Pain Reduction With Oral Methotrexate in Knee Osteoarthritis : A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatments for osteoarthritis (OA) are limited. Previous small studies suggest that the antirheumatic drug methotrexate may be a potential treatment for OA pain. OBJECTIVE: To assess symptomatic benefits of methotrexate in knee OA (KOA). DESIGN: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial done between 13 June 2014 and 13 October 2017. (ISRCTN77854383; EudraCT: 2013-001689-41). SETTING: 15 secondary care musculoskeletal clinics in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 207 participants with symptomatic, radiographic KOA and knee pain (severity ≥4 out of 10) on most days in the past 3 months with inadequate response to current medication were approached for inclusion. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to oral methotrexate once weekly (6-week escalation 10 to 25 mg) or matched placebo over 12 months and continued usual analgesia. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was average knee pain (numerical rating scale [NRS] 0 to 10) at 6 months, with 12-month follow-up to assess longer-term response. Secondary end points included knee stiffness and function outcomes and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: A total of 155 participants (64% women; mean age, 60.9 years; 50% Kellgren-Lawrence grade 3 to 4) were randomly assigned to methotrexate (n = 77) or placebo (n = 78). Follow-up was 86% (n = 134; methotrexate: 66, placebo: 68) at 6 months. Mean knee pain decreased from 6.4 (SD, 1.80) at baseline to 5.1 (SD, 2.32) at 6 months in the methotrexate group and from 6.8 (SD, 1.62) to 6.2 (SD, 2.30) in the placebo group. The primary intention-to-treat analysis showed a statistically significant pain reduction of 0.79 NRS points in favor of methotrexate (95% CI, 0.08 to 1.51; P = 0.030). There were also statistically significant treatment group differences in favor of methotrexate at 6 months for Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index stiffness (0.60 points [CI, 0.01 to 1.18]; P = 0.045) and function (5.01 points [CI, 1.29 to 8.74]; P = 0.008). Treatment adherence analysis supported a dose-response effect. Four unrelated serious AEs were reported (methotrexate: 2, placebo: 2). LIMITATION: Not permitting oral methotrexate to be changed to subcutaneous delivery for intolerance. CONCLUSION: Oral methotrexate added to usual medications demonstrated statistically significant reduction in KOA pain, stiffness, and function at 6 months. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Versus Arthritis.

Revision to the musculoskeletal domain of the BILAG-2004 index to incorporate ultrasound findings.

OBJECTIVES: To improve the definitions of inflammatory arthritis within the musculoskeletal (MSK) domain of the BILAG-2004 index by incorporating imaging findings and clinical features predictive of response to treatment. METHODS: The BILAG MSK Subcommittee proposed revisions to the BILAG-2004 index definitions of inflammatory arthritis, based on review of evidence in two recent studies. Data from these studies were pooled and analysed to determine the impact of the proposed changes on the severity grading of inflammatory arthritis. RESULTS: The revised definition for severe inflammatory arthritis includes definition of 'basic activities of daily living'. For moderate inflammatory arthritis, it now includes synovitis, defined by either observed joint swelling or MSK US evidence of inflammation in joints and surrounding structures. For mild inflammatory arthritis, the definition now includes reference to symmetrical distribution of affected joints and guidance on how US may help re-classify patients as moderate or no inflammatory arthritis. Data from two recent SLE trials were analysed (219 patients). A total of 119 (54.3%) were graded as having mild inflammatory arthritis (BILAG-2004 Grade C). Of these, 53 (44.5%) had evidence of joint inflammation (synovitis or tenosynovitis) on US. Applying the new definition increased the number of patients classified as moderate inflammatory arthritis from 72 (32.9%) to 125 (57.1%), while patients with normal US (n = 66/119) could be recategorized as BILAG-2004 Grade D (inactive disease). CONCLUSIONS: Proposed changes to the definitions of inflammatory arthritis in the BILAG-2004 index will result in more accurate classification of patients who are more or less likely to respond to treatment.

