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.

A machine learning approach reveals features related to clinicians' diagnosis of clinically relevant knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To identify highly ranked features related to clinicians' diagnosis of clinically relevant knee OA. METHODS: General practitioners (GPs) and secondary care physicians (SPs) were recruited to evaluate 5-10 years follow-up clinical and radiographic data of knees from the CHECK cohort for the presence of clinically relevant OA. GPs and SPs were gathered in pairs; each pair consisted of one GP and one SP, and the paired clinicians independently evaluated the same subset of knees. A diagnosis was made for each knee by the GP and SP before and after viewing radiographic data. Nested 5-fold cross-validation enhanced random forest models were built to identify the top 10 features related to the diagnosis. RESULTS: Seventeen clinician pairs evaluated 1106 knees with 139 clinical and 36 radiographic features. GPs diagnosed clinically relevant OA in 42% and 43% knees, before and after viewing radiographic data, respectively. SPs diagnosed in 43% and 51% knees, respectively. Models containing top 10 features had good performance for explaining clinicians' diagnosis with area under the curve ranging from 0.76-0.83. Before viewing radiographic data, quantitative symptomatic features (i.e. WOMAC scores) were the most important ones related to the diagnosis of both GPs and SPs; after viewing radiographic data, radiographic features appeared in the top lists for both, but seemed to be more important for SPs than GPs. CONCLUSIONS: Random forest models presented good performance in explaining clinicians' diagnosis, which helped to reveal typical features of patients recognized as clinically relevant knee OA by clinicians from two different care settings.

2020 EULAR points to consider for the prevention, screening, assessment and management of non-adherence to treatment in people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases for use in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to treatment could preclude reaching an optimal outcome. Thirty to 80% of patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) do not adhere to the agreed treatment. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to establish points to consider (PtCs) for the prevention, screening, assessment and management of non-adherence to (non-)pharmacological treatments in people with RMDs. METHODS: An EULAR task force (TF) was established, and the EULAR standardised operating procedures for the development of PtCs were followed. The TF included healthcare providers (HCPs), comprising rheumatologists, nurses, pharmacists, psychologists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists and patient-representatives from 12 European countries. A review of systematic reviews was conducted in advance to support the TF in formulating the PtCs. The level of agreement among the TF was established by anonymous online voting. RESULTS: Four overarching principles and nine PtCs were formulated. The PtCs reflect the phases of action on non-adherence. HCPs should assess and discuss adherence with patients on a regular basis and support patients to treatment adherence. As adherence is an agreed behaviour, the treatment has to be tailored to the patients' needs. The level of agreement ranged from 9.5 to 9.9 out of 10. CONCLUSIONS: These PtCs can help HCPs to support people with RMDs to be more adherent to the agreed treatment plan. The basic scheme being prevent non-adherence by bonding with the patient and building trust, overcoming structural barriers, assessing in a blame-free environment and tailoring the solution to the problem.

Diagnostic criteria for early hip osteoarthritis: first steps, based on the CHECK study.

OBJECTIVES: Although there is a general focus on early diagnosis and treatment of hip OA, there are no validated diagnostic criteria for early-stage hip OA. The current study aimed to take the first steps in developing diagnostic criteria for early-stage hip OA, using factors obtained through history taking, physical examination, radiography and blood testing at the first consultation in individuals presenting with hip pain, suspicious for hip OA, in primary care. METHODS: Data of the 543 individuals with 735 symptomatic hips at baseline who had any follow-up data available from the prospective CHECK cohort study were used. A group of 26 clinical experts [general practitioners (GPs), rheumatologists and orthopaedic surgeons] evaluated standardized clinical assessment forms of all subjects on the presence of clinically relevant hip OA 5-10 years after baseline. Using the expert-based diagnoses as reference standard, a backward selection method was used to create predictive models based on pre-defined baseline factors from history taking, physical examination, radiography and blood testing. RESULTS: Prevalence of clinically relevant hip OA during follow-up was 22%. Created models contained four to eight baseline factors (mainly WOMAC pain items, painful/restricted movements and radiographic features) and obtained area under the curve between 0.62 (0.002) and 0.71 (0.002). CONCLUSION: Based on clinical and radiographic features of hip OA obtained at first consultation at a GP for pain/stiffness of the hip, the prediction of clinically relevant hip OA within 5-10 years was 'poor' to 'fair'.

