A randomised controlled trial of etanercept and methotrexate to induce remission in early inflammatory arthritis: the EMPIRE trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of etanercept (ETN) and methotrexate (MTX) versus MTX monotherapy for remission induction in patients with early inflammatory arthritis. METHODS: In a 78-week multicentre randomised placebo-controlled superiority trial, 110 DMARD-naïve patients with early clinical synovitis (≥1 tender and swollen joint, and within 3 months of diagnosis) and either rheumatoid factor, anticitrullinated protein antibodies or shared epitope positive were randomised 1:1 to receive MTX+ETN or MTX+placebo (PBO) for 52 weeks. Injections (ETN or PBO) were stopped in all patients at week 52. In those with no tender or swollen joints (NTSJ) for >26 weeks, injections were stopped early. If patients had NTSJ >12 weeks after stopping the injections, MTX was weaned. The primary endpoint was NTSJ at week 52. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was seen for the primary endpoint (NTSJ at week 52 (32.5% vs 28.1% [adjusted OR 1.32 (0.56 to 3.09), p=0.522]) in the MTX+ETN and MTX+PBO groups, respectively). The secondary endpoints did not differ between groups at week 52 or 78. Exploratory analyses showed a higher proportions of patients with DAS28-CRP<2.6 in the MTX+ETN group at week 2 (38.5% vs 9.2%, adjusted OR 8.87 (2.53 to 31.17), p=0.001) and week 12 (65.1% vs 43.8%, adjusted OR 2.49 (1.12 to 5.54), p=0.026). CONCLUSIONS: In this group of patients with early inflammatory arthritis, almost a third had no tender, swollen joints after 1 year. MTX+ETN was not superior to MTX monotherapy in achieving this outcome. Clinical responses, however, including DAS28-CRP<2.6, were achieved earlier with MTX+ETN combination therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The EMPIRE trial is registered on the following trial registries: Eudract-2005-005467-29; ISRCTN 55428162 (http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN55428162/EMPIRE). The full trial protocol can be obtained from the corresponding author.

Clinical and ultrasound-based composite disease activity indices in rheumatoid arthritis: results from a multicenter, randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the metrologic properties of composite disease activity indices in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), utilizing information derived from clinical, gray-scale (GS), and power Doppler (PD) ultrasound examinations, and to assess the classification of patients according to disease activity using such indices. METHODS: This ancillary study utilized data from a multicenter, prospective, randomized, parallel-group study conducted in subjects with moderate RA randomized to receive etanercept and methotrexate (ETN + MTX) or usual care (various disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [DMARDs]). In multimodal indices, the 28 swollen joint count was either supplemented or replaced by clinically nonswollen joints in which the presence of synovitis was detected either by GS and/or PD and was calculated according to the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) or the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI). Reliability, external validity, and discriminative capacity were calculated at baseline/screening by intraclass correlation coefficient, Pearson's correlation, and standardized response mean, respectively. RESULTS: Data from 62 patients (mean ± SD age 53.8 ± 13.2 years, mean ± SD disease duration 8.8 ± 7.7 years, mean ± SD disease activity 4.6 ± 0.5 [DAS28] and 20.9 ± 5.9 [SDAI]) were analyzed, with 32 receiving ETN + MTX and 30 receiving DMARDs. The metrologic properties were at least as good for GS- and/or PD-based indices as for their clinical counterparts. Using GS- and PD-supplemented indices, an additional 67.8% and 32.3% of patients (DAS28-derived and SDAI-derived indices, respectively) could be classified as having high disease activity at the screening visit. CONCLUSION: Multimodal indices incorporating ultrasound and clinical data had similar metrologic properties to their clinical counterparts; certain indices allowed for a significantly larger number of patients to be classified to either high or moderate disease activity at the screening visit.

Is there subclinical enthesitis in early psoriatic arthritis? A clinical comparison with power doppler ultrasound.

OBJECTIVE: Enthesitis is a recognized feature of spondylarthritides (SpA), including psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Previously, ultrasound imaging has highlighted the presence of subclinical enthesitis in established SpA, but there are little data on ultrasound findings in early PsA. The aim of our study was to compare ultrasound and clinical examination (CE) for the detection of entheseal abnormalities in an early PsA cohort. METHODS: Forty-two patients with new-onset PsA and 10 control subjects underwent CE of entheses for tenderness and swelling, as well as gray-scale (GS) and power Doppler (PD) ultrasound of a standard set of entheses. Bilateral elbow lateral epicondyles, Achilles tendons, and plantar fascia were assessed by both CE and ultrasound, the latter scored using a semiquantitative (SQ) scale. Inferior patellar tendons were assessed by ultrasound alone. A GS SQ score of >1 and/or a PD score of >0 was used to describe significant ultrasound entheseal abnormality. RESULTS: A total of 24 (57.1%) of 42 patients in the PsA group and 0 (0%) of 10 controls had clinical evidence of at least 1 tender enthesis. In the PsA group, for sites assessed by both CE and ultrasound, 4% (7 of 177) of nontender entheses had a GS score >1 and/or a PD score >0 compared to 24% (9 of 37) of tender entheses. CE overestimated activity in 28 (13%) of 214 of entheses. All the nontender ultrasound-abnormal entheses were in the lower extremity. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of subclinical enthesitis in this early PsA cohort was low. CE may overestimate active enthesitis. The few subclinically inflamed entheses were in the lower extremity, where mechanical stress is likely to be more significant.

