Erosive hand osteoarthritis and sarcopenia: data from Osteoarthritis Initiative cohort.

OBJECTIVES: There is no evidence linking specific osteoarthritis (OA) types, such as erosive hand OA (EHOA), with distant generalised changes in muscle composition (sarcopenia), which can potentially be modified. This study pioneers the exploration of the association between EHOA and sarcopenia, both of which are predominantly observed in the older adults. METHODS: Using the Osteoarthritis Initiative cohort, we selected hand OA (modified Kellgren and Lawrence (grade ≥2 in ≥1 hand joint) participants with radiographic central erosions in ≥1 joints (EHOA group) and propensity score-matched hand OA participants with no erosion (non-EHOA group). MRI biomarkers of thigh muscles were measured at baseline, year 2 and year 4 using a validated deep-learning algorithm. To adjust for 'local' effects of coexisting knee OA (KOA), participants were further stratified according to presence of radiographic KOA. The outcomes were the differences between EHOA and non-EHOA groups in the 4-year rate of change for both intramuscular adipose tissue (intra-MAT) deposition and contractile (non-fat) area of thigh muscles. RESULTS: After adjusting for potential confounders, 844 thighs were included (211 EHOA:633 non-EHOA; 67.1±7.5 years, female/male:2.9). Multilevel mixed-effect regression models showed that EHOA is associated a different 4-year rate of change in intra-MAT deposition (estimate, 95% CI: 71.5 mm2/4 years, 27.9 to 115.1) and contractile area (estimate, 95% CI: -1.8%/4 years, -2.6 to -1.0) of the Quadriceps. Stratified analyses showed that EHOA presence is associated with adverse changes in thigh muscle quality only in participants without KOA. CONCLUSIONS: EHOA is associated with longitudinal worsening of thigh muscle composition only in participants without concomitant KOA. Further research is needed to understand the systemic factors linking EHOA and sarcopenia, which unlike EHOA is modifiable through specific interventions.

2023 EULAR classification criteria for hand osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to develop classification criteria for overall hand osteoarthritis (OA), interphalangeal OA and thumb base OA based on self-reported data and radiographic features. METHODS: The classification criteria sets were developed in three phases. In phase 1, we identified criteria that discriminated hand OA from controls. In phase 2, we used a consensus-based decision analysis approach to derive a clinician-based evaluation of the relative importance of the criteria. In phase 3, we refined the scoring system, determined the cut-offs for disease classification and compared the sensitivity and specificity of the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) criteria with the 1990 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria. RESULTS: In persons with hand symptoms and no other disease (including psoriasis) or acute injury that can explain the hand symptoms (mandatory criteria), hand OA can be classified based on age, duration of morning stiffness, number of joints with osteophytes and joint space narrowing, and concordance between symptoms and radiographic findings. Using a sum of scores based on each diagnostic element, overall hand OA can be classified if a person achieves 9 or more points on a 0-15 scale. The cut-off for interphalangeal OA and thumb base OA is 8 points. While the EULAR criteria demonstrated better sensitivity than the ACR criteria in the phase 1 data set, the performance of the two criteria sets was similar in two external cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: International experts developed the EULAR criteria to classify overall hand OA, interphalangeal OA and thumb base OA in clinical studies using a rigorous methodology.

A perspective on the evolution of semi-quantitative MRI assessment of osteoarthritis: Past, present and future.

OBJECTIVE: This perspective describes the evolution of semi-quantitative (SQ) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in characterizing structural tissue pathologies in osteoarthritis (OA) imaging research over the last 30 years. METHODS: Authors selected representative articles from a PubMed search to illustrate key steps in SQ MRI development, validation, and application. Topics include main scoring systems, reading techniques, responsiveness, reliability, technical considerations, and potential impact of artificial intelligence (AI). RESULTS: Based on original research published between 1993 and 2023, this article introduces available scoring systems, including but not limited to Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (WORMS) as the first system for whole-organ assessment of the knee and the now commonly used MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score (MOAKS) instrument. Specific systems for distinct OA subtypes or applications have been developed as well as MRI scoring instruments for other joints such as the hip, the fingers or thumb base. SQ assessment has proven to be valid, reliable, and responsive, aiding OA investigators in understanding the natural history of the disease and helping to detect response to treatment. AI may aid phenotypic characterization in the future. SQ MRI assessment's role is increasing in eligibility and safety evaluation in knee OA clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence supports the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of SQ MRI assessment in understanding structural aspects of disease onset and progression. SQ scoring has helped explain associations between structural tissue damage and clinical manifestations, as well as disease progression. While AI may support human readers to more efficiently perform SQ assessment in the future, its current application in clinical trials still requires validation and regulatory approval.