Effect on efficacy and safety trial outcomes of also enrolling patients on ongoing glucocorticoid therapy in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials of tocilizumab or adalimumab or methotrexate monotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In rheumatoid arthritis (RA) trials, inclusion of patients on background treatment with glucocorticoids (GCs) might impact efficacy and safety outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To determine if inclusion of patients on background GC use influenced efficacy and safety outcomes of RA randomised clinical trials on initiation of tocilizumab (TCZ) or adalimumab (ADA) or methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy. METHODS: Data of four double-blind RA randomised controlled trials (AMBITION, ACT-RAY, ADACTA and FUNCTION) with in total four TCZ, one ADA and two MTX monotherapy arms were analysed. Analyses of covariance of changes from baseline to week 24 in efficacy endpoints and radiographic progression up to week 104 were performed, correcting for relevant covariates. Incidence rates of serious adverse events (SAEs) were assessed. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found in efficacy parameters between background GC users and non-GC users, except for less radiographic progression associated with GC usage in one MTX arm. SAE rates were not statistically significantly different between GC users and non-GC users in the treatment arms. CONCLUSION: No effect of including patients on background GC treatment on efficacy and safety trial outcomes was found, with the exception of reduced radiological joint damage in one MTX arm.

Efficacy of pharmacological treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature research informing the 2019 update of the EULAR recommendations for management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To inform the 2019 update of the European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A systematic literature research (SLR) to investigate the efficacy of any disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) (conventional synthetic (cs)DMARD, biological (b) and biosimilar DMARD, targeted synthetic (ts)DMARD) or glucocorticoid (GC) therapy in patients with RA was done by searching MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library for articles published between 2016 and 8 March 2019. RESULTS: 234 abstracts were selected for detailed assessment, with 136 finally included. They comprised the efficacy of bDMARDs versus placebo or other bDMARDs, efficacy of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (JAKi) across different patient populations and head-to-head of different bDMARDs versus JAKi or other bDMARDs. Switching of bDMARDs to other bDMARDs or tsDMARDs, strategic trials and tapering studies of bDMARDs, csDMARDs and JAKi were assessed. The drugs evaluated included abatacept, adalimumab, ABT-122, baricitinib, certolizumab pegol, SBI-087, CNTO6785, decernotinib, etanercept, filgotinib, golimumab, GCs, GS-9876, guselkumab, hydroxychloroquine, infliximab, leflunomide, mavrilimumab, methotrexate, olokizumab, otilimab, peficitinib, rituximab, sarilumab, salazopyrine, secukinumab, sirukumab, tacrolimus, tocilizumab, tofacitinib, tregalizumab, upadacitinib, ustekinumab and vobarilizumab. The efficacy of many bDMARDs and tsDMARDs was shown. Switching to another tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) or non-TNFi bDMARDs after TNFi treatment failure is efficacious. Tapering of DMARDs is possible in patients achieving long-standing stringent clinical remission; in patients with residual disease activity (including patients in LDA) the risk of flares is increased during the tapering. Biosimilars are non-inferior to their reference products. CONCLUSION: This SLR informed the task force regarding the evidence base of various therapeutic regimen for the development of the update of EULAR's RA management recommendation.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2019 update.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an update of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations to account for the most recent developments in the field. METHODS: An international task force considered new evidence supporting or contradicting previous recommendations and novel therapies and strategic insights based on two systematic literature searches on efficacy and safety of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) since the last update (2016) until 2019. A predefined voting process was applied, current levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned and participants ultimately voted independently on their level of agreement with each of the items. RESULTS: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 12 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GCs); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib). Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering on sustained clinical remission is provided. Cost and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs are addressed. Initially, MTX plus GCs and upon insufficient response to this therapy within 3 to 6 months, stratification according to risk factors is recommended. With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD or JAK inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD is recommended. On sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered, but not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were mostly high. CONCLUSIONS: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on the management of RA with respect to benefit, safety, preferences and cost.

