Randomized Trial for Evaluation in Secondary Prevention Efficacy of Combination Therapy-Statin and Eicosapentaenoic Acid (RESPECT-EPA).

BACKGROUND: Low plasma levels of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) are associated with cardiovascular events. This trial aimed to assess the clinical benefits of icosapent ethyl in patients with coronary artery disease, a low EPA/arachidonic acid (AA) ratio, and statin treatment. METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label, blinded end-point study, patients with stable coronary artery disease and a low EPA/AA ratio (<0.4) were randomized to EPA (1800 of icosapent ethyl administered daily) or control group. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal ischemic stroke, unstable angina pectoris, and coronary revascularization. The secondary composite end points of coronary events included sudden cardiac death, fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring emergency hospitalization and coronary revascularization, or coronary revascularization. RESULTS: Overall, 3884 patients were enrolled at 95 sites in Japan. Among them, 2506 patients had a low EPA/AA ratio, and 1249 and 1257 patients were randomized to the EPA and control group, respectively. The median EPA/AA ratio was 0.243 (interquartile range, 0.180-0.314) and 0.235 (interquartile range, 0.163-0.310) in the EPA and control group, respectively. Over a median period of 5 years, the primary end point occurred in 112 of 1225 patients (9.1%) and 155 of 1235 patients (12.6%) in the EPA and control group, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.62-1.00]; P=0.055). Meanwhile, the secondary composite end point of coronary events in the EPA group was significantly lower (81/1225 [6.6%] versus 120/1235 [9.7%] patients; hazard ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55-0.97]). Adverse events did not differ between the groups, but the rate of new-onset atrial fibrillation was significantly higher in the EPA group (3.1% versus 1.6%; P=0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Icosapent ethyl treatment resulted in a numerically lower risk of cardiovascular events that did not reach statistical significance in patients with chronic coronary artery disease, a low EPA/AA ratio, and statin treatment. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/; Unique identifier: UMIN000012069.

Person-Centered Models for Cardiovascular Care: A Review of the Evidence: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death and disability in the United States and globally. Disease burden continues to escalate despite technological advances associated with improved life expectancy and quality of life. As a result, longer life is associated with multiple chronic cardiovascular conditions. Clinical guidelines provide recommendations without considering prevalent scenarios of multimorbidity and health system complexities that affect practical adoption. The diversity of personal preferences, cultures, and lifestyles that make up one's social and environmental context is often overlooked in ongoing care planning for symptom management and health behavior support, hindering adoption and compromising patient outcomes, particularly in groups at high risk. The purpose of this scientific statement was to describe the characteristics and reported outcomes in existing person-centered care delivery models for selected cardiovascular conditions. We conducted a scoping review using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase.com, Web of Science, CINAHL Complete, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through Ovid, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 2010 to 2022. A range of study designs with a defined aim to systematically evaluate care delivery models for selected cardiovascular conditions were included. Models were selected on the basis of their stated use of evidence-based guidelines, clinical decision support tools, systematic evaluation processes, and inclusion of the patient's perspective in defining the plan of care. Findings reflected variation in methodological approach, outcome measures, and care processes used across models. Evidence to support optimal care delivery models remains limited by inconsistencies in approach, variation in reimbursement, and inability of health systems to meet the needs of patients with chronic, complex cardiovascular conditions.

Goodbye to the term 'ankylosing spondylitis', hello 'axial spondyloarthritis': time to embrace the ASAS-defined nomenclature.

