Effect of bimekizumab on patient-reported disease impact in patients with psoriatic arthritis: 1-year results from two phase 3 studies.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate 1-year bimekizumab efficacy in PsA from the patient perspective using the 12-item PsA Impact of Disease (PsAID-12) questionnaire. METHODS: BE OPTIMAL (NCT03895203; biologic DMARD [bDMARD]-naïve), BE COMPLETE (NCT03896581; inadequate response/intolerance to TNF inhibitors [TNFi-IR]) and BE VITAL (NCT04009499; open-label extension) assessed bimekizumab 160 mg every 4 weeks in patients with PsA. Post hoc analyses of patient-reported disease impact, assessed by the PsAID-12 questionnaire, are reported to 1 year (collected to Week 40 in BE COMPLETE). RESULTS: Overall, 1,112 total patients were included (698 bimekizumab, 414 placebo). Rapid improvements observed with bimekizumab treatment at Week 4 continued to Week 16 and were sustained to 1 year. At 1 year, mean (SE) change from baseline in PsAID-12 total score was comparable between bimekizumab-randomized patients and patients who switched to bimekizumab at Week 16 (bDMARD-naïve bimekizumab -2.3 [0.1], placebo/bimekizumab -2.2 [0.1]; TNFi-IR bimekizumab -2.5 [0.1], placebo/bimekizumab -2.2 [0.2]). Proportions of bimekizumab-randomized patients achieving clinically meaningful within-patient improvement (≥3-point decrease from baseline) at Week 16 were sustained to 1 year (bDMARD-naïve 49.0%; TNFi-IR 48.5%) and were similar for placebo/bimekizumab patients (bDMARD-naïve 44.4%; TNFi-IR 40.6%). Across studies and arms, 35.3% to 47.8% of patients had minimal or no symptom impact at 1 year. Improvements were observed to 1 year across all single-item domains, including pain, fatigue and skin problems. CONCLUSION: Bimekizumab treatment resulted in rapid and sustained clinically meaningful improvements in disease impact up to 1 year in bDMARD-naïve and TNFi-IR patients with PsA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: BE OPTIMAL: NCT03895203; BE COMPLETE: NCT03896581; BE VITAL: NCT04009499 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Characteristics associated with patient-reported treatment success in psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine characteristics associated with patient-reported treatment success in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: Rheumatologist-diagnosed PsA patients fulfilling the CASPAR classification were recruited from a single center. PsA outcome measures included: 66/68 swollen/tender joint counts, Leeds/SPARCC dactylitis/enthesitis indices, psoriasis body surface area (BSA), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including PROMIS. The primary outcome was a patient-reported item: "Today, considering the level of control of your psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis, do you consider your treatment has been successful?" Descriptive and multivariate logistic regression analyses identified clinical predictors of patient-reported treatment success. Patient-reported reasons for lack of treatment success were explored. RESULTS: A total of 178 participants had a baseline visit. Mean (SD) CASPAR score was 3.7 (0.9), age 51.7 (13.5) years, and BMI 31.3 (7.2) kg/m2. Fifty-two percent were women, and 86.0% white. Treatment success was reported by 116/178(65%) patients in the analytic cohort. Among 76 patients who reported treatment failure, the most frequently selected reasons for lack of success were pain (n = 55, 72.4%), fatigue (n = 46, 60.5%), inflamed joints (n = 40, 52.6%), and stiffness (n = 40, 52.6%). Overall, 105 participants had complete data across variables in the logistic regression models. Patient-reported treatment success was independently associated with the 66-swollen/68-tender joint counts, psoriasis BSA, PROs (pain interference, physical function, fatigue), and TNF-inhibitor therapy, after controlling for BMI and demographics. CONCLUSION: Patient-reported treatment success in PsA may be achieved through improvement of inflammatory arthritis, psoriasis, pain, physical function, fatigue, and the use ofTNF-inhibitors. Patients reported treatment failure was most commonly due to symptoms of pain, fatigue and stiffness.

