The impact of eHealth use on general practice workload in the pre-COVID-19 era: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, eHealth has received much attention as an opportunity to increase efficiency within healthcare organizations. Adoption of eHealth might consequently help to solve perceived health workforce challenges, including labor shortages and increasing workloads among primary care professionals, who serve as the first point of contact for healthcare in many countries. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the impact of general eHealth use and specific eHealth services use on general practice workload in the pre-COVID-19 era. METHODS: The databases of CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, IEEE Xplore, Medline ALL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched, using combinations of keywords including 'eHealth', 'workload', and 'general practice'. Data extraction and quality assessment of the included studies were independently performed by at least two reviewers. Publications were included for the period 2010 - 2020, before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: In total, 208 studies describing the impact of eHealth services use on general practice workload were identified. We found that two eHealth services were mainly investigated within this context, namely electronic health records and digital communication services, and that the largest share of the included studies used a qualitative study design. Overall, a small majority of the studies found that eHealth led to an increase in general practice workload. However, results differed between the various types of eHealth services, as a large share of the studies also reported a reduction or no change in workload. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of eHealth services use on general practice workload is ambiguous. While a small majority of the effects indicated that eHealth increased workload in general practice, a large share of the effects also showed that eHealth use reduced workload or had no impact. These results do not imply a definitive conclusion, which underscores the need for further explanatory research. Various factors, including the study setting, system design, and the phase of implementation, may influence this impact and should be taken into account when general practices adopt new eHealth services. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) CRD42020199897; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=199897 .

Favourable effect of a 'second hit' after 13 weeks in early RA non-responders: the Amsterdam COBRA treat-to-target randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of treat-to-target combination therapy with intensification at 13 weeks in early RA. METHODS: Early RA patients were classified as being at high or low risk of worsening RA based on disease activity and prognostic factors. High-risk patients received COBRA-light (prednisolone 30 mg/day tapered to 7.5 mg/day, MTX increasing to 25 mg/week), and low-risk patients received MTX monotherapy increasing to 25 mg/week. The primary outcome (target) was DAS44 < 1.6 or EULAR good response at 26 weeks. At 13 weeks, non-responders were randomized to (open-label) intensification [high-risk patients: prednisolone 60 mg/day tapered to 7.5 mg/day, addition of SSZ (2 g/day) and HCQ (400 mg/day); low-risk patients: prednisolone 30 mg/day tapered to 7.5 mg/day] or continuation. RESULTS: In the high-risk group (n = 150), 110 patients (73%) reached the target at 13 weeks, and 9 dropped out. Non-responders were randomized to intensification (n = 15) or continuation (n = 16), and after 26 weeks, 12 (80%) vs 7 (44%) of these, respectively, reached the target [difference: 36%, (95% CI 2%, 71%); P = 0.04]. In the low-risk group (n = 40), 17 (43%) reached the target. Non-responders were randomized to intensification (n = 8) or continuation (n = 7); 4 vs 3, respectively, reached the target.Adverse event rates were higher in the high-risk group, and higher in the intensification subgroup of that group. Serious adverse events were rare. Protocol violations were frequent and mostly led to mitigation of actual treatment intensification. CONCLUSION: Initial combination therapy was very successful in high-risk RA, and early intensification was beneficial in patients not reaching the strict target. The low-risk group was too small for drawing conclusions. In routine practice, adherence to early intensification based on strict targets is difficult. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), NL4393, https://www.trialregister.nl/.

Physical Activity in People With Dementia Living in Long-Term Care Facilities and the Connection With Environmental Factors and Behavior.

This study is conducted in order to gain a better understanding of the relationship between physical activity and agitated behavior among older people with dementia, and physical activity and characteristics of long-term care wards. Data were collected among people with dementia living in long-term care facilities (N = 76) by conducting observations at the wards and distributing questionnaires among professional caregivers. The results show that participants are largely inactive (82.8%) and a significant relation was found between the degree of physical activity and characteristics of the ward such as "taking sufficient time," which relates to the time caregivers take when interacting with residents. This study supports the existing knowledge about the degree of physical activity among people with dementia in long-term care and adds information about the potential influence of organizational factors that could be valuable for daily practice.