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is the historic term used for decades for the HLA-B27-associated inflammatory disease affecting mainly the sacroiliac joints (SIJ) and spine. Classification criteria for AS have radiographic sacroiliitis as a dominant characteristic. However, with the availability of MRI of SIJ, it could be demonstrated that the disease starts long before definite SIJ changes become visible on radiographs. The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society, representing a worldwide group of experts reached consensus on changes in the nomenclature pertaining to axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), such as the terminology of diagnosis and of assessment of disease activity tools. These are important changes in the field, as experts in axSpA are now in agreement that the term axSpA is the overall term for the disease. A further differentiation, of which radiographic versus non-radiographic is only one aspect, may be relevant for research purposes. Another important decision was that the terms AS and radiographic axSpA (r-axSpA) can be used interchangeably, but that the preferred term is r-axSpA. Based on the decision that axSpA is the correct terminology, a proposal was made to officially change the meaning of the ASDAS acronym to 'Axial Spondyloarthritis Disease Activity Score'. In addition, for simplification it was proposed that the term ASDAS (instead of ASDAS-CRP) should be preferred and applied to the ASDAS calculated with C reactive protein (CRP). It is hoped that these changes will be used consequently for education, in textbooks, manuscripts and presentations.

Determination of the most appropriate ACR response definition for contemporary drug approval trials in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate which American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response definition (ACR20, 50 or 70) should primarily be used for efficacy claims in future drug approval trials of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We systematically searched EMBASE, Medline and the Cochrane Library for randomised controlled RA drug approval trials of biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). We included full-text articles reporting ACR response rates for multiple time points over a 24-week placebo-controlled period and visualised normalised response trajectories over time in different patient populations. Using mixed-effect logistic regression, we calculated the proportion of ACR responders per outcome and time point, and compared the discriminant validity of these metrics at multiple time points. RESULTS: We screened 12 680 records and included 45 in the final analysis. Discriminative capacity of the ACR20 was high across all time points, whereas ACR50 and ACR70 showed highest discrimination towards the end of the placebo-controlled periods. This effect could be observed in all patient populations and compound groups. Faster response to treatment was observed in DMARD naïve patient populations when compared with DMARD insufficient responders. CONCLUSION: ACR20 remains the most powerful discriminator between active treatment and placebo, especially when early discrimination is of primary interest. At the same time, our results support the selection of more stringent thresholds if later time points shall be evaluated, given their comparable discriminant but higher clinical face validity.

Long-term mortality in treated-to-target RA and UA: results of the BeSt and IMPROVED cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To study long-term (up to 20-year) mortality of two treat-to-target trial cohorts in undifferentiated arthritis (UA) and early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: The BeSt (BehandelStrategieën) study (n=508, early RA) was performed between 2000 and 2012. For 10 years, patients were treated-to-target disease activity score (DAS)≤2.4.The Induction therapy with Methotrexate and Prednisone in Rheumatoid Or Very Early arthritic Disease (IMPROVED) study (n=610, early RA/UA) was performed between 2007 and 2015. For 5 years, patients were treated-to-target DAS<1.6.Vital status of BeSt/IMPROVED participants was assessed up to and including 31 December 2021. Standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated. Stratified analyses for anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) and smoking status were performed. Death causes and the potential effect of disease activity during the trial period on late mortality were assessed. RESULTS: Excess mortality was found in both BeSt (SMR 1.32, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.53) and IMPROVED (SMR 1.33, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.63) and became manifest after 10 years. Excess mortality was statistically significant in ACPA+ patients who smoked (BeSt: SMR 2.80, 95% CI 2.16 to 3.64; IMPROVED: 2.14, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.45). Mean survival time was 10 (95% CI 5 to 16) months shorter than expected in BeSt and 13 (95% CI 11 to 16) months in IMPROVED. The HR for mortality was 1.34 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.86; BeSt)/1.13 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.91; IMPROVED) per 1 point increase in mean DAS during the trial. The main cause of death was malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: After long-term treatment-to-target, excess mortality occurred in patients with RA after>10 years since treatment start, with smoking as an important risk factor.