Effectiveness and safety over 3 years after the 2-year U-Act-Early trial of the strategies initiating tocilizumab and/or methotrexate.

OBJECTIVES: U-Act-Early was a 2-year, randomized placebo controlled, double-blind trial, in which DMARD-naïve early RA patients were treated to the target of sustained remission (SR). Two strategies initiating tocilizumab (TCZ), with and without methotrexate (MTX), were more effective than a strategy initiating MTX. The aim of the current study was to determine longer-term effectiveness in daily clinical practice. METHODS: At the end of U-Act-Early, patients were included in a 3-year post-trial follow-up (PTFU), in which treatment was according to standard care and data were collected every 3 months during the first year and every 6 months thereafter. Primary end point was disease activity score assessing 28 joints (DAS28) over time. Mixed effects models were used to compare effectiveness between initial strategy groups, correcting for relevant confounders. Between the groups as randomized, proportions of patients were tested for DMARD use, SR and radiographic progression of joint damage. RESULTS: Of patients starting U-Act-Early, 226/317 (71%) participated in the PTFU. Over the total 5 years, mean DAS28 was similar between groups (P > 0.20). During U-Act-Early, biologic DMARD use decreased in both TCZ initiation groups and increased in the MTX initiation group, but during follow-up this trend did not continue. SR was achieved at least once in 99% of patients. Of the 226 patients, only 30% had any radiographic progression over 5 years, without significant differences between the groups. CONCLUSION: Although in the short-term the strategies initiating TCZ yielded the most clinical benefit, in the longer-term differences in important clinical outcomes between the strategies disappeared, probably due to continuation of the treat-to-target principle.

Short-term clinical worsening is a clear predictor for worsening at 2 years in established knee and hip osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to estimate the proportion of knee and hip OA patients showing worsening at 2 years, and to examine the additional predictive value of failure of optimised non-surgical treatment during 3 months for worsening at 2 years. METHODS: Data of patients participating in the longitudinal CONTROL-PRO study (patients fulfilling clinical ACR criteria for knee or hip OA) were used. Measurements of pain, functioning and patient global assessments were performed at baseline, 3 months and 2 years. Worsening at 2 years was defined as fulfilling the recently validated clinical worsening criteria for knee and hip OA, or total joint replacement (TJR). Logistic regression was performed with worsening at 2 years as the dependent variable. RESULTS: The 297 included patients were predominantly women (66%) with a mean age of 55 years. At 2 years, 61% showed worsening (knee 59%; hip 71%) and 24% had undergone a TJR (knee 19%; hip 51%). Clinical worsening at 3 months appeared to be a clear independent predictor for worsening at 2 years (OR 2.8 95% CI 1.5-5.2) with a moderate discriminative ability (AUC 0.68 95% CI 0.57-0.70). Similar results were obtained when only TJR at 2 years was used as the outcome measure (OR 4.1 95% CI 2.0-8.4) with good AUC (0.82 95% CI 0.76-0.87). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that re-assessment of symptoms after optimised non-surgical treatment could be meaningful in clinical decision making for TJR. Furthermore, this information could be used to identify subgroups of patients potentially eligible for novel and advanced treatment options.

Will we ever have better glucocorticoids?