Composite Outcome Measures for Psoriatic Arthritis: OMERACT and 3 and 4 Visual Analog Scale Progress in 2023.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) psoriatic arthritis (PsA) working group provided updates at the GRAPPA 2023 annual meeting on its work to evaluate composite outcome measures for PsA. An ongoing systematic literature review is in progress to evaluate psychometric measurement properties using the OMERACT filter 2.2 for a list of candidate composite outcome measures, which include minimal disease activity (MDA), Disease Activity for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI), 3 visual analog scale (3VAS), and 4VAS. The performance of the 3VAS and 4VAS in clinical practice and a synthesis of new data were presented, including estimates for minimal clinically important differences and thresholds of meaning, discrimination and construct validity, and longitudinal construct validity. Numeric rating scale (NRS) versions of the VAS have also been tested. Performance characteristics and psychometric properties are similar to the ASSESS study, a UK multicenter study, indicating that the VAS scales may be feasible tools for routine clinical care with a preference for the 4VAS because of superior face validity and clinical utility.

Vaccination recommendations for adults receiving biologics and oral therapies for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: Delphi consensus from the medical board of the National Psoriasis Foundation.

BACKGROUND: For psoriatic patients who need to receive nonlive or live vaccines, evidence-based recommendations are needed regarding whether to pause or continue systemic therapies for psoriasis and/or psoriatic arthritis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate literature regarding vaccine efficacy and safety and to generate consensus-based recommendations for adults receiving systemic therapies for psoriasis and/or psoriatic arthritis receiving nonlive or live vaccines. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi process, 22 consensus statements were developed by the National Psoriasis Foundation Medical Board and COVID-19 Task Force, and infectious disease experts. RESULTS: Key recommendations include continuing most oral and biologic therapies without modification for patients receiving nonlive vaccines; consider interruption of methotrexate for nonlive vaccines. For patients receiving live vaccines, discontinue most oral and biologic medications before and after administration of live vaccine. Specific recommendations include discontinuing most biologic therapies, except for abatacept, for 2-3 half-lives before live vaccine administration and deferring next dose 2-4 weeks after live vaccination. LIMITATIONS: Studies regarding infection rates after vaccination are lacking. CONCLUSION: Interruption of antipsoriatic oral and biologic therapies is generally not necessary for patients receiving nonlive vaccines. Temporary interruption of oral and biologic therapies before and after administration of live vaccines is recommended in most cases.

Risk Factors for Infection and Health Impacts of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic in People With Autoimmune Diseases.

BACKGROUND: People with autoimmune or inflammatory conditions taking immunomodulatory/suppressive medications may have higher risk of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Chronic disease care has also changed for many patients, with uncertain downstream consequences. METHODS: We included participants with autoimmune or inflammatory conditions followed by specialists at Johns Hopkins. Participants completed periodic surveys querying comorbidities, disease-modifying medications, exposures, COVID-19 testing and outcomes, social behaviors, and disruptions to healthcare. We assessed whether COVID-19 risk is higher among those on immunomodulating or suppressive agents and characterized pandemic-associated changes to care and mental health. RESULTS: In total, 265 (5.6%) developed COVID-19 over 9 months of follow-up (April-December 2020). Patient characteristics (age, race, comorbidity, medications) were associated with differences in social distancing behaviors during the pandemic. Glucocorticoid exposure was associated with higher odds of COVID-19 in models incorporating behavior and other potential confounders (odds ratio [OR]: 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08, 1.89). Other medication classes were not associated with COVID-19 risk. Diabetes (OR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.08, 2.73), cardiovascular disease (OR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.24, 2.28), and kidney disease (OR: 1.76; 95% CI: 1.04, 2.97) were associated with higher odds of COVID-19. Of the 2156 reporting pre-pandemic utilization of infusion, mental health or rehabilitative services, 975 (45.2%) reported disruptions therein, which disproportionately affected individuals experiencing changes to employment or income. CONCLUSIONS: Glucocorticoid exposure may increase risk of COVID-19 in people with autoimmune or inflammatory conditions. Disruption to healthcare and related services was common. Those with pandemic-related reduced income may be most vulnerable to care disruptions.