Disease flares with baricitinib dose reductions and development of flare criteria in patients with CANDLE/PRAAS.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with chronic atypical neutrophilic dermatosis with lipodystrophy and elevated temperature/proteasome-associated autoinflammatory syndrome (CANDLE/PRAAS) respond to the janus kinase inhibitor 1/2 inhibition with baricitinib at exposures higher than in rheumatoid arthritis. Baricitinib dose reductions to minimise exposure triggered disease flares which we used to develop 'flare criteria'. METHODS: Of 10 patients with CANDLE/PRAAS treated with baricitinib in an open-label expanded-access programme, baricitinib doses were reduced 14 times in 9 patients between April 2014 and December 2019. Retrospective data analysis of daily diary scores and laboratory markers collected before and after the dose reductions were used to develop 'clinical' and 'subclinical' flare criteria. Disease flare rates were compared among patients with <25% and >25% dose reductions and during study visits when patients received recommended 'optimized' baricitinib doses (high-dose visits) versus lower than recommended baricitinib doses (low-dose visits) using two-sided χ2 tests. RESULTS: In the 9/10 patients with CANDLE with dose reduction, 7/14 (50%) times the dose was reduced resulted in a disease flare. All four dose reductions of >25% triggered a disease flare (p <0.05). Assessment of clinical and laboratory changes during disease flares allowed the development of disease flare criteria that were assessed during visits when patients received high or low doses of baricitinib. Disease flare criteria were reached during 43.14% of low-dose visits compared with 12.75% of high-dose visits (p <0.0001). Addition of an interferon score as an additional flare criterion increased the sensitivity to detect disease flares. CONCLUSION: We observed disease flares and rebound inflammation with baricitinib dose reductions and proposed flare criteria that can assist in monitoring disease activity and in designing clinical studies in CANDLE/PRAAS.

Pragmatic targets for moderate/severe SLE and their implications for clinical care and trial design: sustained DORIS or LLDAS for at least 6 months is sufficient while their attainment for at least 24 months ensures high specificity for damage-free progression.

OBJECTIVES: Treatment targets in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have been validated in unselected-in terms of severity-cohorts, which limits their generalisability. We assessed remission (Definition of Remission in SLE (DORIS)) and Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS) in a historical cohort of 348 patients with active moderate-to-severe disease and median follow-up of 5 years. METHODS: Active SLE was defined as Physician Global Assessment ≥1.5 and/or SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 ≥6, requiring therapy intensification. DORIS/LLDAS, organ damage, flares and adverse events were monitored. Shared frailty survival, generalised linear models and K-means clustering were applied. RESULTS: Sustained DORIS and LLDAS for ≥6 months occurred in 41.1% and 80.4%, respectively, and resulted in reduced damage accrual (HR: 0.58; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.93 and 0.61; 0.43 to 0.86) and severe flares (HR: 0.14; 0.08 to 0.27 and 0.19; 0.13 to 0.27). LLDAS without DORIS was also protective (HR: 0.65; 0.43 to 0.98 for damage, 0.49; 0.36 to 0.67 for flares). Models fitting increasing duration of targets showed that DORIS ≥50% and LLDAS ≥60% of time, or alternatively, ≥24 and ≥36 months, achieved optimal balance between feasibility (20.2-41.7%) and specificity (73.3-86.1%) for damage-free outcome. These targets were linked to reduced serious adverse events (risk ratio (RR): 0.56-0.71), hospitalisation (RR: 0.70) and mortality (RR: 0.06-0.13). Patients with predominant arthritis and mucocutaneous disease experienced reduced DORIS/LLDAS, compared with counterparts with major organ involvement. Conventional drugs were more frequently used in the former group, whereas potent immunosuppressive/biological agents in the latter. CONCLUSIONS: In moderate-to-severe SLE, sustained DORIS/LLDAS for at least 6 months is sufficient, while attainment for at least 24 months ensures higher specificity for damage-free progression, thus facilitating treat-to-target strategies and clinical trials. Arthritis and skin disease represent unmet therapeutic needs that could benefit from novel biologics.

