Update of the guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of rheumatoid arthritis by the Mexican College of Rheumatology 2023.

OBJECTIVE: To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacological management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A group of experts representative of different geographical regions and various medical services catering to the Mexican population with RA was formed. Questions based on Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) were developed, deemed clinically relevant. These questions were answered based on the results of a recent systematic literature review (SLR), and the evidence's validity was assessed using the GRADE system, considered a standard for these purposes. Subsequently, the expert group reached consensus on the direction and strength of recommendations through a multi-stage voting process. RESULTS: The updated guidelines for RA treatment stratify various therapeutic options, including different classes of DMARDs (conventional, biologicals, and JAK inhibitors), as well as NSAIDs, glucocorticoids, and analgesics. By consensus, it establishes the use of these in different subpopulations of interest among RA patients and addresses aspects related to vaccination, COVID-19, surgery, pregnancy and lactation, and others. CONCLUSIONS: This update of the Mexican guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of RA provides reference points for evidence-based decision-making, recommending patient participation in joint decision-making to achieve the greatest benefit for our patients. It also establishes recommendations for managing a variety of relevant conditions affecting our patients.

Very low prevalence of ultrasound-detected tenosynovial abnormalities in healthy subjects throughout the age range: OMERACT ultrasound minimal disease study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of ultrasound-detected tendon abnormalities in healthy subjects (HS) across the age range. METHODS: Adult HS (age 18-80 years) were recruited in 23 international Outcome Measures in Rheumatology ultrasound centres and were clinically assessed to exclude inflammatory diseases or overt osteoarthritis before undergoing a bilateral ultrasound examination of digit flexors (DFs) 1-5 and extensor carpi ulnaris (ECU) tendons to detect the presence of tenosynovial hypertrophy (TSH), tenosynovial power Doppler (TPD) and tenosynovial effusion (TEF), usually considered ultrasound signs of inflammatory diseases. A comparison cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was taken from the Birmingham Early Arthritis early arthritis inception cohort. RESULTS: 939 HS and 144 patients with RA were included. The majority of HS (85%) had grade 0 for TSH, TPD and TEF in all DF and ECU tendons examined. There was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of TSH and TPD involvement between HS and subjects with RA (HS vs RA p<0.001). In HS, there was no difference in the presence of ultrasound abnormalities between age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-detected TSH and TPD abnormalities are rare in HS and can be regarded as markers of active inflammatory disease, especially in newly presenting RA.

Musculoskeletal ultrasound to complement clinical evaluation and drive treatment of rheumatoid arthritis patients in remission does not prevent worsening of patient-reported outcomes: the ULTRAPRO randomised controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine the impact of sharing musculoskeletal ultrasound (MUS) results with rheumatologists on worsening patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 6 months of follow-up in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with clinical remission. Secondary objectives were to describe MUS findings and to compare the proportion of patients with flares, according to the DAS28-ESR, following the intervention. METHODS: Ninety-four consecutive outpatients with clinical remission had PROs and a treatment proposal recorded at study entry. MUS was then performed by trained specialists who were blinded to clinical assessments. Forty-seven patients were randomised (1:1) to either the intervention group (MUS data shared with the primary rheumatologist) or the control group (data not shared); changes in the treatment proposal were recorded. PROs worsening and the proportion of patients with ares were compared between both groups at 6±2 months of follow-up. The study received IRB approval. Appropriate statistics were used. RESULTS: At baseline, patients from the intervention and control groups had similar characteristics; 43 and 41 patients, respectively, completed the 6-month follow-up period. PROs worsening at 6 months of follow-up were similar between groups, as were the DAS28-ESR and the proportion of patients who flared. In general, MUS findings were in accordance with the clinical remission status, although power Doppler synovitis was detected in up to 37% of the patients. RA-related treatment was increased in all the patients from the intervention group with discordant findings between clinical and MUS assessments. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of MUS to clinical evaluation of RA outpatients in remission did not prevent worsening PROs at 6 months.

Physician's Experience and Disease Activity Affect the Impact of Ultrasound on the Treatment Decision in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore which factors affect the impact of musculoskeletal ultrasound (MUS) on the treatment proposal among rheumatologists with different degree of experience. METHODS: Sixteen clinical vignettes summarized data from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) outpatients; vignettes included clinical evaluation and a blank section for a first treatment proposal; MUS information was then added, based on German Ultrasound score, followed by a blank section for treatment re-consideration, if applicable. During a 6 months period, each vignette was concomitantly presented to six trainees and six senior rheumatologists (SR); three SR had ≥15 years of experience. Participants were blinded to colleagues' responses. Appropriated statistics were used. RESULTS: Vignettes included data from female patients, who had a mean ± SD age of 43.3 ± 9 years, 7.6 ± 3.5 years of disease duration and comorbidities (68.8%). MUS induced treatment modification in 24% of evaluations, with similar percentage among SR and trainees. Within SR, more experienced rheumatologists (≥15 years) never translated MUS findings in a different treatment proposal, compared to 34% of those with lesser experience, p ≤ 0.0001. There were 60 clinical scenarios each, with remission and moderate disease activity, and 36 clinical scenarios each, with low and high disease activity. MUS-induced treatment modifications were more frequent in scenarios with low and moderate disease activity, compared to remission and high disease activity, p = 0.008. CONCLUSIONS: Physician's experience and disease activity level affect the impact of MUS on the treatment decision in RA outpatients. RA patients with intermediate disease activity may benefit from MUS incorporation to standard assessments.