Normal mortality of the COBRA early rheumatoid arthritis trial cohort after 23 years of follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: Mortality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is higher than in the general population. We investigated mortality in the COBRA-trial cohort after 23 years follow-up, compared with a reference sample of the Dutch population. METHODS: The COBRA-trial randomised patients with early RA to sulfasalazine monotherapy (SSZ, n=79) or a combination of SSZ, low-dose methotrexate and initially high, step-down prednisolone (COBRA, n=76). We compared the mortality in the COBRA-trial up to 2017 to a reference sample of the general population in the Netherlands (standardised mortality ratio, SMR), and its relation to early prognostic factors through stepwise Cox regression. RESULTS: Duration of follow-up in patients alive was mean 23 (range 22-24) years. In total, 44 patients died (28%, SMR=0.80 [95% CI 0.59 to 1.06]); 20 of 75 COBRA patients (27%, SMR 0.75 [0.47 to 1.14]) and 24 of 79 SSZ patients (30%, SMR 0.85 [0.56 to 1.25]); p=0.61). In the reference sample of the general population, 55 people (36%) died. 5 factors were significantly associated with increased mortality hazard: damage progression at 28 weeks; high Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score and absence of HLA-DR 2 or 3; disease duration from start of complaints was also significant, but showed an uninterpretable pattern. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective trial cohort study of early RA is one of the first to show similar mortality compared with the general population after 23 years of follow-up. It confirms that early, intensive treatment of RA has long-term benefits and suggests that treating to target is especially important for patients with poor prognosis.

Prevalence and validity of ACR/EULAR remission in four European early rheumatoid arthritis cohorts.

OBJECTIVES: In 2011 an ACR/EULAR collaboration developed new remission definitions for RA. In the present study, we evaluated the prevalence and predictive validity of these new ACR/EULAR remission criteria in 4 different European early rheumatoid arthritis cohorts. METHODS: Data from a tot al of 722 patients with early RA were analysed. Presence of remission at 6 months, as defined by one of the 4 proposed ACR/EULAR remission definitions was used to predict good functional and radiological outcome between 1 and 2 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Remission rates at 6 months ranged from 2-17% (Boolean definition) between the four cohorts. The level of HAQ and radiological damage varied between cohorts. Patients in remission at 6 months have an increased likelihood of long-term good outcome in terms of HAQ stability, but not radiographic stability. The performance of the practice definitions of remission was highly similar to the trial definitions. CRP status seems to add little information to the classification of remission in early RA. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, a minority of patients with early RA achieves remission in the first 6 months of treatment. Remission at 6 months is predictive for good HAQ outcome between year 1 and 2 after inclusion, but not radiographic stability.

The patient perspective on absence of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis: a survey to identify key domains of patient-perceived remission.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines suggest treatment in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to target remission, in close consultation with the patient. Our recent qualitative study of the patients' perspective on remission in RA identified 26 domains. The current study aimed to identify a short list of the most important aspects to inform future research. METHODS: Patients with RA from the Netherlands, the UK, Austria, Denmark, France and the USA completed a survey that contained all domains identified in our qualitative study. They rated domains for importance ('not important', 'important' or 'essential' to characterise a period of remission) and if important or essential, whether this domain needs to be 'less', 'almost gone' or 'gone' to reflect remission. Respondents were also asked to determine their personal top 3 most important/essential domains. Frequency of specific domains in the top 3 was calculated, and domains were sorted on the percentage of patients that evaluated a particular domain as 'essential'. RESULTS: Of 274 respondents, 75% were female, mean (SD) age 57(13) years, disease duration 12(9) years. The top 3 were as follows: pain (67%), fatigue (33%) and independence (19%); domains most frequently rated as 'essential' were as follows: pain (60%), being mobile (52%), physical function (51%), being independent (47%) and fatigue (41%). Pain needed to be less (13%), almost gone (42%) or gone (45%) to reflect remission. Similar patterns were seen for fatigue, independence, mobility and physical functioning. CONCLUSION: Patients identified pain, fatigue and independence as the most important domains of RA disease activity that need to be improved to reflect remission.