Predictors for severe persisting pain in rheumatoid arthritis are associated with pain origin and appraisal of pain.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with severe persisting pain and to identify predictive factors despite treatment-controlled disease activity. METHODS: This prospective multicentre study included outpatients with RA scheduled for escalation of anti-inflammatory treatment due to active disease and severe pain (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)>3.2 and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)>50). At week 24, patients were stratified into reference group (DAS28 improvement>1.2 or DAS28≤3.2 and VAS pain score<50), non-responders (DAS28 improvement≤1.2 and DAS28>3.2, regardless of VAS pain score) and persisting pain group (DAS28 improvement>1.2 or DAS28≤3.2 and VAS pain score≥50). The former two subgroups ended the study at week 24. The latter continued until week 48. Demographic data, DAS28-C reactive protein, VAS for pain, painDETECT Questionnaire (PD-Q) to identify neuropathic pain (NeP) and the Pain Catastrophising Scale were assessed and tested for relation to persisting pain. RESULTS: Of 567 patients, 337 (59.4%) were classified as reference group, 102 (18.0%) as non-responders and 128 (22.6%) as patients with persisting pain. 21 (8.8%) responders, 28 (35.0%) non-responders and 27 (26.5%) persisting pain patients tested positive for NeP at week 24. Pain catastrophising (p=0.002) and number of tender joints (p=0.004) were positively associated with persisting pain at week 24. Baseline PD-Q was not related to subsequent persisting pain. CONCLUSIONS: Persisting and non-nociceptive pain occur frequently in RA. Besides the potential involvement of NeP, pain catastrophising and a higher number of tender joints coincide with persisting pain.

Prognostic model to predict the incidence of radiographic knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Early diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) in asymptomatic stages is essential for the timely management of patients using preventative strategies. We develop and validate a prognostic model useful for predicting the incidence of radiographic KOA (rKOA) in non-radiographic osteoarthritic subjects and stratify individuals at high risk of developing the disease. METHODS: Subjects without radiographic signs of KOA according to the Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) classification scale (KL=0 in both knees) were enrolled in the OA initiative (OAI) cohort and the Prospective Cohort of A Coruña (PROCOAC). Prognostic models were developed to predict rKOA incidence during a 96-month follow-up period among OAI participants based on clinical variables and serum levels of the candidate protein biomarkers APOA1, APOA4, ZA2G and A2AP. The predictive capability of the biomarkers was assessed based on area under the curve (AUC), and internal validation was performed to correct for overfitting. A nomogram was plotted based on the regression parameters. Model performance was externally validated in the PROCOAC. RESULTS: 282 participants from the OAI were included in the development dataset. The model built with demographic, anthropometric and clinical data (age, sex, body mass index and WOMAC pain score) showed an AUC=0.702 for predicting rKOA incidence during the follow-up. The inclusion of ZA2G, A2AP and APOA1 data significantly improved the model's sensitivity and predictive performance (AUC=0.831). The simplest model, including only clinical covariates and ZA2G and A2AP serum levels, achieved an AUC=0.826. Both models were internally cross-validated. Predictive performance was externally validated in an independent dataset of 100 individuals from the PROCOAC (AUC=0.713). CONCLUSION: A novel prognostic model based on common clinical variables and protein biomarkers was developed and externally validated to predict rKOA incidence over a 96-month period in individuals without any radiographic signs of disease. The resulting nomogram is a useful tool for stratifying high-risk populations and could potentially lead to personalised medicine strategies for treating OA.

Subclinical giant cell arteritis increases the risk of relapse in polymyalgia rheumatica.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to determine the clinical significance of subclinical giant cell arteritis (GCA) in polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) and ascertain its optimal treatment approach. METHODS: Patients with PMR who fulfilled the 2012 European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology/American College of Rheumatology Provisional Classification Criteria for PMR, did not have GCA symptoms and were routinely followed up for 2 years and were stratified into two groups, according to their ultrasound results: isolated PMR and PMR with subclinical GCA. The outcomes (relapses, glucocorticoid use and disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatments) between groups were compared. RESULTS: We included 150 patients with PMR (50 with subclinical GCA) with a median (IQR) follow-up of 22 (20-24) months. Overall, 47 patients (31.3 %) had a relapse, 31 (62%) in the subclinical GCA group and 16 (16%) in the isolated PMR group (p<0.001). Among patients with subclinical GCA, no differences were found in the mean (SD) prednisone starting dosage between relapsed and non-relapsed patients (32.4±15.6 vs 35.5±12.1 mg, respectively, p=0.722). Patients with subclinical GCA who relapsed had a faster prednisone dose tapering in the first 3 months compared with the non-relapsed patients, with a mean dose at the third month of 10.0±5.2 versus 15.2±7.9 mg daily (p<0.001). No differences were found between relapsing and non-relapsed patients with subclinical GCA regarding age, sex, C reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PMR and subclinical GCA had a significantly higher number of relapses during a 2-year follow-up than patients with isolated PMR. Lower starting doses and rapid glucocorticoid tapering in the first 3 months emerged as risk factors for relapse.