Glucocorticoids are cost-effective drugs with potent anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive effects. They are used successfully to treat many disorders, including rheumatoid arthritis, polymyalgia rheumatic and other rheumatic diseases. However, these drugs also have the potential to cause adverse effects, particularly if high doses are used for prolonged periods. Therefore, continuous efforts are being made to implement recommendations for optimal dosing of glucocorticoids, monitoring for potential adverse events, adverse event prevention and management. Apart from this, novel and interesting work is underway to develop innovative glucocorticoids or glucocorticoid receptor ligands in order to improve the therapeutic balance. This article briefly mentions a recent publication discussing the question under which conditions long-term treatment with glucocorticoids has an acceptably low level of harm, and focuses then on two current approaches to minimize glucocorticoid adverse effects while keeping or even enhancing their anti-inflammatory efficacy, liposomal glucocorticoids and dissociated agonists of the glucocorticoid receptor.

Inadequate response to treat-to-target methotrexate therapy in patients with new-onset rheumatoid arthritis: development and validation of clinical predictors.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and validate clinical baseline predictors associated with inadequate response (IR) to methotrexate (MTX) therapy in newly diagnosed patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: In U-Act-Early, 108 disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-naive patients with RA were randomised to initiate MTX therapy and treated to target until sustained remission (disease activity score assessing 28 joints (DAS28) <2.6 with four or less swollen joints for ≥24 weeks) was achieved. If no remission, hydroxychloroquine was added to the treatment regimen (ie, 'MTX+') and replaced by tocilizumab if the target still was not reached thereafter. Regression analyses were performed to identify clinical predictors for IR, defined as needing addition of a biological DMARD, to 'MTX+'. Data from the treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort were used for external validation of the prediction model. RESULTS: Within 1 year, 56/108 (52%) patients in U-Act-Early showed IR to 'MTX+'. DAS28 (adjusted OR (ORadj) 2.1, 95% CI 1.4 to 3.2), current smoking (ORadj 3.02, 95% CI 1.1 to 8.0) and alcohol consumption (ORadj 0.4, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.9) were identified as baseline predictors. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) of the prediction model was 0.75 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.84); the positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were 65% and 80%, respectively. When applying the model to the validation cohort, the AUROC slightly decreased to 0.67 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.79) and the PPV and NPV to 54% and 80%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Higher DAS28, current smoking and no alcohol consumption are predictive factors for IR to step-up 'MTX+' in DMARD-naive patients with new-onset RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01034137; Post-results, ISRCTN26791028; Post-results.

Radiographic joint damage in early rheumatoid arthritis patients: comparing tocilizumab- and methotrexate-based treat-to-target strategies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the progression of erosions and joint space narrowing (JSN) in feet and hands in the U-Act-Early trial. METHODS: In this trial, 317 newly diagnosed DMARD-naïve RA patients initiated randomly tocilizumab, or step-up MTX or a combination of the two. Radiographs were scored at baseline and after 52 and 104 weeks using the Sharp-van der Heijde erosion and JSN score. Between the strategy arms, changes from baseline and the proportions of patients without radiographic progression (change from baseline ≤0) were compared. RESULTS: Mean changes from baseline in erosion and JSN scores for the whole study population were after 52 weeks 0.59 and 0.18 and after 104 weeks 0.70 and 0.50, respectively. For JSN, at both time points no differences in progression were found between strategies (P ⩾ 0.09). For erosions, the progression was significantly lower at week 104 in both tocilizumab arms when compared with the MTX arm ((p≤0.023). Less progression of erosions in the feet was found after 104 weeks in both tocilizumab arms (P ⩽ 0.046); this was not significant for the hands (P ⩾ 0.11). The proportion of patients without progression in erosions was higher in the tocilizumab arms at week 52 (tocilizumab plus MTX: 87%, P = 0.038; tocilizumab: 81%, P = 0.29) and 104 (tocilizumab plus MTX: 85%, P = 0.001; tocilizumab: 77%, P = 0.028), compared with the MTX arm (74 and 60%, respectively). CONCLUSION: In DMARD-naïve early RA patients, initiating a tocilizumab-based treat-to-target strategy inhibits the progression of erosions, especially in the feet, more compared with initiation of a step-up MTX strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01034137.