Similar efficacy and safety of initial COBRA-light and COBRA therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: 4-year results from the COBRA-light trial.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of initial COBRA-light vs COBRA therapy in RA patients after a 4-year follow-up period. Methods: In the COBRA-light trial, 162 consecutive patients with recent-onset RA were randomized to either COBRA-light (prednisolone and MTX) or COBRA therapy (prednisolone, MTX and SSZ) for 1 year. After 1 year, treatment was continued without protocol, and adjusted by the treating physician according to clinical judgement, preferably with a treat-to-target strategy. Four years after trial initiation, all patients were invited to participate in the COBRA-light extension study, in which patients were interviewed and physically examined, patient reported outcomes were assessed, radiographs were made and clinical records were examined for comorbidities and medication use. Results: In the extension study, 149 out of 162 (92%) original trial patients participated: 72 COBRA-light and 77 COBRA patients. Initial COBRA-light and COBRA therapy showed similar effect on disease activity, physical functioning, radiological outcome and Boolean remission over the 4-year follow-up period. In addition, both treatment groups showed similar survival and major comorbidities, although the power to detect differences was limited. Besides protocolled differences in prednisolone, MTX and SSZ use, the use of other synthetic and biologic DMARDs and intra-articular and intramuscular glucocorticoid injections was similar in both treatment groups over the 4-year period. Conclusion: Early RA patients initially treated with COBRA-light or COBRA therapy had similar efficacy and safety outcomes over a 4-year follow-up period.

The short-term effects of two high-dose, step-down prednisolone regimens on body composition in early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of two different high-dose, step-down prednisolone regimens on body composition in early RA patients after 26 weeks of treatment. METHODS: Prednisolone-naive patients with recent-onset RA (n = 108) were randomized to either COBRA (prednisolone 60 mg/day, tapered to 7.5 mg/day in 6 weeks; MTX and SSZ) or COBRA-light therapy (prednisolone 30 mg/day, tapered to 7.5 mg/day in 8 weeks and MTX). Body composition was assessed at baseline (before or soon after start of treatment) and after 26 weeks with DXA, and recorded as total body mass (TBM), total fat mass (FM), total lean mass (LM) and trunk/peripheral fat ratio. Log-ratio analyses assessed the proportional distribution of TBM (between LM, FM and bone mass) and FM (between trunk, extremities and head). The subgroup of patients with a DXA before start of treatment (n = 38) was analysed separately. RESULTS: In the subgroup of patients with a DXA before start of treatment, TBM increased by 1.6 kg (P < 0.001) and total FM by 1.3 kg (P < 0.001). The trunk/peripheral fat ratio and the proportional distribution of TBM and FM remained stable over time. There were no differences between the treatment groups. Similar results were obtained in the study population as a whole. CONCLUSION: Both high-dose, step-down prednisolone regimens caused increases in TBM, mainly caused by an increase in FM, but we found no fat redistribution from peripheral to central tissues. This absence in fat redistribution contradicts the widely held assumption of rapid adverse effects of prednisolone on body composition in RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTNregistry, http://www.isrctn.com, ISRCTN55552928.

The patient perspective on remission in rheumatoid arthritis: 'You've got limits, but you're back to being you again'.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment is remission. As treatment should be targeted at outcomes relevant to patients, it is important to understand how patients perceive remission, and to assess whether the current definition of remission adequately reflects these perceptions. The objective of this study is to explore the patient perspective on remission in RA. METHODS: Nine focus-group discussions in Austria, The Netherlands and UK were conducted, including patients in American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/ European League of Rheumatology (EULAR) remission, self-declared remission and in moderate/high disease activity. Moderators employed a prespecified interview guide helped to engage patients in a discussion on their experience with remission. Inductive thematic analysis was performed within each country, and identified themes were discussed across countries. RESULTS: 47 RA patients (66% women, disease duration 9 years) participated. Three major themes of patient-perceived remission emerged: (1) symptoms would either be absent or strongly reduced, (2) impact of the disease on daily life would diminish by increased independence, ability to do valued activities, improved mood and ability to cope; (3) leading to a return to normality, including work, family role and perception of others. Patients felt the concept of remission was influenced by ageing, side effects of medication, comorbidities, accrued damage to joints and disease duration. Opinions on duration of state, the role of medication and measurement instruments varied widely. CONCLUSIONS: Patients characterise remission by the absence or reduction of symptoms, but more directly by decreased daily impact of their condition and the feeling of a return to normality. The next step is to study whether an additional patient-perceived measure of remission may add value to the ACR/EULAR definition of remission.