Molecular characterisation of lupus low disease activity state (LLDAS) and DORIS remission by whole-blood transcriptome-based pathways in a pan-European systemic lupus erythematosus cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To unveil biological milieus underlying low disease activity (LDA) and remission versus active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: We determined differentially expressed pathways (DEPs) in SLE patients from the PRECISESADS project (NTC02890121) stratified into patients fulfilling and not fulfilling the criteria of (1) Lupus LDA State (LLDAS), (2) Definitions of Remission in SLE remission, and (3) LLDAS exclusive of remission. RESULTS: We analysed data from 321 patients; 40.8% were in LLDAS, and 17.4% in DORIS remission. After exclusion of patients in remission, 28.3% were in LLDAS. Overall, 604 pathways differed significantly in LLDAS versus non-LLDAS patients with an false-discovery rate-corrected p (q)<0.05 and a robust effect size (dr)≥0.36. Accordingly, 288 pathways differed significantly between DORIS remitters and non-remitters (q<0.05 and dr≥0.36). DEPs yielded distinct molecular clusters characterised by differential serological, musculoskeletal, and renal activity. Analysis of partially overlapping samples showed no DEPs between LLDAS and DORIS remission. Drug repurposing potentiality for treating SLE was unveiled, as were important pathways underlying active SLE whose modulation could aid attainment of LLDAS/remission, including toll-like receptor (TLR) cascades, Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) activity, the cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4)-related inhibitory signalling, and the nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain leucine-rich repeat-containing protein 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome pathway. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated for the first time molecular signalling pathways distinguishing LLDAS/remission from active SLE. LLDAS/remission was associated with reversal of biological processes related to SLE pathogenesis and specific clinical manifestations. DEP clustering by remission better grouped patients compared with LLDAS, substantiating remission as the ultimate treatment goal in SLE; however, the lack of substantial pathway differentiation between the two states justifies LLDAS as an acceptable goal from a biological perspective.

Exploring the effect on primary endpoints in trials testing targeted therapy interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-epidemiological study on the appropriate use of a core outcome set.

OBJECTIVES: To explore which core domain is best associated with the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% response in trials assessing the effect of targeted interventions in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A meta-epidemiological study was performed on randomised trials investigating biologics and targeted agents compared with placebo or conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with RA. The main outcome measures were ORs for the ACR 20% response and at least one of the eight core domains according to the existing RA core outcome set (COS) analysed based on standardised mean differences. RESULTS: 115 trials involving 55 422 patients with RA were eligible. The OR for achieving ACR 20% response was 3.19 (95% CI 2.96 to 3.44) for the experimental interventions relative to the comparators. The median number of COS domains reported was 6; 18 trials reported only 1 domain, 17 all 8. Univariable meta-regression analyses indicated that each of the eight core domains was significantly associated with ACR 20% response, yet improvements in physical disability explain a successful ACR 20% response the most. Including only trials reporting on all eight core domains, univariable meta-regression analyses proved improvement in fatigue to explain a successful ACR 20% response the most. CONCLUSIONS: Within this dataset, it is evident that the conclusions concerning our primary objective were significantly influenced by both the amount and characteristics of missing data. Our data suggest that fatigue could be more important for the primary endpoint than previously assumed, but this is based on limited data.

Towards a core outcome set for dysarthria after stroke: What should we measure?

