Impaired fertility in men diagnosed with inflammatory arthritis: results of a large multicentre study (iFAME-Fertility).

OBJECTIVES: The impact of inflammatory arthritis (IA) on male fertility remains unexplored. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of IA on several male fertility outcomes; fertility rate (number of biological children per man), family planning, childlessness and fertility problems. METHODS: We performed a multicentre cross-sectional study (iFAME-Fertility). Men with IA 40 years or older who indicated that their family size was complete were invited to participate. Participants completed a questionnaire that included demographic, medical and fertility-related questions. To analyse the impact of IA on fertility rate, patients were divided into groups according to the age at the time of their diagnosis: ≤30 years (before the peak of reproductive age), between 31 and 40 years (during the peak) and ≥41 years (after the peak). RESULTS: In total 628 participants diagnosed with IA were included. Men diagnosed ≤30 years had a lower mean number of children (1.32 (SD 1.14)) than men diagnosed between 31 and 40 years (1.60 (SD 1.35)) and men diagnosed ≥41 years (1.88 (SD 1.14)).This was statistically significant (p=0.0004).The percentages of men diagnosed ≤30 and 31-40 years who were involuntary childless (12.03% vs 10.34% vs 3.98%, p=0.001) and who reported having received medical evaluations for fertility problems (20.61%, 20.69% and 11.36%, p=0.027) were statistically significant higher than men diagnosed ≥41 years. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that shows that IA can impair male fertility. Men diagnosed with IA before and during the peak of reproductive age had a lower fertility rate, higher childlessness rate and more fertility problems. Increased awareness and more research into the causes behind this association are urgently needed.

Window of opportunity in psoriatic arthritis: the earlier the better?

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether there is a window of opportunity for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients and to assess which patient characteristics are associated with a longer diagnostic delay. METHODS: All newly diagnosed, disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-naïve PsA patients who participated in the Dutch southwest Early PsA cohoRt and had ≥3 years of follow-up were studied. First, total delay was calculated as the time period between symptom onset and PsA diagnosis made by a rheumatologist and then split into patient and physician delays. The total delay was categorised into short (<12 weeks), intermediate (12 weeks to 1 year) or long (>1 year). These groups were compared on clinical (Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) and Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) remission) and patient-reported outcomes during 3 years follow-up. RESULTS: 708 PsA patients were studied of whom 136 (19%), 237 (33%) and 335 (47%) had a short, intermediate and long total delay, respectively. Patient delay was 1.0 month and physician delay was 4.5 months. Patients with a short delay were more likely to achieve MDA (OR 2.55, p=0.003) and DAPSA remission (OR 2.35,p=0.004) compared with PsA patients with a long delay. Patient-reported outcomes showed numerical but non-significant differences between the short and long delay groups. Female patients and those presenting with enthesitis, chronic back pain or normal C-reactive protein (CRP) had a longer delay. CONCLUSIONS: In PsA, referral and diagnosis within 1 year is associated with better clinical outcomes, suggesting the presence of a window of opportunity. The most gain in referral could be obtained in physician delay and in females, patients with enthesitis, chronic back pain or normal CRP.