Patients and clinicians define symptom levels and meaningful change for PROMIS pain interference and fatigue in RA using bookmarking.

OBJECTIVES: Using patient-reported outcomes to inform clinical decision-making depends on knowing how to interpret scores. Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) instruments are increasingly used in rheumatology research and care, but there is little information available to guide interpretation of scores. We sought to identify thresholds and meaningful change for PROMIS Pain Interference and Fatigue scores from the perspective of RA patients and clinicians. METHODS: We developed patient vignettes using the PROMIS item banks representing a continuum of Pain Interference and Fatigue levels. During a series of face-to-face 'bookmarking' sessions, patients and clinicians identified thresholds for mild, moderate and severe levels of symptoms and identified change deemed meaningful for making treatment decisions. RESULTS: In general, patients selected higher cut points to demarcate thresholds than clinicians. Patients and clinicians generally identified changes of 5-10 points as representing meaningful change. The thresholds and meaningful change scores of patients were grounded in their lived experiences having RA, approach to self-management, and the impacts on function, roles and social participation. CONCLUSION: Results offer new information about how both patients and clinicians view RA symptoms and functional impacts. Results suggest that patients and providers may use different strategies to define and interpret RA symptoms, and select different thresholds when describing symptoms as mild, moderate or severe. The magnitude of symptom change selected by patients and clinicians as being clinically meaningful in interpreting treatment efficacy and loss of response may be greater than levels determined by external anchor and statistical methods.

What influences patients' opinion of remission and low disease activity in psoriatic arthritis? Principal component analysis of an international study.

OBJECTIVE: In PsA, the treatment objective is remission or low disease activity (LDA), but patients' perception of remission is poorly studied. This analysis aimed to identify factors associated with patient-defined remission. METHODS: This analysis uses ReFlaP data, an international PsA study, with remission defined as 'At this time, is your psoriatic arthritis in remission, if this means: you feel your disease is as good as gone?'. Variables associated with, first, patient-defined remission and, second, LDA were identified using multivariable logistic regression and principal component analysis (PCA) to explore correlated variables. RESULTS: Of 424 patients (50.2% male, mean age 52 years) with established disease, 94 (22.2%) reported themselves as being in remission and 191 (45.0%) as LDA alone. In multivariable analysis pain, psoriasis, impact of disease, physician opinion of symptoms from joint damage and Groll comorbidity index were independent predictors of remission. For LDA, results were similar. Using PCA, variance explained was 74% by five components for men and 80% by six components for women. The key component from PCA for remission was, for both sex, disease impact (Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease, pain and HAQ) explaining 22.2-27.5% of variance. Other factors included musculoskeletal disease activity, chronicity/joint damage, psoriasis, enthesitis and CRP. For LDA, similar factors were identified but the variance explained was lower (64-68%). CONCLUSION: Many factors impact on patients' opinion of remission, dominated by disease impact. Disease activity in multiple domains, chronicity/age, comorbidities and symptoms due to other conditions contribute to a robust model highlighting that patient-defined remission is multifaceted. TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03119805.

Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA in the SLICC classification criteria dataset.

OBJECTIVE: Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA is a common isotype of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I in SLE. Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I was not included in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) SLE classification criteria, but was included in the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) criteria. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of anti-beta 2-glycoprotein I IgA in SLE versus other rheumatic diseases. In addition, we examined the association between anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA and disease manifestations in SLE. METHODS: The dataset consisted of 1384 patients, 657 with a consensus physician diagnosis of SLE and 727 controls with other rheumatic diseases. Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I isotypes were measured by ELISA. Patients with a consensus diagnosis of SLE were compared to controls with respect to presence of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I. Among patients with SLE, we assessed the association between anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA and clinical manifestations. RESULTS: The prevalence of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA was 14% in SLE patients and 7% in rheumatic disease controls (odds ratio, OR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.6, 3.3). It was more common in SLE patients who were younger patients and of African descent (p = 0.019). Eleven percent of SLE patients had anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA alone (no anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgG or IgM). There was a significant association between anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA and anti-dsDNA (p = 0.001) and the other antiphospholipid antibodies (p = 0.0004). There was no significant correlation of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA with any of the other ACR or SLICC clinical criteria for SLE. Those with anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA tended to have a history of thrombosis (12% vs 6%, p = 0.071), but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: We found the anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA isotype to be more common in patients with SLE and in particular, with African descent. It could occur alone without other isotypes.