OBJECTIVE: To identify and agree on what outcome domains should be measured in research and clinical practice when working with stroke survivors who have dysarthria. DESIGN: Delphi process, two rounds of an online survey followed by two online consensus meetings. SETTING: UK and Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Stroke survivors with experience of dysarthria, speech and language therapists/pathologists working in stroke and communication researchers. METHODS: Initial list of outcome domains generated from existing literature and with our patient and public involvement group to develop the survey. Participants completed two rounds of this survey to rate importance. Outcomes were identified as 'in', 'unclear' or 'out' from the second survey. All participants were invited to two consensus meetings to discuss these results followed by voting to identify critically important outcome domains for a future Core Outcome Set. All outcomes were voted on in the consensus meetings and included if 70% of meeting participants voted 'yes' for critically important. RESULTS: In total, 148 surveys were fully completed, and 28 participants attended the consensus meetings. A core outcome set for dysarthria after stroke should include four outcome domains: (a) intelligibility of speech, (b) ability to participate in conversations, (c) living well with dysarthria, (d) skills and knowledge of communication partners (where relevant). CONCLUSIONS: We describe the consensus of 'what' speech outcomes after stroke are valued by all stakeholders including those with lived experience. We share these findings to encourage the measurement of these domains in clinical practice and research and for future research to identify 'how' best to measure these outcomes.

New consensus definition on defining and measuring care for children with paediatric feeding disorder.

AIM: This study addresses the absence of a definition of care for children with feeding disorders, limited agreement on key performance indicators (KPIs), and the lack of data linked to those KPIs. METHODS: Clinicians, consumers and researchers involved in outpatient feeding care in New South Wales (NSW), Australia were invited to participate in a two-Phase study. In Phase 1, a modified Delphi method was used. Two rounds of voting resulted in a new consensus definition of a multidisciplinary paediatric feeding clinic. Three further rounds voting determined relevant KPIs. In Phase 2, the KPIs were piloted prospectively in 10 clinics. RESULTS: Twenty-six clinicians, consumers and researchers participated in Phase 1. Participation across five voting rounds declined from 92% to 60% and a valid definition and KPI set were created. In Phase 2, the definition and KPIs were piloted in 10 clinics over 6 weeks. Data for 110 patients were collected. The final KPI set of 28 measures proposed covers clinical features, patient demographics and medical issues, parent-child interaction and outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: A new definition of a multidisciplinary paediatric feeding clinic is now available, linked to a standardised KPI set covering relevant performance measures. These proved viable in baseline data collection for 10 clinics across NSW. This sets a foundation for further data collection, systematic measurement of care provision and outcomes, and research needed to deliver care improvement for children with paediatric feeding disorder.

How intervention studies measure the effectiveness of medication safety-related clinical decision support systems in primary and long-term care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors and associated adverse drug events (ADE) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. In recent years, the prevention of medication errors has become a high priority in healthcare systems. In order to improve medication safety, computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) are increasingly being integrated into the medication process. Accordingly, a growing number of studies have investigated the medication safety-related effectiveness of CDSS. However, the outcome measures used are heterogeneous, leading to unclear evidence. The primary aim of this study is to summarize and categorize the outcomes used in interventional studies evaluating the effects of CDSS on medication safety in primary and long-term care. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library for interventional studies evaluating the effects of CDSS targeting medication safety and patient-related outcomes. We extracted methodological characteristics, outcomes and empirical findings from the included studies. Outcomes were assigned to three main categories: process-related, harm-related, and cost-related. Risk of bias was assessed using the Evidence Project risk of bias tool. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Almost all studies (n = 31) used process-related outcomes, followed by harm-related outcomes (n = 11). Only three studies used cost-related outcomes. Most studies used outcomes from only one category and no study used outcomes from all three categories. The definition and operationalization of outcomes varied widely between the included studies, even within outcome categories. Overall, evidence on CDSS effectiveness was mixed. A significant intervention effect was demonstrated by nine of fifteen studies with process-related primary outcomes (60%) but only one out of five studies with harm-related primary outcomes (20%). The included studies faced a number of methodological problems that limit the comparability and generalizability of their results. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the effectiveness of CDSS is currently inconclusive due in part to inconsistent outcome definitions and methodological problems in the literature. Additional high-quality studies are therefore needed to provide a comprehensive account of CDSS effectiveness. These studies should follow established methodological guidelines and recommendations and use a comprehensive set of harm-, process- and cost-related outcomes with agreed-upon and consistent definitions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42023464746.