Assessing the association of epigenetic age acceleration with osteoarthritis in the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study (MOST).

PURPOSE: Advancing age is one of the strongest risk factors for osteoarthritis (OA). DNA methylation-based measures of epigenetic age acceleration may provide insights into mechanisms underlying OA. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study in a subset of 671 participants ages 45-69 years with no or mild radiographic knee OA. DNA methylation was assessed with the Illumina Infinium MethylationEPIC 850K array. We calculated predicted epigenetic age according to Hannum, Horvath, PhenoAge, and GrimAge epigenetic clocks, then regressed epigenetic age on chronological age to obtain the residuals. Associations between the residuals and knee, hand, and multi-joint OA were assessed using logistic regression, adjusted for chronological age, sex, clinical site, smoking status, and race. RESULTS: Twenty-three percent met criteria for radiographic hand OA, 25% met criteria for radiographic knee OA, and 8% met criteria for multi-joint OA. Mean chronological age (SD) was 58.4 (6.7) years. Mean predicted epigenetic age (SD) according to Horvath, Hannum, PhenoAge, and GrimAge epigenetic clocks was 64.9 (6.4), 68.6 (5.9), 50.5 (7.7), and 67.0 (6.2), respectively. Horvath epigenetic age acceleration was not associated with an increased odds of hand OA, odds ratio (95% confidence intervals) = 1.03 (0.99-1.08), with similar findings for knee and multi-joint OA. We found similar magnitudes of associations for Hannum epigenetic age, PhenoAge, and GrimAge acceleration compared to Horvath epigenetic age acceleration. CONCLUSIONS: Epigenetic age acceleration as measured by various well-validated epigenetic clocks based on DNA methylation was not associated with increased risk of knee, hand, or multi-joint OA independent of chronological age.

Hand osteoarthritis phenotypes based on a biopsychosocial approach, and their associations with cross-sectional and longitudinal pain.

OBJECTIVE: Hand osteoarthritis (OA) pain is characterized as heterogeneous and multifactorial. Differences in pain may be explained by underlying phenotypes, which have not been previously explored DESIGN: Latent class analysis determined classes of participants with hand OA from the Nor-Hand study baseline examination (2016-17) based on a biopsychosocial framework. Outcomes were hand and overall bodily pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale, 0-10) at baseline and follow-up (2019-21), The relations of the classes to pain outcomes at baseline, follow-up, and change over time were analysed in separate models by linear regression, using the overall healthiest class as reference. RESULTS: Five classes differing in radiographic hand OA burden and OA burden in the lower extremities by ultrasound, demographic factors, psychosocial burden and pain sensitization was identified. Persons with the least severe OA but higher burden of biopsychosocial factors reported the most hand pain (beta 3.65, 95% CI 2.53, 4.75). Pain was less pronounced in persons with the most severe hand OA but low burden of biopsychosocial factors (beta 1.03, 95% CI 0.41, 1.65). Results were similar for overall bodily pain and at follow-up. Changes in pain were small, but the association between a separate class defined by higher levels of biopsychosocial burden and pain changes was significant. CONCLUSION: The five hand OA phenotypes were associated with pain at baseline and 3.5 years later. The phenotype with the least OA severity, but higher burden of biopsychosocial factors reported more pain than the phenotype with the most severe OA, reflecting the symptom-structure discordance of the hand OA pain experience.