Efficacy and safety of filgotinib in patients with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical trials restricted to moderately active RA are limited. Filgotinib is approved for treating moderate to severe active RA. This post hoc analysis assessed efficacy and safety of filgotinib in moderately active RA. METHODS: In FINCH 1, patients with active moderate to severe RA and inadequate response to methotrexate received filgotinib 200 mg or 100 mg (FIL200/FIL100) once daily, adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks, or placebo, all with methotrexate (n = 1,755). This subgroup analysis was conducted in patients with a moderate baseline Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP; >3.2 to ≤ 5.1; n = 425 [24.2%]). RESULTS: A higher proportion of patients achieved DAS28-CRP <2.6, Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission (≤2.8), low disease activity (LDA) (DAS28-CRP ≤3.2 or CDAI ≤10), and American College of Rheumatology (ACR20/50/70) responses with FIL200 and FIL100 vs placebo at Weeks 12 and 24. Week 12 ACR20 response rates (primary end point) were 77.9%, 67.8%, and 43.8%, respectively. ∼75% of patients achieved DAS28-CRP LDA by week 24 with either filgotinib dose. FIL200 and FIL100 elicited greater improvements in patient-reported outcomes than placebo. The efficacy of filgotinib, maintained through week 52, was comparable to that of adalimumab. Frequency of adverse events (AEs) was similar with filgotinib and adalimumab. Infections were the most common AEs; incidence rates were 40-53% in active treatment groups. CONCLUSION: In this subpopulation with moderately active RA, the efficacy and safety of filgotinib were similar to those in the overall FINCH 1 population (patients with active moderate to severe RA). TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02889796.

JAK inhibitors in systemic lupus erythematosus: Translating pathogenesis into therapy.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a complex multi-organ autoimmune disease marked by the production of autoantibodies against nuclear structures, formation of immune complexes, and chronic inflammation triggered by their tissular deposition. SLE is characterized by alternating periods of relapse and remission and each flare has the potential to cause new organ damage related to either the disease process or the medication toxicity. Despite remarkable progress across its multiple domains, SLE is still an area with many unmet needs, calling for innovative and practical solutions. The efforts of the drug development programme in lupus have led to considerable growth in the last decade, owing to the approval of belimumab, anifrolumab, and voclosporin. The increasing understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease has enabled the exploration of novel therapeutic strategies. New discoveries in the intricate cytokine kaleidoscope of lupus have made the concept of targeted therapy an attractive and promising research focus. JAK inhibitors are oral targeted therapies approved for a wide variety of diseases across the Rheumatology, Gastroenterology, Dermatology, and Haematology fields. Multiple JAKis are currently being investigated in SLE. This paper aims to summarize existing data coming from both clinical trials and case reports regarding the use of JAK inhibitors in SLE.

Safety of synthetic and biological DMARDs: a systematic literature review informing the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic literature review (SLR) concerning the safety of synthetic(s) and biological (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to inform the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: SLR of observational studies comparing safety outcomes of any DMARD with another intervention in RA. A comparator group was required for inclusion. For treatments yet without, or limited, registry data, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were used. RESULTS: Fifty-nine observational studies addressed the safety of DMARDs. Two studies (unclear risk of bias (RoB)) showed an increased risk of serious infections with bDMARDs compared with conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs. Herpes zoster infections occurred more with JAKi than csDMARDs (adjusted HR (aHR): 3.66) and bDMARDs (aHR: 1.9-2.3) (four studies, two low RoB). The risk of malignancies was similar across bDMARDs (five studies) and with tofacitinib compared with bDMARDs (one study, low RoB). The risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was similar with bDMARDs and tofacitinib (two studies, one low RoB). Thirty studies reported safety from RCTs, with one, designed to evaluate safety, showing that malignancies (HR (95% CI): 1.48 (1.04 to 2.09)) and MACE (HR (95% CI): 1.33 (0.91 to 1.94)) occurred numerically more frequently with tofacitinib (5 mg and 10 mg doses combined) than with TNFi in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. In this study, the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) was higher with tofacitinib 10 mg than with TNFi. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of bDMARDs was further demonstrated. Whether the difference in incidence of malignancies, MACE and VTE between tofacitinib and TNFi applies to other JAKi needs further evaluation.

Points to consider: EULAR-UEMS standards for the training of European rheumatologists.

BACKGROUND: Postgraduate rheumatology training programmes are already established at a national level in most European countries. However, previous work has highlighted a substantial level of heterogeneity in the organisation and, in part, content of programmes. OBJECTIVE: To define competences and standards of knowledge, skills and professional behaviours required for the training of rheumatologists. METHODS: A European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) task force (TF) of 23 experts, including two members of the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) section of rheumatology, was convened. The mapping phase consisted of the retrieval of key documents on specialty training in rheumatology and other related specialties across a broad set of international sources. The content of these documents was extracted and represented the foundation for the document draft that underwent several rounds of online discussion within the TF, and afterwards was also distributed to a broad group of stakeholders for collecting feedback. The list of generated competences was voted on during the TF meetings, while the level of agreement (LoA) with each statement was established by anonymous online voting. RESULTS: A total of 132 international training curricula were retrieved and extracted. In addition to the TF members, 253 stakeholders commented and voted on the competences through an online anonymous survey. The TF developed (1) an overarching framework indicating the areas that should be addressed during training, (2) 7 domains defining broad areas that rheumatology trainees should master by the end of the training programme, (3) 8 core themes defining the nuances of each domain and (4) 28 competences that trainees should acquire to cover each of the areas outlined in the overarching framework. A high LoA was achieved for all competences. CONCLUSION: These points to consider for EULAR-UEMS standards for the training of European rheumatologists are now defined. Their dissemination and use can hopefully contribute to harmonising training across European countries.