Rapid and sustained improvements in patient-reported signs and symptoms with ixekizumab in biologic-naive and TNF-inadequate responder patients with psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the onset and sustainability of patient-reported improvements in symptoms of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) following treatment with ixekizumab (IXE) up to Week 108. METHODS: In patients with active PsA, either naive to biological DMARDs (SPIRIT-P1) or having inadequate response or intolerance to 1 or 2 prior TNF-inhibitors (TNFi­experienced; SPIRIT-P2), we analysed the change from baseline in joint pain visual analogue scale (VAS; 0-100 scale), patient global assessment (PatGA VAS; 0-100 scale), fatigue numerical rating scale (NRS; 0 [no fatigue] to 10 [worst imaginable]), and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI; 0-3), up to Week 108. RESULTS: IXE-treated patients compared to placebo reported rapid and statistically significant improvement in pain VAS, PatGA, and HAQ-DI as early as Week 1 and this benefit was sustained or increased through Week 108. Fatigue scores improved in IXE-treated patients compared to placebo in both studies; results were statistically significant at Week 24 only in SPIRIT-P2. Improvements in fatigue with IXE were sustained over 2 years. The improvements observed in these patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were consistent in biologic-naive or TNFi-experienced patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with IXE versus PBO achieved significantly greater improvements and showed faster onset of improvements in patient-reported outcomes measuring symptoms and impact of PsA. Responses were sustained over 2 years and were generally consistent regardless of prior TNFi experience.

Instruments Measuring Physical Function for Psoriatic Arthritis Endorsed at GRAPPA 2020 Annual Meeting: Updates of the GRAPPA-OMERACT Working Group.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Working Group provided updates at the 2020 GRAPPA annual meeting on its work toward developing a core outcome set for PsA. Working groups were set up for the 4 prioritized domains: enthesitis, fatigue, structural damage, and physical function. Two instruments for measurement of physical function were provisionally endorsed: (1) the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index and (2) the physical functioning domain in the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form survey.

Effect of filgotinib on health-related quality of life in active psoriatic arthritis: a randomized phase 2 trial (EQUATOR).

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of filgotinib, an oral, selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID)9 questionnaire in active PsA. METHODS: Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to filgotinib 200 mg or placebo once daily for 16 weeks in EQUATOR, a multicentre, double-blind, phase 2 randomized controlled trial. HRQoL was assessed with PsAID9 at Weeks 4 and 16. Change from baseline in total and individual domain scores, plus the proportions of patients achieving minimal clinically important improvement (MCII; ⩾3 points) and patient-accepted symptom status (PASS; score <4), were evaluated. Correlation with the 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) was investigated. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-one patients were randomized to filgotinib or placebo. Filgotinib effects on PsAID9 were observed from Week 4. At Week 16, mean (s.d.) change from baseline in PsAID9 was -2.3 (1.8) and -0.8 (2.2) for filgotinib and placebo, respectively (least-squares mean of group difference -1.48 [95% CI -2.12, -0.84], P < 0.0001), with significant improvements in all domains vs placebo. Significantly more patients on filgotinib achieved MCII (group difference 25.4% [95% CI 8.92, 39.99], P = 0.0022) and PASS (group difference 29.6% [95% CI 10.65, 45.60], P = 0.0018) at Week 16 vs placebo. Similar improvements in SF-36 were observed, with moderate to strong negative correlation between PsAID9 and SF-36. CONCLUSION: Filgotinib significantly improved HRQoL vs placebo in patients with active PsA, as measured by PsAID9. To our knowledge, EQUATOR is the first randomized controlled trial to evaluate PsAID9. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show, NCT03101670.