Initial high-dose prednisolone combination therapy using COBRA and COBRA-light in early rheumatoid arthritis.

Treatment with initial high-dose prednisolone and a combination of methotrexate (MTX) and sulfasalazine (SSZ) according to the COBRA regimen (Dutch acronym for combinatietherapie bij reumatoide artritis, 'combination therapy for rheumatoid arthritis'), has repeatedly been demonstrated to be very effective in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). COBRA combination therapy is superior to initial monotherapy of SSZ and MTX, is also associated with a good long-term outcome, is as safe as other treatment regimes, and performs as well as the combination of high-dose MTX and the tumor necrosis factor antagonist infliximab. A pilot study with an intensified version of the COBRA combination therapy showed that strict monitoring and aggressive treatment intensification based on the Disease Activity Score can result in a remission rate of 90% in patients with active early RA. Also, the first results indicate that an attenuated variation on COBRA combination therapy, called 'COBRA-light', is effective in decreasing disease activity and is generally well tolerated. Based on these results, we conclude that initial high-dose prednisolone in combination with MTX and SSZ could or should be the first choice in early active RA since it is effective and safe, and the cost price of the drugs is low.

Chronological reading of radiographs in rheumatoid arthritis increases efficiency and does not lead to bias.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the difference between chronological and random sequence reading in a series of radiographs with 11 years' follow-up. In addition, the influence of the starting point and length of series was evaluated. METHODS: Two experienced readers independently and repeatedly scored digitised radiographs of 62 patients at time points 0, 2, 5, 8 and 11 years of follow-up from the COBRA follow-up database according to the Sharp/van der Heijde method. A linear mixed model was fitted to the data. RESULTS: Over 11 years the mean scores increased by 3.8 points per year. Compared to random reading, chronological reading resulted in a slightly increased progression rate of 0.4 points per year (p=0.008) and a lower standard error of the mean total progression rate of 0.30 (compared to 0.35 for random reading). Over 11 years, this results in a small difference in progression estimates of about five points, but a highly relevant difference of over 25% of patients needed in a study to find a difference in radiological outcome between two groups. Reading of short series, or series including a baseline radiograph, results in a significantly higher yearly progression rate compared to reading of long series, or series not including a baseline measurement. CONCLUSIONS: Chronological reading of radiographs is preferred above random reading, due to decreased variability around the estimation of the progression rate; this increased efficiency translates into smaller sample sizes, or increased power to detect small differences. For studies with long-term follow-up, the same two readers should read all radiographs, including baseline.

Symptom complexes in patients with seropositive arthralgia and in patients newly diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis: a qualitative exploration of symptom development.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore symptoms and symptom development during the earliest phases of RA in patients with seropositive arthralgia and patients newly diagnosed with RA. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 15 seropositive patients (anti-CCP positive, and often with arthralgia) and 11 newly presenting RA patients [classified according to the 2010 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria]. Feedback procedures shared the experiences of seropositive arthralgia patients with early RA patients and vice versa. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Symptoms common to both groups included joint pain, psychological distress, muscle cramps, abnormal skin sensations, stiffness, loss of motor control, weakness, fatigue and sleeping difficulties. Also, patterns of symptom evolution and the order of symptom development were described. Seropositive arthralgia patients described pain as annoying, while RA patients described how the severity of pain intensified before diagnosis, to the point where symptoms were psychologically distressing. Patients with seropositive arthralgia described reddening of the skin and burning sensations that they felt were indicative of the onset of swelling. Intense pain appeared to precede the onset of swelling for those with RA, which was often palindromic and travelled between joints until it later became persistent. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the breadth of symptoms that constitute the earliest phases of RA. Further research is needed to develop measures of symptom patterns and clusters to allow the predictive utility of symptoms to be assessed and to allow the integration of aspects of the patient's history into evidence-based investigative and management algorithms for use in primary and secondary care.