Associations of inflammatory and metabolic biomarkers with incident erosive hand osteoarthritis in the osteoarthritis initiative cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Erosive hand osteoarthritis (eHOA) is a subtype of hand osteoarthritis (OA) that develops in finger joints with pre-existing OA and is differentiated by clinical characteristics (hand pain/disability, inflammation, and erosions) that suggest inflammatory or metabolic processes. METHOD: This was a longitudinal nested case-cohort design among Osteoarthritis Initiative participants who had hand radiographs at baseline and 48-months, and biospecimens collected at baseline. We classified incident radiographic eHOA in individuals with ≥1 joint with Kellgren-Lawrence ≥2 and a central erosion present at 48-months but not at baseline. We used a random representative sample (n = 1282) for comparison. We measured serum biomarkers of inflammation, insulin resistance and dysglycemia, and adipokines using immunoassays and enzymatic colorimetric procedures, blinded to case status. RESULTS: Eighty-six participants developed incident radiographic eHOA. In the multivariate analyses adjusted for age, gender, race, smoking, and body mass index, and after adjustment for multiple analyses, incident radiographic eHOA was associated with elevated levels of interleukin-7 (risk ratio (RR) per SD = 1.30 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09, 1.55] p trend 0.01). CONCLUSION: This exploratory study suggests an association of elevated interleukin-7, an inflammatory cytokine, with incident eHOA, while other cytokines or biomarkers of metabolic inflammation were not associated. Interleukin-7 may mediate inflammation and tissue damage in susceptible osteoarthritic finger joints and participate in erosive progression.

Associations between pain sensitization and measures of physical function in people with hand osteoarthritis: Results from the Nor-Hand study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether pain sensitization is associated with hand and lower extremity function in people with hand osteoarthritis (OA) in the Nor-Hand study. DESIGN: Pain sensitization was assessed by pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and temporal summation (TS). Hand function was assessed by Australian/Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index (AUSCAN) (range: 0-36), grip strength and Moberg pick-up test, and lower extremity function was assessed by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (range: 0-68), 30-s chair stand test, and 40-m walk test. We examined whether sex-standardized PPT and TS values were cross-sectionally associated with measures of physical function using linear regression analyses. Beta coefficients were presented per sex-specific standard deviation of PPT and TS. The mediating effect of pain was examined by causal-inference based mediation analysis. RESULTS: In 206 participants, higher PPTs at/near the hand, indicative of less peripheral and/or central pain sensitization, were associated with greater grip strength and better self-reported hand function (beta for PPT at finger joint on AUSCAN function: -1.41, 95% CI -2.40, -0.42). Higher PPTs at/near the hand, near the knee and at trapezius were associated with lower extremity function, although not statistically significant for all outcomes. Self-reported pain severity mediated the effect of PPT on self-reported function. TS was not associated with hand or lower extremity function. CONCLUSION: Peripheral sensitization, and possibly central sensitization, was associated with impaired function. Effects of PPTs on self-reported function were mediated by self-reported pain, whereas there might be a direct effect of sensitization or effects through other mediators on performance-based function.

A scoping review of how early-stage knee osteoarthritis has been defined.

BACKGROUND: Early-stage knee osteoarthritis (KOA) classification criteria will enable consistent identification and trial recruitment of individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA) at an earlier stage of the disease when interventions may be more effective. Toward this goal, we identified how early-stage KOA has been defined in the literature. METHODS: We performed a scoping literature review in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science, including human studies where early-stage KOA was included as a study population or outcome. Extracted data included demographics, symptoms/history, examination, laboratory, imaging, performance-based measures, gross inspection/histopathologic domains, and the components of composite early-stage KOA definitions. RESULTS: Of 6142 articles identified, 211 were included in data synthesis. An early-stage KOA definition was used for study inclusion in 194 studies, to define study outcomes in 11 studies, and in the context of new criteria development or validation in six studies. The element most often used to define early-stage KOA was Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade (151 studies, 72%), followed by symptoms (118 studies, 56%), and demographic characteristics (73 studies, 35%); 14 studies (6%) used previously developed early-stage KOA composite criteria. Among studies defining early-stage KOA radiographically, 52 studies defined early-stage KOA by KL grade alone; of these 52, 44 (85%) studies included individuals with KL grade 2 or higher in their definitions. CONCLUSION: Early-stage KOA is variably defined in the published literature. Most studies included KL grades of 2 or higher within their definitions, which reflects established or later-stage OA. These findings underscore the need to develop and validate classification criteria for early-stage KOA.