ASAS consensus definition of early axial spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a consensual definition for the term 'early axial spondyloarthritis-axSpA'-and 'early peripheral spondyloarthritis-pSpA'. METHODS: The ASAS (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society-Spondyloarthritis EARly definition) steering committee convened an international working group (WG). Five consecutive steps were followed: (1) systematic literature review (SLR); (2) discussion of SLR results within the WG and ASAS community; (3) a three-round Delphi survey inviting all ASAS members to select the items that should be considered for the definition; (4) presentation of Delphi results to the WG and ASAS community and (5) ASAS voting and endorsement (2023 annual meeting). RESULTS: Following the SLR, consensus was to proceed with an expert-based definition for early axSpA (81% in favour) but not for pSpA (54% against). Importantly, early axSpA should be based on symptom duration taking solely axial symptoms into account. 151-164 ASAS members participated in the Delphi surveys. Consensus was achieved for considering the following items within early axSpA definition: duration of symptoms ≤2 years; axial symptoms defined as cervical/thoracic/back/buttock pain or morning stiffness; regardless of the presence/absence of radiographic damage. The WG agreed that in patients with a diagnosis of axSpA 'early axSpA' should be defined as a duration of ≤2 years of axial symptoms. Axial symptoms should include spinal/buttock pain or morning stiffness and should be considered by a rheumatologist as related to axSpA. The ASAS community endorsed this proposal (88% in favour). CONCLUSIONS: Early axSpA has newly been defined, based on expert consensus. This ASAS definition should be adopted in research studies addressing early axSpA.

Instrument selection for the ASAS core outcome set for axial spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To define the instruments for the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society-Outcomes Measures in Rheumatology (ASAS-OMERACT) core domain set for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). METHODS: An international working group representing key stakeholders selected the core outcome instruments following a predefined process: (1) identifying candidate instruments using a systematic literature review; (2) reducing the list of candidate instruments by the working group, (3) assessing the instruments' psychometric properties following OMERACT filter 2.2, (4) selection of the core instruments by the working group and (5) voting and endorsement by ASAS. RESULTS: The updated core set for axSpA includes seven instruments for the domains that are mandatory for all trials: Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score and Numerical Rate Scale (NRS) patient global assessment of disease activity, NRS total back pain, average NRS of duration and severity of morning stiffness, NRS fatigue, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Function Index and ASAS Health Index. There are 9 additional instruments considered mandatory for disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) trials: MRI activity Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) sacroiliac joints and SPARCC spine, uveitis, inflammatory bowel disease and psoriasis assessed as recommended by ASAS, 44 swollen joint count, Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score, dactylitis count and modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score. The imaging outcomes are considered mandatory to be included in at least one trial for a drug tested for properties of DMARD. Furthermore, 11 additional instruments were also endorsed by ASAS, which can be used in axSpA trials on top of the core instruments. CONCLUSIONS: The selection of the instruments for the ASAS-OMERACT core domain set completes the update of the core outcome set for axSpA, which should be used in all trials.

Influence of active versus placebo control on treatment responses in randomised controlled trials in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether treatment effects of pharmaceutical compounds compared with placebo controls are systematically different to the effects of the same compounds compared with active treatment controls in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) clinical trials. METHODS: We systematically identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in RA, and matched active treatment arms with comparable regimens, populations, background therapy, and outcome reporting, by the nature of their control group (active comparator or placebo). Medline, EMBASE and CENTRAL were used to identify RCTs investigating disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug therapies until December 2021. Using mixed-model logistic regression we estimated OddsRatios (OR) for achieving an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70% response at weeks 12 and 24. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Tool. RESULTS: We screened 8328 studies and included 40 for analysis after detailed review of 590 manuscripts; unique compounds had significantly higher responses in active comparator trials compared with their effects observed in placebo controlled trials, with ORs of 1.67 (95% CI 1.46 to 1.91; p<0.001) for ACR20, 1.50 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.75; p<0.001) for ACR50 and 1.65 (95% CI 1.30 to 2.10; p<0.001) for ACR70 (week 12); corresponding ORs for ACR 20, 50, and 70 (week 24) were 1.93 (95% CI 1.50 to 2.48; p<0.001), 1.75 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.33; p<0.001) and 1.68 (95% CI 1.21 to 2.34; p<0.001), respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed consistent results. CONCLUSION: Placebo controlled trials lead to smaller effect sizes of active compounds in RCTs compared with the same compound in head-to-head trials. This difference may be explained by potential nocebo effects in placebo-controlled settings and needs to be considered when interpreting head-to-head and placebo-controlled trials, by patients, investigators, sponsors and regulatory agencies.