Characteristics of patients initiating treatment with baricitinib and outcomes at follow-up: analysis of BSRBR-RA Registry data.

OBJECTIVES: To describe selected baseline characteristics, continuation with baricitinib and disease activity over time in patients initiating treatment with baricitinib in a UK real-world rheumatology setting. METHODS: Baseline and follow-up data were analysed from baricitinib-treated patients newly recruited to the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Registry-RA (BSRBR-RA) baricitinib cohort between 1 January 2018 and 31 March 2020. The primary objective was to evaluate continuation of baricitinib treatment in patients with at least one follow-up. Analyses were performed using the full baricitinib cohort, overall and by patient subgroup: biologic DMARD (bDMARD)/targeted synthetic (ts)DMARD-naive vs -experienced, baricitinib 4 vs 2 mg, age ≥65 vs <65 years, monotherapy vs combination therapy and male vs female. RESULTS: At baseline, the study cohort (n = 561) was 76.5% female, mean age 60.0 years, had longstanding (mean 13.1 years) and severe RA, and 54.0% had previously received a bDMARD/tsDMARD. Of 265 and 110 patients completing the 6- and 12-month follow-ups with available data, 77.7 and 69.1% remained on baricitinib at each time, respectively. In all Kaplan-Meier analyses, >60% of patients remained on baricitinib at 540 days. Continuation of baricitinib therapy differed between some subgroup pairs (bDMARD/tsDMARD naive/experienced, baricitinib 2 mg/4 mg). Disease activity was lower at both follow-ups than at baseline, overall and in all subgroups. CONCLUSION: In the early years of real-world baricitinib use in the UK, a high proportion of patients continued with treatment at both 6 and 12 months, at which times disease activity was lower than at baseline.

Efficacy of subcutaneous vs intravenous infliximab in rheumatoid arthritis: a post-hoc analysis of a randomized phase III trial.

OBJECTIVES: The primary endpoint of the pivotal phase III study of infliximab (IFX) s.c. demonstrated non-inferiority of s.c. to i.v. IFX, based on 28-joint DAS-CRP (DAS28-CRP) improvement at week (W) 22 (NCT03147248). This post-hoc analysis investigated whether numerical differences in efficacy outcomes at W30/54 were statistically significant, using conservative imputation methods. METHODS: Patients with active RA and inadequate response to MTX received IFX i.v. 3 mg/kg at W0 and W2 (induction) and were randomized (1:1) to IFX s.c. 120 mg every 2 weeks or i.v. 3 mg/kg every 8 weeks thereafter (maintenance). Patients randomized to IFX i.v. switched to IFX s.c. from W30-54. This post-hoc analysis compared efficacy outcomes for s.c. and i.v. groups pre-switch (W30) and post-switch (W54) using last observation carried forward (LOCF) and non-responder imputation (NRI) methods. RESULTS: Of 343 randomized patients, 165 (IFX s.c.) and 174 (IFX i.v.) were analysed. At W30, significantly improved outcomes were identified with s.c. vs i.v. IFX for DAS28-CRP/DAS28-ESR/Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)/Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) scores (LOCF); ACR/good EULAR responses, DAS28-CRP/Boolean remission, and DAS28-CRP/DAS28-ESR/CDAI/SDAI low disease activity and remission (LOCF and/or NRI); and minimal clinically important difference in HAQ score (LOCF and NRI). After switching to IFX s.c. from IFX i.v., fewer significant between-group differences were identified at W54. CONCLUSION: IFX s.c. showed improved efficacy at W30 compared with IFX i.v., and the reduced between-group difference in efficacy outcomes at W54 after switching supports the results suggesting benefits of IFX s.c. compared with IFX i.v. at W30. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClincialTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03147248, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03147248.

Outcomes of children born to mothers with systemic lupus erythematosus exposed to hydroxychloroquine or azathioprine.