Disease activity and dropout in young persons with juvenile idiopathic arthritis in transition of care: a longitudinal observational study.

OBJECTIVES: Reaching a certain age, juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients in paediatric care are transferred to adult care. An increased disease activity after transfer and increased dropout has been suggested, however, evidence is scarce. Our aim is to determine whether the process of transition is associated with increased disease-activity and dropout, and to identify associated factors. METHODS: During a 3-year prospective transition cohort study, paediatric patients (14-17yrs) were transferred to adult care. Paediatric (10-13yrs) and adult JIA patients (18-27yrs) were used as control groups. Demographic and disease-related items were obtained yearly. Non-parametric tests were used to compare differences between the groups and mixed models to evaluate disease activity over time, measured by JADAS27 and DAS28. Dropout was defined as not attending the clinic for 2 consecutive visits. RESULTS: Groups did not differ regarding baseline variables of subtype, gender, uveitis, ANA-, RF- or HLA B27-positivity and current or past DMARD use. Median disease activity was not different between groups during follow-up. Transfer was not associated with disease activity. Dropout rate was 12%, and was significantly higher in patients under transition (22%) compared with paediatric (3%) and adult care (10%). Patients who dropped out had significantly lower disease activity at baseline and were using less MTX, but did not differ regarding subtype, ANA, RF and HLA-B27. CONCLUSIONS: The process of transition in JIA is not associated with an increase in disease activity, however, this period carries a risk for drop out especially in patients with low disease activity.

Explorative analyses of protein biomarkers in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis achieving sustained drug-free remission after treatment with tocilizumab- or methotrexate-based strategies: from transcriptomics to proteomics.

OBJECTIVES: Previously, we identified networks of co-expressed genes related to achieving sustained drug-free remission (sDFR). The aim of the present exploratory analysis was to identify inflammatory proteins associated with achieving sDFR and their enriched biological pathways, and compare these pathways with those found in the previous transcriptomic analyses. METHODS: Serum samples were used from 60 patients who participated in the U-Act-Early trial and were treated-to-target with tocilizumab plus methotrexate, or tocilizumab or methotrexate; 37 achieved sDFR (≥3 months drug-free) and 23 did not (controls). Luminex® multi-analyte profiling (xMAP)® was used to measure 85 proteins. Partial least square discriminant analyses (PLSDA) identified proteins associated with achieving sDFR within each strategy arm, which were thereafter used for pathway analyses. RESULTS: PLSDA identified 9, 14 and 13 relevant proteins in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate, tocilizumab and methotrexate arm, respectively and pathway analyses thereafter identified respectively 49, 88 and 117 significantly enriched gene ontology (GO) terms. When comparing these terms with those previously found in the transcriptomic analyses, corresponding pathways were related in the tocilizumab arm to activity of leukocytes; in the methotrexate arm to response of stimuli and regulation of the Janus kinase signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK-STAT) pathway. In the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm, no corresponding enriched pathways were found. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple proteins were associated with achieving sDFR and several biological pathways corresponded, mainly in the methotrexate arm, with our previous transcriptomic findings potentially providing further insights into gene expression and protein translation in newly diagnosed RA patients.

