Qualitative Research with Patients and Physicians to Assess Content Validity and Meaningful Change on ESSDAI and ESSPRI in Sjögren's.

INTRODUCTION: European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index (ESSDAI) is a clinician-reported outcome (ClinRO) instrument, assessing Sjögren's disease activity from the physician perspective. EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index (ESSPRI) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument, assessing patient-defined Sjögren's symptom severity. Both instruments are commonly used as clinical trial endpoints and have been psychometrically validated. However, qualitative evidence supporting content validity and what constitutes a meaningful change is limited. Qualitative evidence supporting Physician/Patient Global Assessment of disease activity and symptom severity (PhGA/PaGA) items used within anchor-based analyses for ESSDAI/ESSPRI is also lacking. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured, telephone/video interviews were conducted with patients with Sjögren's (n = 12) and physicians who specialise in Sjögren's (n = 10). Interviews explored: appropriateness of ESSDAI domain weights and meaningful improvements on domain/total scores from the physician perspective, appropriateness of ESSPRI's 2-week recall period from the patient/physician perspective, patients' perspectives on meaningful improvements in ESSPRI total scores, and patients'/physicians' interpretation of PhGA/PaGA items. RESULTS: Most ESSDAI domain weights were considered clinically appropriate. Generally, a one-category improvement in domain-level scores and a 3-point improvement in total ESSDAI scores were considered clinically meaningful. Most patients/physicians considered ESSPRI's 2-week recall period appropriate, and patients considered a 1-to-2-point ESSPRI total score improvement meaningful. PhGA/PaGA items developed for use as ESSDAI/ESSPRI anchors were consistently interpreted. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support use of ESSDAI and ESSPRI as Sjögren's clinical trials endpoints, as well as in clinical practice and other research settings. Qualitative data exploring meaningful change supports existing minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) thresholds.

European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index (ESSDAI) is an assessment used by physicians to measure how active Sjögren's is in individuals with the condition. EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index (ESSPRI) is a questionnaire completed by individuals with Sjögren's to assess the severity of their symptoms. It is important to show that ESSDAI and ESSPRI are considered appropriate by physicians and individuals with Sjögren's, respectively, and that ESSPRI is well understood by individuals with Sjögren's completing the questionnaire. Therefore, interviews were conducted with physicians who specialise in Sjögren's to explore the appropriateness of ESSDAI, the level of improvement on the assessment that would be important to individuals with Sjögren's, and the appropriateness of the ESSPRI recall period (i.e. whether it is acceptable to ask individuals to remember their symptoms over the past 2 weeks). Interviews were also conducted with individuals with Sjögren's to explore their understanding and relevance of ESSPRI (including the 2-week recall period) and the level of improvement on the questionnaire that would be important to them. Most physicians and patients considered ESSDAI and ESSPRI appropriate, supporting their use in a range of settings including Sjögren's clinical trials, clinical practice and other research settings. Most physicians reported that a 3-point improvement in ESSDAI total score would be meaningful to individuals with Sjögren's. Individuals with Sjögren's reported that a 1-to-2-point improvement in ESSPRI total score would be meaningful.

Content Validity of Sjögren's Syndrome Symptom Diary and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue in Patients with Sjögren's.

INTRODUCTION: Sjögren's Syndrome Symptom Diary (SSSD) and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) are patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments assessing Sjögren's symptoms. Original SSSD items have demonstrated content validity, however qualitative evidence supporting the updated 'tiredness' item and two new supplementary items is lacking. Although well established and validated in other rheumatic diseases, there is no qualitative evidence supporting content validity of FACIT-F in Sjögren's. This study addressed these evidence gaps to support use of SSSD and FACIT-F as clinical trial endpoints, in clinical practice and in other research settings. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with patients with Sjögren's (n = 12) and expert Sjögren's physicians (n = 10). Patient interviews explored content validity (e.g., understanding and relevance) of the new and updated SSSD items, perceptions of item and total score meaningful change on SSSD, and understanding and relevance of FACIT-F items. Physician interviews explored opinions on various SSSD scoring approaches. RESULTS: The new and updated SSSD items and FACIT-F demonstrated good content validity. Most patients considered a two-point improvement on most SSSD items meaningful, as well as a one- or two-point total score improvement. Most physicians reported tracking changes in patient responses to individual items as the most appropriate SSSD scoring approach. CONCLUSIONS: SSSD and FACIT-F are content valid in a Sjögren's population, meeting an important criterion to support their use as clinical trial endpoints, but also their use in clinical practice and other research settings. Qualitative data exploring meaningful change will be valuable in supporting psychometrically derived responder definitions.