OBJECTIVES: HCQ and AZA are used to control disease activity and reduce risk of flare during pregnancy in patients with SLE. The aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of children born to mothers with SLE exposed to HCQ or AZA during pregnancy and breast-feeding. METHODS: Women attending UK specialist lupus clinics with children ≤17 years old, born after SLE diagnosis, were recruited to this retrospective study. Data were collected using questionnaires and from clinical record review. Factors associated with the outcomes of low birth weight and childhood infection were determined using multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression models. RESULTS: We analysed 284 live births of 199 mothers from 10 UK centres. The first pregnancies of 73.9% of mothers (147/199) were captured in the study; (60.4%) (150/248) and 31.1% (87/280) children were exposed to HCQ and AZA, respectively. There were no significant differences in the frequency of congenital malformations or intrauterine growth restriction between children exposed or not to HCQ or AZA. AZA use was increased in women with a history of hypertension or renal disease. Although AZA was associated with low birth weight in univariate models, there was no significant association in multivariable models. In adjusted models, exposure to AZA was associated with increased reports of childhood infection requiring hospital management [odds ratio 2.283 (1.003, 5.198), P = 0.049]. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant negative outcomes in children exposed to HCQ in pregnancy. AZA use was associated with increased reporting of childhood infection, which warrants further study.

The BILAG-2004 index is associated with development of new damage in SLE.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether BILAG-2004 index is associated with the development of damage in a cohort of SLE patients. Mortality and development of damage were examined. METHODS: This was a multicentre longitudinal study. Patients were recruited within 12 months of achieving fourth ACR classification criterion for SLE. Data were collected on disease activity, damage, SLE-specific drug exposure, cardiovascular risk factors, antiphospholipid syndrome status and death at every visit. This study ran from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2017. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse mortality and development of new damage. Poisson regression was used to examine potential explanatory variables for development of new damage. RESULTS: A total of 273 SLE patients were recruited with total follow-up of 1767 patient-years (median 73.4 months). There were 6348 assessments with disease activity scores available for analysis. During follow-up, 13 deaths and 114 new damage items (in 83 patients) occurred. The incidence rate for development of damage was higher in the first 3 years before stabilizing at a lower rate. Overall rate for damage accrual was 61.1 per 1000 person-years (95% CI: 50.6, 73.8). Analysis showed that active disease scores according to BILAG-2004 index (systems scores of A or B, counts of systems with A and BILAG-2004 numerical score) were associated with development of new damage. Low disease activity (LDA) states [BILAG-2004 LDA and BILAG Systems Tally (BST) persistent LDA] were inversely associated with development of damage. CONCLUSIONS: BILAG-2004 index is associated with new damage. BILAG-2004 LDA and BST persistent LDA can be considered as treatment targets.

Comparison of Femoral Nerve Catheter, Adductor Canal Catheter, and Periarticular Liposomal Bupivacaine Infiltration for Postoperative Analgesia After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve catheters are used to provide analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and have been shown to decrease pain and opioid use, to facilitate participation with physical therapy (PT), and to hasten discharge. More recently, pericapsular infiltration using liposomal bupivacaine (LB) has been employed as an alternative analgesic approach. METHODS: This retrospective study compared outcomes for three analgesic approaches: femoral nerve catheter (FNC), adductor canal catheter (ACC), and intraoperative LB infiltration. The primary outcome was numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores at 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included pain scores at 12, 36, and 48 hours, time-to-first opioid, cumulative opioid use, distance walked, and time-to-discharge. RESULTS: Pain scores at 24 hours were significantly lower in both the ACC and FNC cohorts when compared to the LB cohort (3.1 versus 4.6 [P = .017] and 2.4 versus 4.6 [P < .0001]). The ACC and FNC groups did not differ significantly at that timepoint (P = .27). Similar comparisons were found at 12 and 36 hours, while at 48 hours the FNC group was superior. Time to first opioid and opioid consumption favored the ACC and FNC groups. Walking distance favored the ACC group. Both the ACC and LB groups had a faster time-to-discharge than the FNC group. CONCLUSION: Both ACCs and FNCs provided superior analgesia at 24 hours compared to LB, while being equivalent to each other. Pain scores at 12 hours and 36 hours as well as opioid consumption through 48 hours mirrored this finding. Although various differences were found between groups in terms of time-to-first analgesic, walking distance and time-to-discharge, the ACC approach appeared to optimally balance analgesia, ambulation, and time-to-discharge.