Early rheumatoid arthritis treated with tocilizumab, methotrexate, or their combination (U-Act-Early): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, strategy trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, treatment aim is early, rapid, and sustained remission. We compared the efficacy and safety of strategies initiating the interleukin-6 receptor-blocking monoclonal antibody tocilizumab with or without methotrexate (a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug [DMARD]), versus initiation of methotrexate monotherapy in line with international guidelines. METHODS: We did a 2-year, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, strategy study at 21 rheumatology outpatient departments in the Netherlands. We included patients who had been diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis within 1 year before inclusion, were DMARD-naive, aged 18 years or older, met current rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria, and had a disease activity score assessing 28 joints (DAS28) of at least 2·6. We randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) to start tocilizumab plus methotrexate (the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm), or tocilizumab plus placebo-methotrexate (the tocilizumab arm), or methotrexate plus placebo-tocilizumab (the methotrexate arm). Tocilizumab was given at 8 mg/kg intravenously every 4 weeks with a maximum of 800 mg per dose. Methotrexate was started at 10 mg per week orally and increased stepwise every 4 weeks by 5 mg to a maximum of 30 mg per week, until remission or dose-limiting toxicity. We did the randomisation using an interactive web response system. Masking was achieved with placebos that were similar in appearance to the active drug; the study physicians, pharmacists, monitors, and patients remained masked during the study, and all assessments were done by masked assessors. Patients not achieving remission on their initial regimen switched from placebo to active treatments; patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm switched to standard of care therapy (typically methotrexate combined with a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor). When sustained remission was achieved, methotrexate (and placebo-methotrexate) was tapered and stopped, then tocilizumab (and placebo-tocilizumab) was also tapered and stopped. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving sustained remission (defined as DAS28 <2·6 with a swollen joint count ≤four, persisting for at least 24 weeks) on the initial regimen and during the entire study duration, compared between groups with a two-sided Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. Analysis was based on an intention-to-treat method. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01034137. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2010, and July 30, 2012, we recruited and assigned 317 eligible patients to treatment (106 to the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm, 103 to the tocilizumab arm, and 108 to the methotrexate arm). The study was completed by a similar proportion of patients in the three groups (range 72-78%). The most frequent reasons for dropout were adverse events or intercurrent illness: 27 (34%) of dropouts, and insufficient response: 26 (33%) of dropouts. 91 (86%) of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm achieved sustained remission on the initial regimen, compared with 86 (84%) of 103 in the tocilizumab arm, and 48 (44%) of 108 in the methotrexate arm (relative risk [RR] 2·00, 95% CI 1·59-2·51 for tocilizumab plus methotrexate vs methotrexate, and 1·86, 1·48-2·32 for tocilizumab vs methotrexate, p<0·0001 for both comparisons). For the entire study, 91 (86%) of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm, 91 (88%) of 103 in the tocilizumab arm, and 83 (77%) of 108 in the methotrexate arm achieved sustained remission (RR 1·13, 95% CI 1·00-1·29, p=0·06 for tocilizumab plus methotrexate vs methotrexate, 1·14, 1·01-1·29, p=0·0356 for tocilizumab vs methotrexate, and p=0·59 for tocilizumab plus methotrexate vs tocilizumab). Nasopharyngitis was the most common adverse event in all three treatment groups, occurring in 38 (36%) of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm, 40 (39%) of 103 in the tocilizumab arm, and 37 (34%) of 108 in the methotrexate arm. The occurrence of serious adverse events did not differ between the treatment groups (17 [16%] of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm vs 19 [18%] of 103 in the tocilizumab arm and 13 [12%] of 108 in the methotrexate arm), and no deaths occurred during the study. INTERPRETATION: For patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, strategies aimed at sustained remission by immediate initiation of tocilizumab with or without methotrexate are more effective, and with a similar safety profile, compared with initiation of methotrexate in line with current standards. FUNDING: Roche Nederland BV.

EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging in the clinical management of peripheral joint osteoarthritis.