Measurement of stiffness in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in low disease activity or remission: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Recent qualitative research has shown that stiffness is an important symptom for patients to identify remission. However, it is unclear how to measure stiffness in low disease activity. This systematic review aims to summarise the existing literature on validity of patient reported outcomes to measure stiffness in RA low disease activity states, to aid the choice for a measurement instrument. METHODS: An extensive pubmed-search was undertaken, identifying measurement instruments for patient perceived stiffness used in low disease activity. Eligible studies reported on 1) stiffness as an outcome in relation to other core set measures, 2) development of a patient reported tool to measure stiffness, or 3) comparison of two different tools to measure aspects of stiffness, all in low disease activity. RESULTS: Of 788 titles, only two studies report on validity of stiffness measures within low disease activity. Morning stiffness (MS) is reported in 44 to 80% of patients in low disease activity. A difference of 40 to 60 minutes in duration until maximum improvement is observed between active and inactive patients. Severity of MS might discriminate better between high and low disease activity compared to measurement of duration of MS. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient data on measurement of stiffness in the spectrum of low disease activity or remission.

Potential for pharmacist prescribing in primary care: A Dutch citizen perspective.

Background: Medication prescribing by pharmacists is a task shifting approach to help ensure quality and accessibility of healthcare. In many countries, like the Netherlands, pharmacist prescribing is not legally ensured, and it is unknown what citizens think of its potential introduction. Objective: To investigate citizen perspectives on the potential role of pharmacists in prescribing in primary care. Methods: A Citizen Platform with citizens (>18 years) from the Netherlands was conducted in October 2022. This consisted of a one-day program in which the participants were engaged in interactive assignments and received expert presentations to foster the development of informed opinions. In the final assignment, 3 participant groups designed their ideal future scenario including preconditions regarding the role of the pharmacist in prescribing in primary care. All assignments were recorded, and notes were taken. The researchers then consolidated the 3 scenarios into one version and categorized the preconditions. The Citizen Platform results were summarized and subsequently discussed in 2 online focus groups with other citizens in February 2023 to investigate the perspectives of less informed citizens. Focus group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Results: The Citizen Platform (n = 10) resulted in a shared scenario involving a primary care center where general practitioners (GPs) pharmacists and other healthcare professionals collaborate as a team. In this scenario, pharmacists can modify treatment in certain chronic diseases, manage minor ailments and support GPs with the care for patients with complex needs. Preconditions needed to realize this scenario include having shared medical records, the GP retaining the overview of the care for the patient and additional training for pharmacists. The focus groups (n = 6, in total) yielded 5 themes which acknowledge potential pharmacist prescribing but depict a more skeptical view towards pharmacist prescribing and include several concerns, for example pharmacists' potential conflict of interest. Conclusions: Citizens that are informed about opportunities for pharmacy prescribing are capable of sketching potential scenarios for pharmacist prescribing in a collaborative primary care context. Less informed citizens seem more skeptical towards pharmacist prescribing.

Remission in early rheumatoid arthritis defined by 28 joint counts: limited consequences of residual disease activity in the forefeet on outcome.