A systematic review of ultrasonography in osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasonography has been increasingly utilised to aid the understanding and management of rheumatic conditions. In recent years there has been a focus on the validity and utility of ultrasonography in demonstrating joint pathology, although this has largely focused on inflammatory arthritis. AIMS: To undertake a systematic review of the published literature evaluating ultrasonography as an assessment tool in osteoarthritis. METHODS: Medline and Pubmed were searched to identify original manuscripts, published before June 2008, utilising ultrasonography to assess the joints of cohorts of subjects with osteoarthritis. Data were extracted from manuscripts meeting the inclusion criteria, with a particular focus on the pathology imaged, the definitions used, scoring systems and their metric properties. RESULTS: Forty-seven studies were identified that utilised ultrasonography to assess structural pathology in osteoarthritis. Doppler function was only assessed in 10 studies and contrast agents in one. There was heterogeneity with regard to the pathology examined, the definition of pathology, quantification and the reporting of these factors. There was also a lack of construct and criterion validity and data demonstrating reliability and sensitivity to change. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas there is increasing evidence of the validity of ultrasonography in detecting structural pathology in inflammatory arthritis, more work is required to develop standardised definitions of pathology and to demonstrate the validity of ultrasonography in osteoarthritis.

Presence of significant synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis patients with disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-induced clinical remission: evidence from an imaging study may explain structural progression.

OBJECTIVE: More timely and effective therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has contributed to increasing rates of clinical remission. However, progression of structural damage may still occur in patients who have satisfied remission criteria, which suggests that there is ongoing disease activity. This questions the validity of current methods of assessing remission in RA. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that modern joint imaging improves the accuracy of remission measurement in RA. METHODS: We studied 107 RA patients receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy who were judged by their consultant rheumatologist to be in remission and 17 normal control subjects. Patients underwent clinical, laboratory, functional, and quality of life assessments. The Disease Activity Score 28-joint assessment and the American College of Rheumatology remission criteria, together with strict clinical definitions of remission, were applied. Imaging of the hands and wrists using standardized acquisition and scoring techniques with conventional 1.5T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography (US) were performed. RESULTS: Irrespective of which clinical criteria were applied to determine remission, the majority of patients continued to have evidence of active inflammation, as shown by findings on the imaging assessments. Even in asymptomatic patients with clinically normal joints, MRI showed that 96% had synovitis and 46% had bone marrow edema, and US showed that 73% had gray-scale synovial hypertrophy and 43% had increased power Doppler signal. Only mild synovial thickening was seen in 3 of the control subjects (18%), but no bone marrow edema. CONCLUSION: Most RA patients who satisfied the remission criteria with normal findings on clinical and laboratory studies had imaging-detected synovitis. This subclinical inflammation may explain the observed discrepancy between disease activity and outcome in RA. Imaging assessment may be necessary for the accurate evaluation of disease status and, in particular, for the definition of true remission.

Validation and reproducibility of ultrasonography in the detection of synovitis in the knee: a comparison with arthroscopy and clinical examination.

OBJECTIVE: Accurate detection of synovitis is important in both the diagnosis and outcome assessment of arthritis. This study was undertaken to assess the validity and reproducibility of ultrasonography (US) as a means of detecting synovitis in the knee, by comparing US findings with findings of arthroscopy and clinical examination. METHODS: Sixty consecutive patients with knee pain due to various arthritides had a clinical examination and US of their knee performed immediately prior to arthroscopy. All 3 assessments were performed by different clinicians who were blinded to the results obtained with the other modalities. US and clinical examination were compared with arthroscopically detected synovitis as the gold standard. Data from a subset of patients were used for calculating the inter- and intrareader reproducibility of US results, using a standard dichotomous (absence/presence of synovitis) as well as a graded (absence/grade of synovitis) scoring system. RESULTS: With the use of arthroscopy as the gold standard, US had a higher sensitivity (98% versus 85%), specificity (88% versus 25%), accuracy (97% versus 77%), positive predictive value (98% versus 88%), and negative predictive value (88% versus 20%) compared with clinical examination. The Cohen kappa values for inter- and intrareader reproducibility of US for distinguishing between presence and absence of synovitis were 0.71 and 0.85, respectively (P < 0.05 for both). The weighted kappa values for distinguishing grade of synovitis were 0.65 for inter- and 0.74 for intrareader reproducibility. The kappa value for intrareader reproducibility of arthroscopy results was 0.88. CONCLUSION: Ultrasonography is a valid and reproducible technique for detecting synovitis in the knee, and is more accurate than clinical examination. It may be valuable as a tool in studies investigating pain, diagnosis, and treatment response in knee arthritis.

Ultrasound in inflammatory disease.

US may be used effectively to diagnose and treat a wide range of musculoskeletal inflammatory conditions. It is likely that its usage will increase with regards to such conditions especially in the management of rheumatology clinic patients.