Patient-reported outcomes in RA care improve patient communication, decision-making, satisfaction and confidence: qualitative results.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into routine clinics, from the perspective of patients with RA, clinicians and other staff. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study using a mixed methods sequential explanatory design at an academic arthritis clinic. RA patients completed selected Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System measures on tablets in the waiting room. Results were immediately available to discuss during the visit. Post-visit surveys with patients and physicians evaluated topics discussed and their impact on decision making; patients rated confidence in treatment. Focus groups or interviews with patients, treating rheumatologists and clinic staff were conducted to understand perspectives and experiences. RESULTS: Some 196 patients and 20 rheumatologists completed post-visit surveys at 816 and 806 visits, respectively. Focus groups were conducted with 24 patients, 10 rheumatologists and 4 research/clinic staff. PROs influenced medical decision-making and RA treatment changes (38 and 18% of visits, respectively). Patients reported very high satisfaction and treatment confidence. Impact on clinical workflow was minimal after a period of initial adjustment. PROs were valued by patients and physicians, and provided new insight into how patients felt and functioned over time. Reviewing results together improved communication, and facilitated patient-centred care, shared decision making, and the identification of new symptoms and contributing psychosocial/behavioural factors. CONCLUSION: PRO use at RA visits was feasible, increased understanding of how disease affects how patients feel and function, facilitated shared decision-making, and was associated with high patient satisfaction and treatment confidence.

Network Meta-Analysis of Tofacitinib, Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs, and Apremilast for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib and other new treatments approved for use in psoriatic arthritis have only recently been included in psoriatic arthritis treatment guidelines, and studies evaluating the relative efficacy of available therapies are important to inform treatment decisions by healthcare professionals. OBJECTIVE: To perform a network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of tofacitinib, biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), and apremilast in patients with psoriatic arthritis naïve to tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy (TNFi-naïve) or with an inadequate response (TNFi-IR). METHODS: A systematic literature review used searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library on October 9, 2017. Randomized controlled trials including adult patients with psoriatic arthritis receiving treatment administered as monotherapy or with conventional synthetic DMARDs were selected. Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20 response, change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, ≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, and change from baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score and Leeds Enthesitis Index. Treatment effects were evaluated during placebo-controlled phases, using a binomial logit model for binary outcomes and a normal identify link model for other outcomes. Discontinuations due to adverse events and serious infection events were assessed as safety outcomes. RESULTS: The network meta-analysis included 24 published randomized controlled trials, of which 13 enrolled TNFi-naïve patients only, 3 enrolled TNFi-IR patients only, and 8 enrolled both TNFi-naïve and TNFi-IR patients. Placebo-controlled treatment durations ranged from 12 to 24 weeks. Indirect comparisons showed tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID to have similar efficacy compared with most bDMARDs and apremilast in improving joint symptoms (based on American College of Rheumatology 20 response), and with some bDMARDs in improving skin symptoms (based on Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) (tofacitinib 10 mg BID only in TNFi-IR) in patients with psoriatic arthritis who were TNFi-naïve or TNFi-IR. Results also showed that, compared with placebo, the improvement in physical functioning (based on Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index) with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID was similar to that observed with most bDMARDs and apremilast in TNFi-naïve patients, and similar to that observed with all bDMARDs with available data in the TNFi-IR population. Improvements in Dactylitis Severity Score and Leeds Enthesitis Index scores were comparable between treatments. Tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID were median-ranked 8 and 15, respectively, for discontinuation due to any adverse events, and 5 and 16, respectively, for a serious infection event out of a total of 20 treatments in the network (lower numbers are more favorable). CONCLUSIONS: Tofacitinib provides an additional treatment option for patients with psoriatic arthritis, both in patients naïve to TNFi and in those with TNFi-IR. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2020; 81:XXX-XXX).