Hand joints without radiographic osteoarthritis maintain their joint space width over 4 years despite what's happening elsewhere in the hand.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine if hand osteoarthritis is characterized by systemic cartilage loss by assessing if radiographically normal joints had greater joint space width (JSW) loss during four years in hands with incident or prevalent osteoarthritis elsewhere in the hand compared with hands without osteoarthritis. METHODS: We used semi-automated software to measure JSW in the distal and proximal interphalangeal joints of 3,368 participants in the Osteoarthritis Initiative who had baseline and 48-month hand radiographs. A reader scored 16 hand joints (including the thumb-base) for Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) Grade. A joint had osteoarthritis if scored as KL ≥ 2. We identified three groups based on longitudinal hand osteoarthritis status: 1) no hand osteoarthritis (KL < 2 in all 16 joints) at the baseline and 48-month visits, 2) incident hand osteoarthritis (KL < 2in all 16 joints at baseline and then ≥1 joint with KL ≥ 2 at 48-months), and 3) prevalent hand osteoarthritis (≥1 joint with KL ≥ 2 at baseline and 48-months). We then assessed if JSW in radiographically normal joints (KL = 0) differed across these three groups. We calculated unpooled effect sizes to help interpret the differences between groups. RESULTS: We observed small differences in JSW loss that are unlikely to be clinically important between radiographically normal joints between those without hand osteoarthritis (n = 1054) and those with incident (n = 102) or prevalent hand osteoarthritis (n = 2212) (effect size range: -0.01 to 0.24). These findings were robust when examining JSW loss dichotomized based on meaningful change and in other secondary analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Hand osteoarthritis is not a systemic disease of cartilage.

Exploring the differences between radiographic joint space width and MRI cartilage thickness changes using data from the IMI-APPROACH cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Longitudinal weight-bearing radiographic joint space width (JSW) and non-weight-bearing MRI-based cartilage thickness changes often show weak correlations. The current objective was to investigate these correlations, and to explore the influence of different factors that could contribute to longitudinal differences between the two methods. METHODS: The current study included 178 participants with medial osteoarthritis (OA) out of the 297 knee OA participants enrolled in the IMI-APPROACH cohort. Changes over 2 years in medial JSW (ΔJSWmed), minimum JSW (ΔJSWmin), and medial femorotibial cartilage thickness (ΔMFTC) were assessed using linear regression, using measurements from radiographs and MRI acquired at baseline, 6 months, and 1 and 2 years. Pearson R correlations were calculated. The influence of cartilage quality (T2 mapping), meniscal extrusion (MOAKS scoring), potential pain-induced unloading (difference in knee-specific pain scores), and increased loading (BMI) on the correlations was analyzed by dividing participants in groups based on each factor separately, and comparing correlations (slope and strength) between groups using linear regression models. RESULT: Correlations between ΔMFTC and ΔJSWmed and ΔJSWmin were statistically significant (p < 0.004) but weak (R < 0.35). Correlations were significantly different between groups based on cartilage quality and on meniscal extrusion: only patients with the lowest T2 values and with meniscal extrusion showed significant moderate correlations. Pain-induced unloading or BMI-induced loading did not influence correlations. CONCLUSIONS: While the amount of loading does not seem to make a difference, weight-bearing radiographic JSW changes are a better reflection of non-weight-bearing MRI cartilage thickness changes in knees with higher quality cartilage and with meniscal extrusion.

Osteoarthritis endotype discovery via clustering of biochemical marker data.

