Enhancing current guidance for psoriatic arthritis and its comorbidities: recommendations from an expert consensus panel.

OBJECTIVES: Existing guidelines for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) cover many aspects of management. Some gaps remain relating to routine practice application. An expert group aimed to enhance current guidance and develop recommendations for clinical practice that are complementary to existing guidelines. METHODS: A steering committee comprising experienced, research-active clinicians in rheumatology, dermatology and primary care agreed on themes and relevant questions. A targeted literature review of PubMed and Embase following a PICO framework was conducted. At a second meeting, recommendations were drafted and subsequently an extended faculty comprising rheumatologists, dermatologists, primary care clinicians, specialist nurses, allied health professionals, non-clinical academic participants and members of the Brit-PACT patient group, was recruited. Consensus was achieved via an online voting platform when 75% of respondents agreed in the range of 7-9 on a 9-point scale. RESULTS: The guidance comprised 34 statements covering four PsA themes. Diagnosis focused on strategies to identify PsA early and refer appropriately, assessment of diagnostic indicators, use of screening tools and use of imaging. Disease assessment centred on holistic consideration of disease activity, physical functioning and impact from a patient perspective, and on how to implement shared decision-making. For comorbidities, recommendations included specific guidance for high-impact conditions such as depression and obesity. Management statements (which excluded extant guidance on pharmacological therapies) covered multidisciplinary team working, implementation of lifestyle modifications and treat-to-target strategies. Minimising corticosteroid use was recommended where feasible. CONCLUSION: The consensus group have made evidence-based best practice recommendations for the management of PsA to enhance the existing guidelines.

The protocol of a clinical effectiveness trial comparing standard step-up care, early combination DMARD therapy and early use of TNF inhibitors for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriatic arthritis: the 3-arm parallel group SPEED randomized controlled trial.

Objectives: The aim of the Severe Psoriatic arthritis - Early intervEntion to control Disease trial is to compare outcomes in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients with poor prognostic factors treated with standard step-up conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), combination csDMARDs or a course of early biologics. Design: This multicentre UK trial was embedded within the MONITOR-PsA cohort, which uses a trial within cohort design. Methods and analysis: Patients with newly diagnosed PsA and at least one poor prognostic factor (polyarthritis, C-reactive protein >5 mg/dL, health assessment questionnaire >1, radiographic erosions) were randomized equally and open-label to either standard care with 'step-up' csDMARD therapy, initial therapy with combination csDMARDs (methotrexate with either sulfasalazine or leflunomide) or to early biologics induction therapy (adalimumab plus methotrexate). The primary outcome is the PsA disease activity score at week 24. Ethics: Ethical approval for the study was granted by the South Central Research Ethics Committee (ref 18/SC/0107). Discussion: Treatment recommendations for PsA suggest more intensive therapy for those with poor prognostic factors but there are no studies that have previously used prognostic factors to guide therapy. Applying initial intensive therapy has shown improved outcomes in other inflammatory arthritides but has never been tried in PsA. Combination csDMARDs have shown some superiority over single therapies but there are limited data and concerns about side effects. Early use of biologics has also been shown to be superior to methotrexate but these drugs are costly and not usually funded first line. However, if a short course of biologics can rapidly suppress inflammation allowing treatment to be withdrawn and response maintained on methotrexate, this may be a cost-effective model for early use. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03739853) and EudraCT (2017-004542-24).

Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor neutralisation in patients with axial spondyloarthritis in the UK (NAMASTE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) is a proinflammatory cytokine overproduced in several inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, including axial spondyloarthritis. Namilumab is a human IgG1 monoclonal anti-GM-CSF antibody that potently neutralises human GM-CSF. We aimed to assess the efficacy of namilumab in participants with moderate-to-severe active axial spondyloarthritis. METHODS: This proof-of-concept, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2, Bayesian (NAMASTE) trial was done at nine hospitals in the UK. Participants aged 18-75 years with axial spondyloarthritis, meeting the Assessment in SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) criteria and the ASAS-defined MRI criteria, with active disease as defined by a Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), were eligible. Those who had inadequately responded or had intolerance to previous treatment with an anti-TNF agent were included. Participants were randomly assigned (6:1) to receive subcutaneous namilumab 150 mg or placebo at weeks 0, 2, 6, and 10. Participants, site staff (except pharmacy staff), and central study staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants who had an ASAS ≥20% improvement (ASAS20) clinical response at week 12 in the full analysis set (all randomly assigned participants). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03622658). FINDINGS: From Sept 6, 2018, to July 25, 2019, 60 patients with moderate-to-severe active axial spondyloarthritis were assessed for eligibility and 42 were randomly assigned to receive namilumab (n=36) or placebo (n=six). The mean age of participants was 39·5 years (SD 13·3), 17 were women, 25 were men, 39 were White, and seven had previously received anti-TNF therapy. The primary endpoint was not met. At week 12, the proportion of patients who had an ASAS20 clinical response was lower in the namilumab group (14 of 36) than in the placebo group (three of six; estimated between-group difference 6·8%). The Bayesian posterior probability η was 0·72 (>0·927 suggests high clinical significance). The rates of any treatment-emergent adverse events in the namilumab group were similar to those in the placebo group (31 vs five). INTERPRETATION: Namilumab did not show efficacy compared with placebo in patients with active axial spondyloarthritis, but the treatment was generally well tolerated. FUNDING: Izana Bioscience, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), NIHR Birmingham BRC, and Clinical Research Facility.

The prescription and monitoring of conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs: British Society for Rheumatology guideline scope.

This guideline will provide up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations on the safe use of non-biologic DMARDs, also called conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARD), across the full spectrum of autoimmune rheumatic diseases. The guideline will update the guideline published in 2017 and will be expanded to include people of all ages. Updated information on the monitoring of DMARDs and vaccinations will be included. The guideline will be developed using the methods and processes described in the British Society for Rheumatology's 'Creating clinical guidelines: our protocol', updated 2023.