and small differences as expressed by remission rates according to DAS28, RADAI-5 or Boolean criteria (namely approximately 1/2, 1/3 to 1/4 and 1/4 to 1/5 of the patients respectively). Sixty-four adverse events (AEs) were noted in 56 (20 %) of EST and 20 in 19 (31 %) of NEW patients. Malignancy occurred in four patients. After 1 year, 48 % of EST patients but only 16 % of NEW patients were on bDMARD monotherapy. CONCLUSION: Regarding DA, the date collected in BIOREG appeared to be valid. After 1 year of bDMARD therapy, all patients, whether EST or NEW, achieved a similar level of DA. AEs occurred more frequently during the early phase of bDMARD treatment. Austrian rheumatologists initiate bDMARD therapy in patients with lower disease levels than in other European countries, leading to high remission rates.

Patient-centered psoriatic arthritis (PsA) activity assessment by Stockerau Activity Score for Psoriatic Arthritis (SASPA).

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether a modified Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index-5 could be applied as a routine assessment tool for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients. METHODS: Ninety-seven PsA outpatients (mean age 49.78 years; age range 23-80 years; 49 male, 48 female), completed a prototype questionnaire. Tender and swollen joint counts, including enthesiopathy, physician's assessment of disease activity on a visual analog scale (MDglob), erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and patient satisfaction with disease status (PatSat: 1 = excellent to 5 = unsatisfactory) were recorded. Factorial analysis was performed and alpha, as a measure of reliability, and tau were calculated. The ultimate five-item questionnaire, calculated by (Q1 + Q2 + Q3 + Q4 + Q5)/5, was then handed over to 152 PsA outpatients (mean age 54.02 years; age range 26-80 years; 82 male, 70 female), and analyzed accordingly. RESULTS: Analyzing the internal consistency of the prototype questionnaire revealed the highest alpha value of 0.849, on deleting the question targeting disease course. Alpha for the final Stockerau Activity Score for Psoriatic Arthritis (SASPA) was 0.875, with all items contributing to the final result (item loading from 0.573 to 0.910). Kendall's tau for the relationship between SASPA scores and swollen joint count, tender joint count, and MDglob was 0.34, 0.416, and 0.392, respectively. The sensitivity of the questionnaire to change was demonstrated in patients starting treatment with a tumor necrosis factor blocker (standardized mean difference: 2.1). CONCLUSION: The SASPA questionnaire constitutes a fully patient-administered tool to monitor PsA activity. Its reliability, convergent validity, and sensitivity to change were demonstrated.

Is the state of health of rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving adequate treatment, predictable? - Results of a survey.

BACKGROUND: A survey was conducted to evaluate whether a steady improvement in the quality of life of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) patients as frequently reported in clinical studies, does actually occur. The focus of this study laid on the personal perception of RA patients. How do patients who have been treated along accepted guidelines see the state of their health and their joint pain at different points in time? METHODS: RA patients were asked to complete a questionnaire and return it to an opinion research centre. The questionnaire, which was developed by the authors, was divided into the areas: demography, symptom description and medical care, as well as the illness in a personal context. Three telephone interviews followed in monthly intervals when the patients' feelings about their illness, their every-day coping mechanisms and their social lives were rated. Intra-subject correlation and the level of agreement among patients when assessed at three different points within a two month period, was determined. RESULTS: 127 patients replied to the questionnaire. RA exerts a significant impact on a patient's daily life. Average ratings of current state of health and joint pain (answered on a 5-part scale extending from 1 (very good) to 5 (very bad)) range between 2.6 and 2.9 all three times. However, intra-subject correlation between the different assessment times, is in general quite modest. Concerning the question: "How is your join pain today?" only 14 of 127 participants express identical ratings all three times , while in one third of the participants, a difference of two digits on the 5-part scale, at least twice had to be noticed. Intra-class correlation coefficients between answers at different points are often much smaller than 0.5. Results were similar in all subgroups analysed (men vs. women; patients receiving biologics vs. those not receiving biologics; disease duration ≤3 years vs. 4 to 10 years vs. ≥11 years). CONCLUSION: On an individual level personal assessments of health, well-being and joint pain are nevertheless unsteady even within the timeframe of two months. This is why, even now, RA patients still cannot plan their lives as non-affected people can.

Multinational evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of gout: integrating systematic literature review and expert opinion of a broad panel of rheumatologists in the 3e initiative.

We aimed to develop evidence-based multinational recommendations for the diagnosis and management of gout. Using a formal voting process, a panel of 78 international rheumatologists developed 10 key clinical questions pertinent to the diagnosis and management of gout. Each question was investigated with a systematic literature review. Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL and abstracts from 2010-2011 European League Against Rheumatism and American College of Rheumatology meetings were searched in each review. Relevant studies were independently reviewed by two individuals for data extraction and synthesis and risk of bias assessment. Using this evidence, rheumatologists from 14 countries (Europe, South America and Australasia) developed national recommendations. After rounds of discussion and voting, multinational recommendations were formulated. Each recommendation was graded according to the level of evidence. Agreement and potential impact on clinical practice were assessed. Combining evidence and clinical expertise, 10 recommendations were produced. One recommendation referred to the diagnosis of gout, two referred to cardiovascular and renal comorbidities, six focused on different aspects of the management of gout (including drug treatment and monitoring), and the last recommendation referred to the management of asymptomatic hyperuricaemia. The level of agreement with the recommendations ranged from 8.1 to 9.2 (mean 8.7) on a 1-10 scale, with 10 representing full agreement. Ten recommendations on the diagnosis and management of gout were established. They are evidence-based and supported by a large panel of rheumatologists from 14 countries, enhancing their utility in clinical practice.