OBJECTIVES: Osteoarthritis (OA) patient stratification is an important challenge to design tailored treatments and drive drug development. Biochemical markers reflecting joint tissue turnover were measured in the IMI-APPROACH cohort at baseline and analysed using a machine learning approach in order to study OA-dominant phenotypes driven by the endotype-related clusters and discover the driving features and their disease-context meaning. METHOD: Data quality assessment was performed to design appropriate data preprocessing techniques. The k-means clustering algorithm was used to find dominant subgroups of patients based on the biochemical markers data. Classification models were trained to predict cluster membership, and Explainable AI techniques were used to interpret these to reveal the driving factors behind each cluster and identify phenotypes. Statistical analysis was performed to compare differences between clusters with respect to other markers in the IMI-APPROACH cohort and the longitudinal disease progression. RESULTS: Three dominant endotypes were found, associated with three phenotypes: C1) low tissue turnover (low repair and articular cartilage/subchondral bone turnover), C2) structural damage (high bone formation/resorption, cartilage degradation) and C3) systemic inflammation (joint tissue degradation, inflammation, cartilage degradation). The method achieved consistent results in the FNIH/OAI cohort. C1 had the highest proportion of non-progressors. C2 was mostly linked to longitudinal structural progression, and C3 was linked to sustained or progressive pain. CONCLUSIONS: This work supports the existence of differential phenotypes in OA. The biomarker approach could potentially drive stratification for OA clinical trials and contribute to precision medicine strategies for OA progression in the future. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03883568.

Associations between joint pathologies and central sensitization in persons with hand osteoarthritis: results from the Nor-Hand study.

OBJECTIVE: Pain sensitization is associated with pain severity in persons with hand OA. What contributes to pain sensitization is unclear. This study explores whether hand OA pathologies and symptom duration are related to central sensitization. METHOD: Participants with hand OA in the Nor-Hand study underwent bilateral hand radiography and US examination. Central sensitization was assessed with pressure pain thresholds (PPT) at remote sites (wrist, trapezius and tibialis anterior muscles) and temporal summation. We examined whether hand OA pathologies, independent of each other, including structural severity (Kellgren-Lawrence sum score, presence of erosive hand OA), inflammatory severity (greyscale synovitis and power Doppler activity sum scores) and symptom duration, were related to central sensitization, adjusting for age, sex, BMI, comorbidities and OA-severity of knee/hip. RESULTS: In 291 participants (88% women, median age 61 years, interquartile range 57-66 years) Kellgren-Lawrence, greyscale synovitis and power Doppler activity sum scores were not associated with lower PPTs at remote sites. Persons with erosive hand OA had lower PPTs at the wrist (adjusted beta -0.75, 95% CI -1.32, -0.19) and tibialis anterior (adjusted beta -0.82, 95% CI -1.54, -0.09) and had greater temporal summation (adjusted beta 0.56, 95% CI 0.12, 1.01) compared with persons with non-erosive disease. No associations were found for symptom duration. CONCLUSIONS: A person's overall amount of structural or inflammatory hand OA pathologies was not associated with central sensitization. Although persons with erosive hand OA showed greater signs of central sensitization, the small differences suggest that central sensitization is mainly explained by factors other than joint pathologies.

Predicted and actual 2-year structural and pain progression in the IMI-APPROACH knee osteoarthritis cohort.

OBJECTIVES: The IMI-APPROACH knee osteoarthritis study used machine learning (ML) to predict structural and/or pain progression, expressed by a structural (S) and pain (P) predicted-progression score, to select patients from existing cohorts. This study evaluates the actual 2-year progression within the IMI-APPROACH, in relation to the predicted-progression scores. METHODS: Actual structural progression was measured using minimum joint space width (minJSW). Actual pain (progression) was evaluated using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS) pain questionnaire. Progression was presented as actual change (Δ) after 2 years, and as progression over 2 years based on a per patient fitted regression line using 0, 0.5, 1 and 2-year values. Differences in predicted-progression scores between actual progressors and non-progressors were evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed and corresponding area under the curve (AUC) reported. Using Youden's index, optimal cut-offs were chosen to enable evaluation of both predicted-progression scores to identify actual progressors. RESULTS: Actual structural progressors were initially assigned higher S predicted-progression scores compared with structural non-progressors. Likewise, actual pain progressors were assigned higher P predicted-progression scores compared with pain non-progressors. The AUC-ROC for the S predicted-progression score to identify actual structural progressors was poor (0.612 and 0.599 for Δ and regression minJSW, respectively). The AUC-ROC for the P predicted-progression score to identify actual pain progressors were good (0.817 and 0.830 for Δ and regression KOOS pain, respectively). CONCLUSION: The S and P predicted-progression scores as provided by the ML models developed and used for the selection of IMI-APPROACH patients were to some degree able to distinguish between actual progressors and non-progressors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03883568.