UNLABELLED: Introduction The new American College for Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) remission criteria are based on the assessment of 28 joints. A study was undertaken to study the consequences of remission misclassification due to residual disease activity in the feet on physical function and joint damage in the subsequent year in an observational early disease cohort. METHODS: All patients with rheumatoid arthritis at inclusion or at 1-year follow-up in the early arthritis cohort of the Jan van Breemen Institute, The Netherlands were included. ACR/EULAR remission definitions for trials and clinical practice were calculated twice, once using a 28-joint count and once using a 38-joint count that included the 10 metatarsophalangeal joints. Disease stability was defined as stable x-ray scores over 1 year (change ≤ 0 in Sharp/van der Heijde scores) and stable and low scores on the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ change ≤ 0 and HAQ score consistently ≤ 0.5), all during the second year after inclusion. Analyses comprised residual disease activity (swollen or tender joints >0) in the feet of patients who fulfilled the candidate remission criteria using a 28-joint count and likelihood ratios of remission definitions to predict disease stability. RESULTS: Of 421 patients, 9-15% reached remission at 1 year using a 28-joint count. Of these, 26-40% showed activity in the feet. Misclassification due to reduced joint counts was observed in 2-3%. A state of remission increased the likelihood of stability of both x-ray and HAQ, with similar likelihood ratios for definitions using 38-joint counts and those using 28-joint counts. CONCLUSION: The ability of remission definitions with 28-joint counts versus 38-joint counts to predict long-term good radiological and functional outcome is similar. This confirms that inclusion of ankles and forefeet in the assessment of remission is not required, although inclusion of these joints in the examination is recommended.

American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism provisional definition of remission in rheumatoid arthritis for clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an increasingly attainable goal, but there is no widely used definition of remission that is stringent but achievable and could be applied uniformly as an outcome measure in clinical trials. This work was undertaken to develop such a definition. METHODS: A committee consisting of members of the American College of Rheumatology, the European League Against Rheumatism, and the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Initiative met to guide the process and review prespecified analyses from RA clinical trials. The committee requested a stringent definition (little, if any, active disease) and decided to use core set measures including, as a minimum, joint counts and levels of an acute-phase reactant to define remission. Members were surveyed to select the level of each core set measure that would be consistent with remission. Candidate definitions of remission were tested, including those that constituted a number of individual measures of remission (Boolean approach) as well as definitions using disease activity indexes. To select a definition of remission, trial data were analyzed to examine the added contribution of patient-reported outcomes and the ability of candidate measures to predict later good radiographic and functional outcomes. RESULTS: Survey results for the definition of remission suggested indexes at published thresholds and a count of core set measures, with each measure scored as 1 or less (e.g., tender and swollen joint counts, C-reactive protein [CRP] level, and global assessments on a 0-10 scale). Analyses suggested the need to include a patient-reported measure. Examination of 2-year followup data suggested that many candidate definitions performed comparably in terms of predicting later good radiographic and functional outcomes, although 28-joint Disease Activity Score-based measures of remission did not predict good radiographic outcomes as well as the other candidate definitions did. Given these and other considerations, we propose that a patient's RA can be defined as being in remission based on one of two definitions: (a) when scores on the tender joint count, swollen joint count, CRP (in mg/dl), and patient global assessment (0-10 scale) are all ≤ 1, or (b) when the score on the Simplified Disease Activity Index is ≤ 3.3. CONCLUSION: We propose two new definitions of remission, both of which can be uniformly applied and widely used in RA clinical trials. We recommend that one of these be selected as an outcome measure in each trial and that the results on both be reported for each trial.

American College of Rheumatology/European League against Rheumatism provisional definition of remission in rheumatoid arthritis for clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an increasingly attainable goal, but there is no widely used definition of remission that is stringent but achievable and could be applied uniformly as an outcome measure in clinical trials. This work was undertaken to develop such a definition. METHODS: A committee consisting of members of the American College of Rheumatology, the European League Against Rheumatism, and the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Initiative met to guide the process and review prespecified analyses from RA clinical trials. The committee requested a stringent definition (little, if any, active disease) and decided to use core set measures including, as a minimum, joint counts and levels of an acute-phase reactant to define remission. Members were surveyed to select the level of each core set measure that would be consistent with remission. Candidate definitions of remission were tested, including those that constituted a number of individual measures of remission (Boolean approach) as well as definitions using disease activity indexes. To select a definition of remission, trial data were analysed to examine the added contribution of patient-reported outcomes and the ability of candidate measures to predict later good radiographic and functional outcomes. RESULTS: Survey results for the definition of remission suggested indexes at published thresholds and a count of core set measures, with each measure scored as 1 or less (eg, tender and swollen joint counts, C reactive protein (CRP) level, and global assessments on a 0-10 scale). Analyses suggested the need to include a patient-reported measure. Examination of 2-year follow-up data suggested that many candidate definitions performed comparably in terms of predicting later good radiographic and functional outcomes, although 28-joint Disease Activity Score-based measures of remission did not predict good radiographic outcomes as well as the other candidate definitions did. Given these and other considerations, we propose that a patient's RA can be defined as being in remission based on one of two definitions: (1) when scores on the tender joint count, swollen joint count, CRP (in mg/dl), and patient global assessment (0-10 scale) are all ≤1, or (2) when the score on the Simplified Disease Activity Index is ≤3.3. CONCLUSION: We propose two new definitions of remission, both of which can be uniformly applied and widely used in RA clinical trials. The authors recommend that one of these be selected as an outcome measure in each trial and that the results on both be reported for each trial.