Rituximab versus tocilizumab in anti-TNF inadequate responder patients with rheumatoid arthritis (R4RA): 16-week outcomes of a stratified, biopsy-driven, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although targeted biological treatments have transformed the outlook for patients with rheumatoid arthritis, 40% of patients show poor clinical response, which is mechanistically still unexplained. Because more than 50% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis have low or absent CD20 B cells-the target for rituximab-in the main disease tissue (joint synovium), we hypothesised that, in these patients, the IL-6 receptor inhibitor tocilizumab would be more effective. The aim of this trial was to compare the effect of tocilizumab with rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response to anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) stratified for synovial B-cell status. METHODS: This study was a 48-week, biopsy-driven, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 randomised controlled trial (rituximab vs tocilizumab in anti-TNF inadequate responder patients with rheumatoid arthritis; R4RA) done in 19 centres across five European countries (the UK, Belgium, Italy, Portugal, and Spain). Patients aged 18 years or older who fulfilled the 2010 American College of Rheumatology and European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis and were eligible for treatment with rituximab therapy according to UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines were eligible for inclusion in the trial. To inform balanced stratification, following a baseline synovial biopsy, patients were classified histologically as B-cell poor or rich. Patients were then randomly assigned (1:1) centrally in block sizes of six and four to receive two 1000 mg rituximab infusions at an interval of 2 weeks (rituximab group) or 8 mg/kg tocilizumab infusions at 4-week intervals (tocilizumab group). To enhance the accuracy of the stratification of B-cell poor and B-cell rich patients, baseline synovial biopsies from all participants were subjected to RNA sequencing and reclassified by B-cell molecular signature. The study was powered to test the superiority of tocilizumab over rituximab in the B-cell poor population at 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was defined as a 50% improvement in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI50%) from baseline. The trial is registered on the ISRCTN database, ISRCTN97443826, and EudraCT, 2012-002535-28. FINDINGS: Between Feb 28, 2013, and Jan 17, 2019, 164 patients were classified histologically and were randomly assigned to the rituximab group (83 [51%]) or the tocilizumab group (81 [49%]). In patients histologically classified as B-cell poor, there was no statistically significant difference in CDAI50% between the rituximab group (17 [45%] of 38 patients) and the tocilizumab group (23 [56%] of 41 patients; difference 11% [95% CI -11 to 33], p=0·31). However, in the synovial biopsies classified as B-cell poor with RNA sequencing the tocilizumab group had a significantly higher response rate compared with the rituximab group for CDAI50% (rituximab group 12 [36%] of 33 patients vs tocilizumab group 20 [63%] of 32 patients; difference 26% [2 to 50], p=0·035). Occurrence of adverse events (rituximab group 76 [70%] of 108 patients vs tocilizumab group 94 [80%] of 117 patients; difference 10% [-1 to 21) and serious adverse events (rituximab group 8 [7%] of 108 vs tocilizumab group 12 [10%] of 117; difference 3% [-5 to 10]) were not significantly different between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: The results suggest that RNA sequencing-based stratification of rheumatoid arthritis synovial tissue showed stronger associations with clinical responses compared with histopathological classification. Additionally, for patients with low or absent B-cell lineage expression signature in synovial tissue tocilizumab is more effective than rituximab. Replication of the results and validation of the RNA sequencing-based classification in independent cohorts is required before making treatment recommendations for clinical practice. FUNDING: Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme from the UK National Institute for Health Research.

Apremilast monotherapy for long-term treatment of active psoriatic arthritis in DMARD-naïve patients.

OBJECTIVES: Apremilast monotherapy was evaluated up to 5 years in PALACE 4 (fourth PsA Long-term Assessment of Clinical Efficacy study) DMARD-naïve patients with PsA. METHODS: Patients with active PsA were randomized (1:1:1) to placebo, apremilast 30 mg or apremilast 20 mg twice a day. Placebo patients were rerandomized to apremilast at week 16 or 24. Double-blind apremilast continued to week 52, with a 4-year open-label extension (≤260 weeks of exposure). Analyses through week 260 were based on observed data. RESULTS: A total of 527 patients were treated. Among patients randomized to apremilast 30 mg at baseline, 45.5% completed week 260. At study end, 24.8% reported conventional synthetic DMARD or steroid use for any reason. At week 260, 65.8%/39.0%/20.3% of apremilast 30 mg patients achieved ACR20/ACR50/ACR70 responses, respectively. PsA sign and symptom improvements were sustained up to week 260 with continued treatment, including reductions in swollen (84.8%) and tender (76.4%) joint counts. Among apremilast 30 mg patients with baseline enthesitis or dactylitis, 71.2% achieved a Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score of 0 and 95.1% achieved a dactylitis count of 0. Over 50% of patients achieved a HAQ Disability Index minimal clinically important difference (≥0.35). In patients with ≥3% baseline psoriasis-involved body surface area, 60.3% and 47.6% achieved ≥50% and ≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores, respectively. Patients continuing apremilast 20 mg also demonstrated consistent, sustained improvements. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea, nausea, headache, upper respiratory tract infection and nasopharyngitis. No new safety concerns were observed long term. CONCLUSIONS: Apremilast led to sustained PsA efficacy up to 260 weeks and was well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov), NCT01307423.