Management of hand osteoarthritis: from an US evidence-based medicine guideline to a European patient-centric approach.

Hand osteoarthritis is the most common joint condition and is associated with significant morbidity. It is of paramount importance that patients are thoroughly assessed and examined when complaining of hand stiffness, pain, deformity or disability and that the patient's concerns and expectations are addressed by the healthcare professional. In 2019 the American College of Rheumatology and Arthritis Foundation (ACR/AF) produced guidelines which included recommendations for the treatment of hand osteoarthritis. An ESCEO expert working group (including patients) was convened and composed this paper with the aim to assess whether these guidelines were appropriate for the treatment of hand osteoarthritis therapy in Europe and whether they met with the ESCEO patient-centered approach. Indeed, patients are the key stakeholders in healthcare and eliciting the patient's preference is vital in the context of an individual consultation but also for informing research and policy-making. The patients involved in this working group emphasised the often-neglected area of aesthetic changes in hand osteoarthritis, importance of developing pharmacological therapies which can alleviate pain and disability and the need of the freedom to choose which approach (out of pharmacological, surgical or non-pharmacological) they wished to pursue. Following robust appraisal, it was recommended that the ACR/AF guidelines were suitable for a European context (as described within the body of the manuscript) and it was emphasised that patient preferences are key to the success of individual consultations, future research and future policy-making.

Structural tissue damage and 24-month progression of semi-quantitative MRI biomarkers of knee osteoarthritis in the IMI-APPROACH cohort.

BACKGROUND: The IMI-APPROACH cohort is an exploratory, 5-centre, 2-year prospective follow-up study of knee osteoarthritis (OA). Aim was to describe baseline multi-tissue semiquantitative MRI evaluation of index knees and to describe change for different MRI features based on number of subregion-approaches and change in maximum grades over a 24-month period. METHODS: MRIs were acquired using 1.5 T or 3 T MRI systems and assessed using the semi-quantitative MRI OA Knee Scoring (MOAKS) system. MRIs were read at baseline and 24-months for cartilage damage, bone marrow lesions (BML), osteophytes, meniscal damage and extrusion, and Hoffa- and effusion-synovitis. In descriptive fashion, the frequencies of MRI features at baseline and change in these imaging biomarkers over time are presented for the entire sample in a subregional and maximum score approach for most features. Differences between knees without and with structural radiographic (R) OA are analyzed in addition. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-nine participants had readable baseline MRI examinations. Mean age was 66.6 ± 7.1 years and participants had a mean BMI of 28.1 ± 5.3 kg/m2. The majority (55.3%) of included knees had radiographic OA. Any change in total cartilage MOAKS score was observed in 53.1% considering full-grade changes only, and in 73.9% including full-grade and within-grade changes. Any medial cartilage progression was seen in 23.9% and any lateral progression on 22.1%. While for the medial and lateral compartments numbers of subregions with improvement and worsening of BMLs were very similar, for the PFJ more improvement was observed compared to worsening (15.5% vs. 9.0%). Including within grade changes, the number of knees showing BML worsening increased from 42.2% to 55.6%. While for some features 24-months change was rare, frequency of change was much more common in knees with vs. without ROA (e.g. worsening of total MOAKS score cartilage in 68.4% of ROA knees vs. 36.7% of no-ROA knees, and 60.7% vs. 21.8% for an increase in maximum BML score per knee). CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of MRI-detected structural pathologies was present in the IMI-APPROACH cohort. Baseline prevalence and change of features was substantially more common in the ROA subgroup compared to the knees without ROA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identification: NCT03883568.