The provisional OMERACT ultrasonography score for giant cell arteritis.

OBJECTIVES: To develop an Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) ultrasonography score for monitoring disease activity in giant cell arteritis (GCA) and evaluate its metric properties. METHODS: The OMERACT Instrument Selection Algorithm was followed. Forty-nine members of the OMERACT ultrasonography large vessel vasculitis working group were invited to seven Delphi rounds. An online reliability exercise was conducted using images of bilateral common temporal arteries, parietal and frontal branches as well as axillary arteries from 16 patients with GCA and 7 controls. Sensitivity to change and convergent construct validity were tested using data from a prospective cohort of patients with new GCA in which ultrasound-based intima-media thickness (IMT) measurements were conducted at weeks 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24. RESULTS: Agreement was obtained (92.7%) for the OMERACT GCA Ultrasonography Score (OGUS), calculated as follows: sum of IMT measured in every segment divided by the rounded cut-off values of IMTs in each segment. The resulting value is then divided by the number of segments available. Thirty-five members conducted the reliability exercise, the interrater intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the OGUS was 0.72-0.84 and the median intrareader ICC was 0.91. The prospective cohort consisted of 52 patients. Sensitivity to change between baseline and each follow-up visit up to week 24 yielded standardised mean differences from -1.19 to -2.16, corresponding to large and very large magnitudes of change, respectively. OGUS correlated moderately with erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C reactive protein and Birmingham Vasculitis Activity Score (corrcoeff 0.37-0.48). CONCLUSION: We developed a provisional OGUS for potential use in clinical trials.

Age at diagnosis influences the clinical phenotype, treatment strategies and outcomes in patients with giant cell arteritis: results from the observational GCAGE study on a large cohort of 1004 patients.

BACKGROUND: Immune and vascular ageing are proposed risk factors for giant cell arteritis (GCA). Data on the impact of age at diagnosis of GCA on the clinical presentation and course of the disease are scarce. METHODS: Patients with GCA followed at referral centres within the Italian Society of Rheumatology Vasculitis Study Group were enrolled up to November 2021. Patients were grouped according to age at diagnosis: ≤64, 65-79 and ≥80 years old. RESULTS: The study included 1004 patients, mean age 72.1±8.4, female 70.82%. Median follow-up duration was 49 (IQR 23-91) months. Patients in the oldest group (≥80 years) had significantly more cranial symptoms, ischaemic complications and risk for blindness compared with the groups 65-79 and ≤64 years (blindness: 36.98% vs 18.21% vs 6.19%; p<0.0001). Large-vessel-GCA was more frequent in the youngest group (65% of patients). Relapses occurred in 47% of patients. Age did not influence the time to first relapse, nor the number of relapses. Older age was negatively associated with the number of adjunctive immunosuppressants. Patients >65 years old had 2-3 fold increased risk for aortic aneurysm/dissection up to 60 months follow-up. Serious infections, but not other treatment-related complications (hypertension, diabetes, osteoporotic fractures), were significantly associated with older age. Mortality occurred in 5.8% of the population with age >65, cranial and systemic symptoms as independent risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The highest risk of ischaemic complications, aneurysm development, serious infections and the possible undertreatment make of GCA a very challenging disease in the oldest patients.