Anti-3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase antibodies: incidence using different testing criteria, and case series.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the incidence of anti-3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR) antibodies utilising different testing criteria, and review the clinical details of a series of patients with associated autoimmune myopathy. METHODS: The incidence of anti-HMGCR antibodies in 2019 from 3 groups, South West London, Berkshire/Surrey and Southampton, were compared in the adult population. Anti-HMGCR antibodies were measured by commercial chemiluminescent and immunodot assays. The case notes of patients with anti-HMGCR antibodies were reviewed for the case series. RESULTS: The estimated incidence of anti-HMGCR antibodies in the first 2 groups was 1.94 per million adults per year, and in the third group 10.3 per million adults per year. In the first 2 groups the test criteria restricted analysis to specific clinician request for anti-HMGCR. In the third group test criteria included cases with less specific clinical features or a cytoplasmic indirect immunofluorescence anti-nuclear antibody pattern. The latter strategy had a positive predictive value of 66.1% for anti-HMGCR associated myopathy. A case series of 27 patients with anti-HMGCR antibodies revealed 19 with myopathy, oesophageal involvement in 26% and median peak CK 8000 IU/L. Response to treatment, including intravenous immunoglobulin, was good with CK normalising after median 5.5 months. In 8 cases there was no evidence of autoimmune muscle disease, 7 not statin exposed. CONCLUSIONS: Varying criteria result in a 5-fold difference in estimated incidence of anti-HMGCR antibodies, revealing positive cases without evidence of myopathy. Patients with anti-HMGCR myopathy respond well to immune suppression, supporting wider testing for these antibodies amongst patients with myopathy.

Prevalence of cognitive impairment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a cross sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the role of chronic inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on cognition. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Six hundred sixty-one men and women aged ≥55 years who fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) criteria for RA were recruited from three healthcare trusts in the United Kingdom (UK) between May 2018 and March 2020. Study participants took part in interviews which captured sociodemographic information, followed by an assessment of cognition. RA specific clinical characteristics were obtained from hospital medical records. Participants were cognitively assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and were classified as cognitively impaired if they scored ≤27/30 points. Linear regression analyses were conducted to identify which demographic and clinical variables were potential predictors of cognitive impairment. RESULTS: The average age of participants was 67.6 years and 67% (444/661) were women. 72% (458/634; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.76) of participants were classified as cognitively impaired (MoCA≤27). Greater cognitive impairment was associated with older age (p = .006), being male (p = .041) and higher disease activity score (DAS28) (with moderate (DAS28 > 3.1) (p = 0.008) and high (DAS28 > 5.1) (p = 0.008)) compared to those in remission (DAS28 ≤ 2.6). There was no association between MoCA score and education, disease duration, RF status, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP) status, RA medication type or use of glucocorticoids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that cognitive impairment is highly prevalent in older adults with RA. This impairment appears to be associated with higher RA disease activity and supports the concept that chronic systemic inflammation might accelerate cognitive decline. This underlines the importance of controlling the inflammatory response.

Pharmacy Calls for Prescription Clarification at an Academic Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Approximately two-thirds of patients discharged from an emergency department (ED) are prescribed at least one medication. Prescription clarification by outpatient pharmacies for ED patients can lead to delays for patients and added workload. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to describe prescriptions requiring clarification prior to being dispensed by an outpatient pharmacy for patients recently discharged from an ED. METHODS: This study was conducted at an urban, 61-bed academic ED. Prescription clarification forms were used to identify common causes for outpatient pharmacies to contact the ED to clarify prescriptions prior to dispensation. Clarification types were reviewed and classified. Descriptive statistics were used to present the classification types. RESULTS: There were 1278 documented calls to the ED for prescription clarification that were classified as clarification of directions for use (611, 47.7%), insurance or affordability issues (182, 14.2%), dose (172, 13.4%), medication availability (126, 9.8%), lost or missing prescription (93, 7.3%), patient allergy or adverse event (62, 4.8%), duplication in therapy (17, 1.3%), and clarification of medication ordered (17, 1.3%). When grouped into provider, system, or patient-related issues, provider issues were noted to be most frequent clarifications (862 clarifications, 67.3%), followed by system issues (325 clarifications, 25.4%), and finally, patient-related issues (93 clarifications, 7.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Clarification of directions for use, insurance or affordability issues, and clarification of the dose were the most common reasons that outpatient pharmacies contacted an ED regarding a prescription for a recently discharged patient.