Sjögren's Syndrome Symptom Diary (SSSD) and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) are questionnaires completed by individuals with Sjögren's to assess the severity of their symptoms. It is important to show that these questionnaires are well understood and relevant to the individuals who complete them. Therefore, interviews were conducted with individuals with Sjögren's to explore their understanding and relevance of new and updated SSSD questions. Similarly, the interviews explored whether the FACIT-F questionnaire was well understood and relevant to individuals with Sjögren's, as this has not been explored before. Interviews were also conducted with expert Sjögren's physicians to explore the best approach to scoring SSSD (e.g., calculating a total score or looking at scores on individual items). The new and updated SSSD questions and the FACIT-F questionnaire were well understood and considered relevant by most individuals with Sjögren's. This suggests these questionnaires are appropriate for use in Sjögren's clinical trials, clinical practice, and other research settings. Most individuals with Sjögren's considered an improvement of two points on individual SSSD questions to be important, as well as a one- or two-point improvement in their total SSSD score. Most physicians agreed on the best approach to scoring SSSD.

Correlation Between Subjective and Objective Severity of Oral and Ocular Dryness in Primary Sjögren Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Sjögren syndrome (SS) is a common autoimmune disease primarily affecting the eyes and mouth. With no single gold standard test for its diagnosis, accurate identification of patients with SS continues to be challenging. We aimed to assess the correlation of ocular and oral symptoms of dryness with objective measures in order to evaluate reliability in the screening of primary SS (pSS) in clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of pre-screened pSS and sicca control patients assessed in the Multidisciplinary Sjögren's Clinic at the University Health Network in Toronto. The signs, symptoms, and objective measure of oral and ocular dryness and damage of each patient were prospectively recorded using a standardized protocol. RESULTS: Subjective measures of severity for xerophthalmia and xerostomia correlated in general with objective severity. Oral symptoms tend to have a stronger correlation with objective findings than ocular symptoms. Many patients with few or insignificant eye symptoms had profound ocular dryness and damage. Similarly, some patients with few or no symptoms of oral dryness had profound objective salivary hypofunction. The absence of symptoms does not rule out profound eye and mouth dryness or damage. CONCLUSION: Although objective measures of xerostomia may not be practical for general population screening, it is crucial that practicing specialists perform objective testing of all patients suspected of pSS, instead of relying on symptoms. Without objective testing, the physician cannot ensure the diagnosis of pSS and that the existence of significant damage is not overlooked and left untreated.

Comparison of Effect on Sicca Symptoms of Anticentromere Antibody-positive Sjögren Syndrome and Primary Sjögren Syndrome Alone.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether positive anticentromere antibody (ACA) serology affects the severity of sicca symptoms in patients with primary Sjögren syndrome (pSS). METHODS: Evaluation to detect subjective and objective sicca symptoms included questionnaires, physical examination, and pathology. Cases of pSS were classified according to the 2002 American-European Consensus Group (AECG) criteria. All patients were evaluated for presence of anti-Ro, anti-La, and ACA serology. Patients with pSS were categorized into ACA+ SS and ACA-SS. The groups were compared for measures of severity of oral and ocular sicca. RESULTS: The pSS group had 446 patients, of whom 26 were ACA+ SS. Subjective ocular sicca measured 7.0 ± 2.4 (out of 10) in ACA+ SS and 6.4 ± 2.6 in ACA-SS (p = 0.197). Objective ocular sicca measured 3.2 mm ± 1.8 mm/5 min in ACA+ SS and 4.2 mm ± 4.4 mm/5 min in ACA-SS (p = 0.038). Subjective oral sicca measured 8.5 ± 1.4 in ACA+ SS and 6.7 ± 2.4 in ACA-SS (p < 0.001). Objective oral sicca measured 0.1 ml ± 0.2 ml/15 min in ACA+ SS and 0.4 ml ± 1.0 ml/15 min in ACA-SS (p < 0.001). Only 35% of ACA+ patients with SS were anti-Ro-positive or anti-La-positive compared with 77% of the ACA-patients with SS (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in minor salivary gland fibrosis or focus scores between ACA+ SS and ACA-patients with SS. CONCLUSION: ACA+ SS is associated with more severe objective ocular sicca and more severe subjective and objective oral sicca compared to ACA-SS. The majority of ACA+ patients with SS meet AECG criteria for pSS despite negative serology for anti-Ro/La antibodies.

Fatigue severity in anti-nuclear antibody-positive individuals does not correlate with pro-inflammatory cytokine levels or predict imminent progression to symptomatic disease.