The increased information provided by modern imaging has led to its more extensive use. Our aim was to develop evidence-based recommendations for the use of imaging in the clinical management of the most common arthropathy, osteoarthritis (OA). A task force (including rheumatologists, radiologists, methodologists, primary care doctors and patients) from nine countries defined 10 questions on the role of imaging in OA to support a systematic literature review (SLR). Joints of interest were the knee, hip, hand and foot; imaging modalities included conventional radiography (CR), MRI, ultrasonography, CT and nuclear medicine. PubMed and EMBASE were searched. The evidence was presented to the task force who subsequently developed the recommendations. The strength of agreement for each recommendation was assessed. 17 011 references were identified from which 390 studies were included in the SLR. Seven recommendations were produced, covering the lack of need for diagnostic imaging in patients with typical symptoms; the role of imaging in differential diagnosis; the lack of benefit in monitoring when no therapeutic modification is related, though consideration is required when unexpected clinical deterioration occurs; CR as the first-choice imaging modality; consideration of how to correctly acquire images and the role of imaging in guiding local injections. Recommendations for future research were also developed based on gaps in evidence, such as the use of imaging in identifying therapeutic targets, and demonstrating the added value of imaging. These evidence-based recommendations and related research agenda provide the basis for sensible use of imaging in routine clinical assessment of people with OA.

Development of a Glucocorticoid Toxicity Index (GTI) using multicriteria decision analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a Glucocorticoid Toxicity Index (GTI) to assess glucocorticoid (GC)-related morbidity and GC-sparing ability of other therapies. METHODS: Nineteen experts on GC use and outcome measures from 11 subspecialties participated. Ten experts were from the USA; nine from Canada, Europe or Australia. Group consensus methods and multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) were used. A Composite GTI and Specific List comprise the overall GTI. The Composite GTI reflects toxicity likely to change during a clinical trial. The Composite GTI toxicities occur commonly, vary with GC exposure, and are weighted and scored. Relative weights for items in the Composite GTI were derived by group consensus and MCDA. The Specific List is designed to capture GC toxicity not included in the Composite GTI. The Composite GTI was evaluated by application to paper cases by the investigators and an external group of 17 subspecialists. RESULTS: Thirty-one toxicity items were included in the Composite GTI and 23 in the Specific List. Composite GTI evaluation showed high inter-rater agreement (investigators κ 0.88, external raters κ 0.90). To assess the degree to which the Composite GTI corresponds to expert clinical judgement, participants ranked 15 cases by clinical judgement in order of highest to lowest GC toxicity. Expert rankings were then compared with case ranking by the Composite GTI, yielding excellent agreement (investigators weighted κ 0.87, external raters weighted κ 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: We describe the development and initial evaluation of a comprehensive instrument for the assessment of GC toxicity.

Patient-reported outcomes in newly diagnosed early rheumatoid arthritis patients treated to target with a tocilizumab- or methotrexate-based strategy.

Objective: To evaluate the effect of initiation of tocilizumab, with or without MTX, compared with MTX alone on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in DMARD-naïve patients with early RA. Methods: In U-Act-Early, patients initiated treat-to-target step-up MTX, tocilizumab or tocilizumab plus MTX therapy. PROs assessed included the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, 36-item Short Form (SF-36), five dimensional EuroQol (EQ-5D) and the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire. Differences between strategy groups over time and proportions of patients exceeding minimum clinically important differences (MCID) were evaluated. Results: During the 2-year study period, significant improvements were found in the tocilizumab strategies in the SF-36 physical component score (tocilizumab, P = 0.012; tocilizumab plus MTX, P = 0.044) and EQ-5D score (tocilizumab plus MTX, P = 0.020) when compared with the MTX strategy. No significant differences were noted in other PROs (P ⩾ 0.052, except for the domain 'identity' in the Illness Perception Questionnaire; tocilizumab vs MTX, P = 0.048). The proportions of patients achieving MCID in SF-36 physical component score were significantly higher at 12 and 52 weeks (P ⩽ 0.049) in the tocilizumab arms when compared with the MTX arm. At week 24, the proportion achieving MCID in EQ-5D was significantly higher in the tocilizumab plus MTX arm vs the MTX arm (P = 0.045). Conclusion: Initiation of treat-to-target tocilizumab therapy resulted in significantly improved PROs, especially within the first 24 weeks, when compared with initiation of MTX therapy. Also on the patients' level, initiating tocilizumab may be considered as a valuable strategy in DMARD-naïve patients with early RA. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01034137.