2019 EULAR points to consider for the assessment of competences in rheumatology specialty training.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Striving for harmonisation of specialty training and excellence of care in rheumatology, the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) established a task force to develop points to consider (PtCs) for the assessment of competences during rheumatology specialty training. METHODS: A systematic literature review on the performance of methods for the assessment of competences in rheumatology specialty training was conducted. This was followed by focus groups in five selected countries to gather information on assessment practices and priorities. Combining the collected evidence with expert opinion, the PtCs were formulated by the multidisciplinary task force, including rheumatologists, medical educationalists, and people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. The level of agreement (LoA) for each PtC was anonymously voted online. RESULTS: Four overarching principles and 10 PtCs were formulated. The overarching principles highlighted the importance of assessments being closely linked to the rheumatology training programme and protecting sufficient time and resources to ensure effective implementation. In the PtCs, two were related to overall assessment strategy (PtCs 1 and 5); three focused on formative assessment and portfolio (PtCs 2-4); three focused on the assessment of knowledge, skills or professionalism (PtCs 6-8); one focused on trainees at risk of failure (PtC 9); and one focused on training the trainers (PtC 10). The LoA (0-10) ranged from 8.75 to 9.9. CONCLUSION: These EULAR PtCs provide European guidance on assessment methods throughout rheumatology training programmes. These can be used to benchmark current practices and to develop future strategies, thereby fostering continuous improvement in rheumatology learning and, ultimately, in patient care.

Ultrasound to identify systemic lupus erythematosus patients with musculoskeletal symptoms who respond best to therapy: the US Evaluation For mUsculoskeletal Lupus longitudinal multicentre study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether SLE patients with inflammatory joint symptoms and US synovitis/tenosyovitis achieve better clinical responses to glucocorticoids compared with patients with normal scans. Secondary objectives included identification of clinical features predicting US synovitis/tenosynovitis. METHODS: In a longitudinal multicentre study, SLE patients with physician-diagnosed inflammatory joint pain received intramuscular methylprednisolone 120 mg once. Clinical assessments, patient-reported outcomes and bilateral hand/wrist USs were collected at 0, 2 and 6 weeks. The primary outcome (determined via internal pilot) was the early morning stiffness visual analogue scale (EMS-VAS) at 2 weeks, adjusted for baseline, comparing patients with positive (greyscale ≥2 and/or power Doppler ≥1) and negative US. Post hoc analyses excluded FM. RESULTS: Of 133 patients, 78 had a positive US. Only 53 (68%) of these had one or more swollen joint. Of 66 patients with one or more swollen joint, 20% had a negative US. A positive US was associated with joint swelling, symmetrical small joint distribution and serology. The primary endpoint was not met: in the full analysis set (N = 133) there was no difference in baseline-adjusted EMS-VAS at week 2 [-7.7 mm (95% CI -19.0, 3.5); P = 0.178]. After excluding 32 patients with FM, response was significantly better in patients with a positive US at baseline [baseline-adjusted EMS-VAS at 2 weeks -12.1 mm (95% CI -22.2, -0.1); P = 0.049]. This difference was greater when adjusted for treatment [-12.8 mm (95% CI -22, -3); P = 0.007]. BILAG and SLEDAI responses were higher in US-positive patients. CONCLUSION: In SLE patients without FM, those with a positive US had a better clinical response to therapy. Imaging-detected synovitis/tenosynovitis may be considered to decide on therapy and enrich clinical trials.

Lupus, vaccinations and COVID-19: What we know now.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus causing Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has had a huge impact on health services, with a high mortality associated with complications including pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are at increased risk of viral infections, and recent data suggests they may be at an increased risk of poor outcomes with COVID-19. This may be particularly true for those on rituximab or high dose steroids. A huge international effort from the scientific community has so far resulted in the temporary authorisation of three vaccines which offer protection against SARS-CoV-2, with over 30 other vaccines being evaluated in ongoing trials. Although there has historically been concern that vaccines may trigger disease flares of SLE, there is little convincing evidence to show this. In general lupus patients appear to gain good protection from vaccination, although there may be reduced efficacy in those with high disease activity or those on immunosuppressive therapies, such as rituximab or high dose steroids. Recent concerns have been raised regarding rare clotting events with the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine and it is currently unknown whether this risk is higher for those patients with secondary antiphospholipid syndrome. With the possibility of annual COVID vaccination programmes in the future, prospective data collection and registries looking at the effect of vaccination on SLE disease control, the incidence of COVID-19 in SLE patients and severity of COVID-19 disease course would all be useful. As mass vaccination programmes begin to roll out across the world, we assess the evidence of the use of vaccines in SLE patients and in particular vaccines targeting SARS-CoV-2.

Interventions for tophi in gout.