Relationship between motion, using the GaitSmartTM system, and radiographic knee osteoarthritis: an explorative analysis in the IMI-APPROACH cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To assess underlying domains measured by GaitSmartTMparameters and whether these are additional to established OA markers including patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and radiographic parameters, and to evaluate if GaitSmart analysis is related to the presence and severity of radiographic knee OA. METHODS: GaitSmart analysis was performed during baseline visits of participants of the APPROACH cohort (n = 297). Principal component analyses (PCA) were performed to explore structure in relationships between GaitSmart parameters alone and in addition to radiographic parameters and PROMs. Logistic and linear regression analyses were performed to analyse the relationship of GaitSmart with the presence (Kellgren and Lawrence grade ≥2 in at least one knee) and severity of radiographic OA (ROA). RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty-four successful GaitSmart analyses were performed. The PCA identified five underlying GaitSmart domains. Radiographic parameters and PROMs formed additional domains indicating that GaitSmart largely measures separate concepts. Several GaitSmart domains were related to the presence of ROA as well as the severity of joint damage in addition to demographics and PROMs with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.724 and explained variances (adjusted R2) of 0.107, 0.132 and 0.147 for minimum joint space width, osteophyte area and mean subchondral bone density, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: GaitSmart analysis provides additional information over established OA outcomes. GaitSmart parameters are also associated with the presence of ROA and extent of radiographic severity over demographics and PROMS. These results indicate that GaitsmartTM may be an additional outcome measure for the evaluation of OA.

Task shifting in the care for patients with hand osteoarthritis. Protocol for a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Current health policy states that patients with osteoarthritis (OA) should mainly be managed in primary health care. Still, research shows that patients with hand OA have poor access to recommended treatment in primary care, and in Norway, they are increasingly referred to rheumatologist consultations in specialist care. In this randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, we will test if a new model, where patients referred to consultation in specialist health care receive their first consultation by an occupational therapy (OT) specialist, is as safe and effective as the traditional model, where they receive their first consultation by a rheumatologist. More specifically, we will answer the following questions: 1. What are the characteristics of patients with hand OA referred to specialist health care with regards to joint affection, disease activity, symptoms and function? 2. Is OT-led hand OA care as effective and safe as rheumatologist-led care with respect to treatment response, disease activity, symptoms, function and patient satisfaction? 3. Is OT-led hand OA care equal to, or more cost effective than rheumatologist-led care? 4. Which factors, regardless of hand OA care, predict improvement 6 and 12 months after baseline? METHODS: Participants will be patients with hand OA diagnosed by a general practitioner and referred for consultation at one of two Norwegian departments of rheumatology. Those who agree will attend a clinical assessment and report their symptoms and function in validated outcome measures, before they are randomly selected to receive their first consultation by an OT specialist (n = 200) or by a rheumatologist (n = 200). OTs may refer patients to a rheumatologist consultation and vice versa. The primary outcome will be the number of patients classified as OMERACT/OARSI-responders after six months. Secondary outcomes are pain, function and satisfaction with care over the twelve-month trial period. The analysis of the primary outcome will be done by logistic regression. A two-sided 95% confidence interval for the difference in response probability will be formed, and non-inferiority of OT-led care will be claimed if the upper endpoint of this interval does not exceed 15%. DISCUSSION: The findings will improve access to evidence-based management of people with hand OA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03102788. Registered April 6th, 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03102788?term=Kjeken&draw=2&rank=1 Date and version identifier: December 17th, 2020. First version.