Baseline RANKL:OPG ratio and markers of bone and cartilage degradation predict annual radiological progression over 11 years in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine to what extent baseline measurements of the ratio receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand (RANKL):osteoprotegerin (OPG) and C-terminal cross linking of type-I and type-II (CTX-I and CTX-II), in addition to traditional markers of disease severity, could predict annual radiological progression. METHODS: A cohort of 155 patients with early, active, untreated rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who participated in the Combination Therapy in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis trial (COBRA trial) was followed up for 11 years. Urine was sampled at baseline and after 3 months from the start of treatment and analysed for CTX-I and CTX-II. Baseline serum samples were analysed for RANKL and OPG. Available traditional markers of disease severity included baseline measurements of erythrocyte sedimentation rate, rheumatoid factor and baseline radiological damage. A digital database of frequent radiographs was available, scored according to the Sharp/van der Heijde method. Individual annual progression rates were calculated and used as outcome variable. Multiple linear regression analyses identified the strongest predictors of annual radiological progression. RESULTS: In multivariable analyses the RANKL:OPG ratio and CTX-I or CTX-II proved to be independent predictors of annual radiological damage over 11 years. The prediction of annual radiological progression was strongest when the RANKL:OPG ratio and CTX-I or CTX-II were evaluated in the same model (36-39% explained variance). Adding the effect of treatment at 3 months to the baseline models improved the predictive ability of the models up to 44-46%. CONCLUSION: Unfavourable baseline levels of the RANKL:OPG ratio as well as CTX-I and CTX-II in patients with early, active, untreated RA are strong independent predictors of rapid and persistent damage progression over the 11-year follow-up. Early improvement in bone markers by treatment predicts a better outcome.

Survival, comorbidities and joint damage 11 years after the COBRA combination therapy trial in early rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: COBRA (for 'COmbinatie therapie Bij Rheumatoide Artritis') combination therapy is effective for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but long-term safety is unknown. This study evaluates survival, comorbidities and joint damage in the original COBRA trial cohort. METHODS: In the COBRA trial, 155 patients with early RA were treated with sulfasalazine (SSZ) monotherapy (SSZ group) or a combination of step-down prednisolone, methotrexate (MTX) and SSZ (COBRA group). The current 11-year follow-up study of the COBRA trial invited all original patients and performed protocollised scrutiny of clinical records, questionnaires, physical examination, laboratory and imaging tests. RESULTS: In all, 152 out of 155 patients yielded at least partial data. After a mean of 11 years follow-up, 18 (12%) patients had died, 6 COBRA patients and 12 SSZ patients, HR 0.57 (95% CI 0.21 to 1.52). Treatment for hypertension was significantly more prevalent in the COBRA group (p=0.02) with similar trends for diabetes and cataract. Conversely, hypercholesterolaemia, cancer and infection showed a trend in favour of COBRA. Other comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease and fractures appeared in similar frequency. Radiographic findings suggest as a minimum sustained benefit for COBRA therapy, that is, difference in joint damage but similar subsequent progression rates after 5 years. Imputation to compensate for selective dropout suggests increasing benefit for COBRA, that is, difference in yearly progression rates similar to that seen in the first 5 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: After 11 years, initial COBRA combination therapy resulted in numerically lower mortality and similar prevalence of comorbidity compared with initial SSZ monotherapy. In addition, lower progression of joint damage suggests long-term disease modification.