BACKGROUND: Tophi develop in untreated or uncontrolled gout. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2014.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of non-surgical and surgical treatments for the management of tophi in gout. SEARCH METHODS: We updated the search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase databases to 28 August 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials examining interventions for tophi in gout in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included one trial in our original review. We added four more trials (1796 participants) in this update. One had three arms; pegloticase infusion every two weeks (biweekly), monthly pegloticase infusion (pegloticase infusion alternating with placebo infusion every two weeks) and placebo. Two studies looked at lesinurad 200 mg or 400 mg in combination with allopurinol. One trial studied lesinurad 200 mg or 400 mg in combination with febuxostat. One trial compared febuxostat 80 mg and 120 mg to allopurinol. Two trials were at unclear risk of performance and detection bias due to lack of information on blinding of participants and personnel. All other trials were at low risk of bias. Moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision; one study; 79 participants) showed that biweekly pegloticase resolved tophi in 21/52 participants compared with 2/27 on placebo (risk ratio (RR) 5.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38 to 21.54; number needed to treat for a benefit (NNTB) 3, 95% CI 2 to 6). Similar proportions of participants receiving biweekly pegloticase (80/85) had an adverse event compared to placebo (41/43) (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.07). However, more participants on biweekly pegloticase (15/85) withdrew due to an adverse event compared to placebo (1/43) (RR 7.59, 95% CI 1.04 to 55.55; number needed to treat for a harm (NNTH) 7, 95% CI 4 to 16). More participants on monthly pegloticase (11/52) showed complete resolution of tophi compared with placebo (2/27) (RR 2.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 11.97; NNTB 8, 95% CI 4 to 91). Similar numbers of participants on monthly pegloticase (84/84) had an adverse event compared to placebo (41/43) (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.14). More participants on monthly pegloticase (16/84) withdrew due to adverse events compared to placebo (1/43) (RR 8.19, 95% CI 1.12 to 59.71; NNTH 6, 95% CI 4 to 14). Infusion reaction was the most common reason for withdrawal. Moderate-certainty evidence (2 studies; 103 participants; downgraded for imprecision) showed no clinically significant difference for complete resolution of target tophus in the lesinurad 200 mg plus allopurinol arm (11/53) compared to the placebo plus allopurinol arm (16/50) (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.57), or in the lesinurad 400 mg plus allopurinol arm (12/48) compared to the placebo plus allopurinol arm (16/50) (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.49). An extension study examined lesinurad 200 mg or 400 mg in combination with febuxostat, or placebo (low-certainty evidence, downgraded for indirectness and imprecision). Participants on lesinurad in the original study continued (CONT) on the same dose. Lesinurad 400 mg plus febuxostat may be beneficial for tophi resolution; 43/65 in the lesinurad 400 mg CONT arm compared to 38/64 in the lesinurad 200 mg CONT arm had tophi resolution (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.46). Lesinurad 400 mg plus febuxostat may result in no difference in adverse events; 57/65 in the lesinurad 400 mg CONT arm had an adverse event compared to 50/64 in lesinurad 200 mg CONT arm (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.32). Lesinurad 400 mg plus febuxostat may result in no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events; 10/65 participants in the lesinurad 400 mg CONT arm withdrew due to an adverse event compared to 10/64 participants in the lesinurad 200 mg CONT arm (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.20). Lesinurad 400 mg plus febuxostat may result in no difference in mean serum uric acid (sUA), which was 3 mg/dl in the lesinurad 400 mg CONT group compared to 3.9 mg/dl in the lesinurad 200 mg CONT group (mean difference -0.90, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.29). Participants who were not on lesinurad in the original study were randomised (CROSS) to lesinurad 200 mg or 400 mg, both in combination with febuxostat. Low-certainty evidence downgraded for indirectness and imprecision showed that lesinurad 400 mg (CROSS) may result in tophi resolution (17/34) compared to lesinurad 200 mg (CROSS) (14/33) (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.98). Lesinurad 400 mg in combination with febuxostat may result in no difference in adverse events (33/34 in the lesinurad 400 mg CROSS arm compared to 27/33 in the lesinurad 200 mg (CROSS); RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.41). Lesinurad 400 mg plus febuxostat may result in no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events, 5/34 in the lesinurad 400 mg CROSS arm withdrew compared to 2/33 in the lesinurad 200 mg CROSS arm (RR 2.43, 95% CI 0.51 to 11.64). Lesinurad 400 mg plus febuxostat results in no difference in sUA (4.2 mg/dl in lesinurad 400 mg CROSS) compared to lesinurad 200 mg (3.8 mg/dl in lesinurad 200 mg CROSS), mean difference 0.40 mg/dl, 95% CI -0.75 to 1.55. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-certainty evidence showed that pegloticase is probably beneficial for resolution of tophi in gout. Although there was little difference in adverse events when compared to placebo, participants on pegloticase had more withdrawals due to adverse events. Lesinurad 400 mg plus febuxostat may be beneficial for tophi resolution compared with lesinurad 200 mg plus febuxostat; there was no difference in adverse events between these groups. We were unable to determine whether lesinurad plus febuxostat is more effective than placebo. Lesinurad (400 mg or 200 mg) plus allopurinol is probably not beneficial for tophi resolution, and there was no difference in adverse events between these groups. RCTs on interventions for managing tophi in gout are needed, and the lack of trial data is surprising given that allopurinol is a well-established treatment for gout.