BACKGROUND: Fatigue is a common symptom of systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD). Patients with SARD have a protracted pre-clinical phase during which progressive immunologic derangements occur culminating in disease. In this study, we sought to determine when fatigue develops and whether its presence correlates with inflammatory factors or predicts disease progression. METHODS: Anti-nuclear antibody (ANA)-negative healthy controls (HCs) and ANA-positive participants with no criteria, at least one clinical criteria (undifferentiated connective tissue disease, UCTD), or meeting SARD classification criteria were recruited. Fatigue was assessed using a modified version of the FACIT-F questionnaire and the presence of fibromyalgia determined using a questionnaire based on the modified 2010 ACR criteria. Peripheral blood expression of five IFN-induced genes was quantified by NanoString and the levels of IL-1ß, IL-6, or TNF-α by ELISA. RESULTS: Fatigue was as prevalent and severe in individuals lacking SARD criteria as it was in UCTD and SARD. Overall, ~ 1/3 of ANA+ subjects met fibromyalgia criteria, with no differences between sub-groups. Although fatigue was more severe in these individuals, those lacking fibromyalgia remained significantly more fatigued than ANA- HC. However, even in these subjects, fatigue correlated with the widespread pain index and symptom severity scores on the fibromyalgia questionnaire. Fatigue was not associated with elevated cytokine levels in any of the ANA+ sub-groups and did not predict imminent disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue is common in ANA+ individuals lacking sufficient criteria for a SARD diagnosis, correlates with fibromyalgia-related symptoms, and is not associated with inflammation or predictive of disease progression.

Time to disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatment in rheumatoid arthritis and its predictors: a national, multicenter, retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) under rheumatologic care treated with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) within 6 months from symptom onset and the components of time to treatment and its predictors. METHODS: A historical inception cohort of 339 patients with RA randomly selected from 18 rheumatology practices was audited. The proportion that initiated DMARD treatment within 6 months from symptom onset was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Time to each component of the care pathway was estimated. Multivariable modeling was used to determine predictors of early treatment using 12 preselected variables available in the clinical charts. Bootstrapping was used to validate the model. RESULTS: Within 6 months from symptom onset, 41% (95% CI 36%-46%) of patients were treated with DMARD. The median time to treatment was 8.4 (interquartile range 3.8-24) months. Events preceding rheumatology referral accounted for 78.1% of the time to treatment. The most prominent predictor of increased time to treatment was a concomitant musculoskeletal condition, such as osteoarthritis or fibromyalgia. The significance of other variables was less consistent across the models investigated. Included variables accounted for 0.69 ± 0.03 of the variability in the model. CONCLUSION: Fewer than 50% of patients with RA are treated with DMARD within 6 months from symptom onset. Time to referral to rheumatology represents the greatest component delay to treatment. Concomitant musculoskeletal condition was the most prominent predictor of delayed initiation of DMARD. Implications of these and other findings warrant further investigation.

Early management of newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis by Canadian rheumatologists: a national, multicenter, retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To describe early rheumatologic management for newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Canada. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 339 randomly selected patients with RA diagnosed from 2001-2003 from 18 rheumatology practices was audited between 2005-2007. RESULTS: The most frequent initial disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) included hydroxychloroquine (55.5%) and methotrexate (40.1%). Initial therapy with multiple DMARD (15.6%) or single DMARD and corticosteroid combinations (30.7%) was infrequent. Formal assessment measures were noted infrequently, including the Health Assessment Questionnaire (34.6%) and Disease Activity Score for 28 joints (8.9%). CONCLUSION: Initial pharmacotherapy is consistent with guidelines from the period. The infrequent reporting of multiple DMARD combinations and formal assessment measures has implications for current clinical management and warrants contemporary reassessment.

Whole stimulated salivary flow: correlation with the pathology of inflammation and damage in minor salivary gland biopsy specimens from patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome but not patients with sicca.

OBJECTIVE: To determine which measure of the salivary flow rate, stimulated or unstimulated, is most strongly associated with pathologic changes in minor salivary gland (MSG) biopsy specimens, and to explore the correlation of salivary flow with oral surface damage, disease duration, and symptom severity in patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome (SS). METHODS: In all patients (n = 32), a biopsy of the MSG was performed, and stimulated salivary flow was assessed. Beginning in 2002, unstimulated salivary flow was also assessed. Scores for the severity of symptoms, according to the decayed/missing/filled teeth (DMF) index, were recorded. Associations between measures of salivary flow and covariates characterizing pathology were examined. RESULTS: A definite association between stimulated salivary flow and the MSG focus score, the grade of MSG fibrosis, the duration of dry mouth symptoms, and the DMF score was observed. In contrast, unstimulated salivary flow was not associated with fibrosis, atrophy, the DMF score, or the duration of dry mouth symptoms. In patients with primary SS, the DMF score was associated with pathologic changes in the MSG. Among patients with sicca, 57.9% had an abnormal unstimulated salivary flow rate (versus 82.4% of patients with primary SS), and 15.2% had an abnormal stimulated salivary flow rate (versus 61.8% of patients with primary SS). Among patients with sicca, neither stimulated salivary flow nor unstimulated salivary flow was associated with the degree of fibrosis or atrophy or with the DMF score. CONCLUSION: Compared with unstimulated salivary flow, stimulated salivary flow appeared to be a better measure of inflammation (according to the focus score) and fibrosis. In patients with sicca, the unstimulated salivary flow rate appeared to be abnormal more commonly compared with the stimulated salivary flow rate. In the future, stimulated salivary flow may serve as a noninvasive surrogate biomarker of inflammation and fibrosis as well as a measure of response to treatment in patients with primary SS.