Outcomes of the 2019 GRAPPA Workshop on Continuous Composite Indices for the Assessment of Psoriatic Arthritis and Membership-recommended Next Steps.

OBJECTIVE: Improving the assessment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a key purpose of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and PsA (GRAPPA). Herein, we report the proceedings of the GRAPPA composites workshop at the 2019 GRAPPA annual meeting and the membership's recommended next steps. METHODS: A review of continuous composite measures was conducted in an introductory workshop, followed by 10 breakout group sessions and a final plenary session for feedback and voting. RESULTS: Participants included 154 members: 87 rheumatologists, 18 dermatologists, 2 rheumatologist/dermatologists, 12 patient research partners, 14 academics, 1 methodologist, and 20 industry members. Of voting members, 88.8% agreed a need exists for a continuous composite measure for routine practice, but only 62% were currently using a composite measure. Of these, 27% were using the 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS), which is not a PsA-specific measure; 20% were using a PsA-specific measure such as PsA DAS (PASDAS), Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI), or Disease Activity Index for PsA (DAPSA). Members agreed that the existing measures were not feasible in their current forms (CPDAI 83%, PASDAS 82%, and DAPSA 47%) and that modification should be tested. The majority (76%) agreed that disease effect should be measured separately from disease activity. CONCLUSION: The GRAPPA membership supports the need for a continuous composite measure of disease activity for use in routine clinical care, the separate measurement of disease effect and activity, and the testing of modifications to candidate instruments rather than the development of new measures.

Proceedings of the 2019 GRAPPA Collaborative Research Network Meeting.

At the 2019 Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis-Collaborative Research Network annual meeting, the group presented its progress in selecting a database platform; items to include in an electronic case report form (eCRF); and standardized operating procedures (SOP) for the collection, processing, storage, and transport of biomaterial. A pilot investigator-initiated study was also proposed that, in addition to addressing an area of unmet need, would allow for the testing of both the eCRF and SOP.

The GRAPPA-OMERACT Working Group: 4 Prioritized Domains for Completing the Core Outcome Measurement Set for Psoriatic Arthritis 2019 Updates.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) working group provided updates at the 2019 GRAPPA annual meeting on its work toward developing a core outcome set for PsA. The working group prioritized 4 domains, including musculoskeletal disease activity (enthesitis and dactylitis), fatigue, physical function, and structural damage. In this report, the working group summarizes its progress in standardizing the core outcome set for these 4 domains.

Comparing patient-perceived and physician-perceived remission and low disease activity in psoriatic arthritis: an analysis of 410 patients from 14 countries.

BACKGROUND: The objective was to compare different definitions of remission and low disease activity (LDA) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), based on both patients' and physicians' perspectives. METHODS: In ReFlap (Remission/Flare in PsA; NCT03119805), adults with physician-confirmed PsA and >2 years of disease duration in 14 countries were included. Remission was defined as very low disease activity (VLDA), Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) ≤4, and physician-perceived and patient-perceived remission (specific question yes/no), and LDA as minimal disease activity (MDA), DAPSA <14, and physician-perceived and patient-perceived LDA. Frequencies of these definitions, their agreement (prevalence-adjusted kappa), and sensitivity and specificity versus patient-defined status were assessed cross-sectionally. RESULTS: Of 410 patients, the mean age (SD) was 53.9 (12.5) years, 50.7% were male, disease duration was 11.2 (8.2) years, 56.8% were on biologics, and remission/LDA was frequently attained: respectively, for remission from 12.4% (VLDA) to 36.1% (physician-perceived remission), and for LDA from 25.4% (MDA) to 43.9% (patient-perceived LDA). Thus, patient-perceived remission/LDA was frequent (65.4%). Agreement between patient-perceived remission/LDA and composite scores was moderate to good (kappa range, 0.12-0.65). When patient-perceived remission or LDA status is used as reference, DAPSA-defined remission/LDA and VLDA/MDA had a sensitivity of 73.1% and 51.5%, respectively, and a specificity of 76.8% and 88.0%, respectively. Physician-perceived remission/LDA using a single question was frequent (67.6%) but performed poorly against other definitions. CONCLUSION: In this unselected population, remission/LDA was frequently attained. VLDA/MDA was a more stringent definition than DAPSA-based remission/LDA. DAPSA-based remission/LDA performed better than VLDA/MDA to detect patient-defined remission or remission/LDA. Further studies of long-term outcomes are needed.