Swollen, but not tender joints, are independently associated with ultrasound synovitis: results from a longitudinal observational study of patients with established rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Joint swelling and tenderness are considered a proxy for inflammation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). With ultrasound-detected inflammation as reference, our objectives were to explore on patient and joint level the associations between ultrasound synovitis and joint swelling, tenderness and patient-reported joint pain (PRJP). METHODS: 209 patients with established RA were examined six times during 12 months with assessment of 32 joints in upper/lower extremities for joint swelling/tenderness and Grey scale (GS)/power Doppler (PD) synovitis. PRJP was assessed on a manikin. Correlations between different sum scores were at each examination calculated using Spearman's rho (r), agreement at joint level was examined by Cohen's kappa and logistic regression models were used to explore the associations between joint assessment and GS/PD scores. RESULTS: At patient level, swollen joints were strongly correlated with GS/PD sum scores (r=0.64-0.88), while tender joints were primarily associated with PRJP (r=0.54-0.68). At joint level, GS/PD pathology had higher agreement with swelling (kappa 0.54-0.57) than tenderness (kappa 0.20-0.21) or PRJP (0.23-0.25). Higher percentages of joints were swollen according to increasing GS/PD scores, independently of joint tenderness. However, joints being tender, but not swollen, were not associated with GS/PD scores. Receiver operating curves showed swollen but not tender joints to be associated with GS/PD scores. CONCLUSIONS: Swollen joints were strongly associated with ultrasound detected synovitis at both patient and joint level, while this association was not found for tender joints. These results may question if tender joints reflect ongoing inflammation in established RA.

2018 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of hand osteoarthritis.

Since publication of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for management of hand osteoarthritis (OA) in 2007 new evidence has emerged. The aim was to update these recommendations. EULAR standardised operating procedures were followed. A systematic literature review was performed, collecting the evidence regarding all non-pharmacological, pharmacological and surgical treatment options for hand OA published to date. Based on the evidence and expert opinion from an international task force of 19 physicians, healthcare professionals and patients from 10 European countries formulated overarching principles and recommendations. Level of evidence, grade of recommendation and level of agreement were allocated to each statement. Five overarching principles and 10 recommendations were agreed on. The overarching principles cover treatment goals, information provision, individualisation of treatment, shared decision-making and the need to consider multidisciplinary and multimodal (non-pharmacological, pharmacological, surgical) treatment approaches. Recommendations 1-3 cover different non-pharmacological treatment options (education, assistive devices, exercises and orthoses). Recommendations 4-8 describe the role of different pharmacological treatments, including topical treatments (preferred over systemic treatments, topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) being first-line choice), oral analgesics (particularly NSAIDs to be considered for symptom relief for a limited duration), chondroitin sulfate (for symptom relief), intra-articular glucocorticoids (generally not recommended, consider for painful interphalangeal OA) and conventional/biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (discouraged). Considerations for surgery are described in recommendation 9. The last recommendation relates to follow-up. The presented EULAR recommendations provide up-to-date guidance on the management of hand OA, based on expert opinion and research evidence.

Phase IIa, placebo-controlled, randomised study of lutikizumab, an anti-interleukin-1α and anti-interleukin-1ß dual variable domain immunoglobulin, in patients with erosive hand osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the anti-interleukin (IL)-1α/ß dual variable domain immunoglobulin lutikizumab (ABT-981) in erosive hand osteoarthritis (HOA). METHODS: Patients with ≥1 erosive and ≥3 tender and/or swollen hand joints were randomised to placebo or lutikizumab 200 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in Australian/Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index (AUSCAN) pain subdomain score from baseline to 16 weeks. At baseline and week 26, subjects had bilateral hand radiographs and MRI of the hand with the greatest number of baseline tender and/or swollen joints. Continuous endpoints were assessed using analysis of covariance models, with treatment and country as main factors and baseline measurements as covariates. RESULTS: Of 132 randomised subjects, 1 received no study drug and 110 completed the study (placebo, 61/67 (91%); lutikizumab, 49/64 (77%)). AUSCAN pain was not different among subjects treated with lutikizumab versus placebo at week 16 (least squares mean difference, 1.5 (95% CI -1.9 to 5.0)). Other clinical and imaging endpoints were not different between lutikizumab and placebo. Lutikizumab significantly decreased serum high-sensitivity C reactive protein levels, IL-1α and IL-1ß levels, and blood neutrophils. Lutikizumab pharmacokinetics were consistent with phase I studies and not affected by antidrug antibodies. Injection site reactions and neutropaenia were more common in the lutikizumab group; discontinuations because of adverse events occurred more frequently with lutikizumab (4/64) versus placebo (1/67). CONCLUSION: Despite adequate blockade of IL-1, lutikizumab did not improve pain or imaging outcomes in erosive HOA compared with placebo.