Efficacy and safety of topical diclofenac containing dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) compared with those of topical placebo, DMSO vehicle and oral diclofenac for knee osteoarthritis.

While topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are considered safe, their long-term efficacy for osteoarthritis has been suspect. We conducted a 12-week, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized controlled trial of topical diclofenac (TDiclo) in a vehicle solution containing dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) in 775 subjects with radiologically confirmed, symptomatic primary osteoarthritis of the knee. This 5-arm study compared TDiclo with a placebo solution, the DMSO vehicle, oral diclofenac (ODiclo) and the combination of TDiclo+ODiclo for relieving the signs and symptoms of knee osteoarthritis. Subjects applied study solution, 40 drops four times daily, and took one study tablet daily for 12 weeks. Co-primary efficacy variables were WOMAC pain and physical function and a patient overall health assessment. Secondary variables were WOMAC stiffness and patient global assessment (PGA) of the knee osteoarthritis. TDiclo was superior to placebo for pain (-6.0 vs. -4.7, P=0.015), physical function (-15.8 vs. -12.3, P=0.034), overall health (-0.95 vs. -0.37, P<0.0001), and PGA (-1.36 vs. -1.01, P=0.016), and was superior to DMSO vehicle for all efficacy variables. No significant difference was observed between DMSO vehicle and placebo or between TDiclo and ODiclo. The commonest adverse event associated with TDiclo was dry skin (18.2%). Fewer digestive system and laboratory abnormalities were observed with TDiclo than with ODiclo. Addition of TDiclo to ODiclo did not increase the incidence of systemic adverse events. TDiclo in DMSO vehicle is an effective treatment option for knee osteoarthritis with efficacy similar to, but tolerability better than ODiclo. DMSO vehicle was no more efficacious than placebo.

Effect of a topical diclofenac solution for relieving symptoms of primary osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of osteoarthritis with oral NSAID therapy provides pain relief but carries a substantial risk of adverse effects. Topical NSAID therapy offers an alternative to oral treatment, with the potential for a reduced risk of side effects. The objective of this trial was to assess the safety and efficacy of a topical diclofenac solution in relieving the symptoms of primary osteoarthritis of the knee. METHODS: We identified 248 men and women from southern Ontario with primary osteoarthritis of the knee and at least moderate pain. The patients were randomly assigned to apply 1 of 3 solutions to their painful knee for 4 weeks: a topical diclofenac solution (1.5% wt/wt diclofenac sodium in a carrier containing dimethyl sulfoxide [DMSO]); a vehicle-control solution (the carrier containing DMSO but no diclofenac); and a placebo solution (a modified carrier with a token amount of DMSO for blinding purposes but no diclofenac). The primary efficacy end point was pain relief, measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) LK3.0 Osteoarthritis Index pain subscale. Secondary end points were improved physical function and reduced stiffness (measured by the WOMAC subscales), reduced pain on walking and patient global assessment (PGA). Safety was evaluated with clinical and laboratory assessments. RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat group the mean change (and 95% confidence interval [CI]) in pain score from baseline to final assessment was significantly greater for the patients who applied the topical diclofenac solution (-3.9 [- 4.8 to -2.9]) than for those who applied the vehicle-control solution (-2.5 [- 3.3 to -1.7]; p = 0.023) or the placebo solution (-2.5 [-3.3 to -1.7]; p = 0.016). For the secondary variables the topical diclofenac solution also revealed superiority to the vehicle-control and placebo solutions, leading to mean changes (and 95% CIs) of -11.6 (-14.7 to -8.4; p = 0.002 and 0.014, respectively) in physical function, -1.5 (-1.9 to -1.1; p = 0.015 and 0.002, respectively) in stiffness and -0.8 (-1.1 to -0.6; p = 0.003 and 0.015, respectively) in pain on walking. The PGA scores were significantly better for the patients who applied the topical diclofenac solution than for those who applied the other 2 solutions (p = 0.039 and 0.025, respectively). The topical diclofenac solution caused some skin irritation, mostly minor local skin dryness, in 30 (36%) of the 84 patients, but this led to discontinuation of treatment in only 5 (6%) of the cases. The incidence of gastrointestinal events did not differ between the treatment groups. No serious gastrointestinal or renal adverse events were reported or detected by means of laboratory testing. INTERPRETATION: This topical diclofenac solution can provide safe, site-specific treatment for osteoarthritic pain, with only minor local skin irritation and minimal systemic side effects.