The GRAPPA-OMERACT Psoriatic Arthritis Working Group at the 2018 Annual Meeting: Report and Plan for Completing the Core Outcome Measurement Set.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Working Group reported at the 2018 GRAPPA annual meeting on the outcome of the OMERACT 2018 Conference in Terrigal, Australia. The working group presented the endorsement of the 66/68 joint count for the assessment of peripheral arthritis and the provisional endorsement of the PsA Impact of Disease 12 questionnaire for the assessment of PsA-specific health-related quality of life in PsA randomized controlled trials and observational studies. In this report, the group presents its plan to seek OMERACT endorsement for outcome measures that address the domains of MSK disease activity for enthesitis and dactylitis, physical function, fatigue, and structural damage following the OMERACT Filter 2.1 methodology.

Content and Face Validity and Feasibility of 5 Candidate Instruments for Psoriatic Arthritis Randomized Controlled Trials: The PsA OMERACT Core Set Workshop at the GRAPPA 2017 Annual Meeting.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Set working group is in the process of selecting core instruments for PsA clinical trials. During a 2-h workshop and breakout group discussions at the GRAPPA 2017 annual meeting in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, participants discussed the first set of candidate instruments to be taken through the OMERACT Filter 2.1 instrument selection process: 66/68 swollen/tender joint count (66/68JC), Spondyloarthritis Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) enthesitis index, patient's global assessment (GRAPPA and OMERACT formulations), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID) questionnaires 9 and 12, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue. Based on the assessment of domain match (content and face validity) and feasibility according to the OMERACT instrument selection criteria, the working group recommends continuing with appraisal of construct validity and discrimination for 66/68JC, SPARCC, PsAID 9 and 12, HAQ-DI, and FACIT-Fatigue. In addition, it recommends repeating the OMERACT Filter 2.1 process for patient global instruments because of insufficient votes. Additional sets of candidate instruments for the PsA core instrument set will be evaluated in a similar process.

International patient and physician consensus on a psoriatic arthritis core outcome set for clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To identify a core set of domains (outcomes) to be measured in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) clinical trials that represent both patients' and physicians' priorities. METHODS: We conducted (1) a systematic literature review (SLR) of domains assessed in PsA; (2) international focus groups to identify domains important to people with PsA; (3) two international surveys with patients and physicians to prioritise domains; (4) an international face-to-face meeting with patients and physicians using the nominal group technique method to agree on the most important domains; and (5) presentation and votes at the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) conference in May 2016. All phases were performed in collaboration with patient research partners. RESULTS: We identified 39 unique domains through the SLR (24 domains) and international focus groups (34 domains). 50 patients and 75 physicians rated domain importance. During the March 2016 consensus meeting, 12 patients and 12 physicians agreed on 10 candidate domains. Then, 49 patients and 71 physicians rated these domains' importance. Five were important to >70% of both groups: musculoskeletal disease activity, skin disease activity, structural damage, pain and physical function. Fatigue and participation were important to >70% of patients. Patient global and systemic inflammation were important to >70% of physicians. The updated PsA core domain set endorsed by 90% of OMERACT 2016 participants includes musculoskeletal disease activity, skin disease activity, pain, patient global, physical function, health-related quality of life, fatigue and systemic inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: The updated PsA core domain set incorporates patients' and physicians' priorities and evolving PsA research. Next steps include identifying outcome measures that adequately assess these domains.