Comparison of Composite Measure Remission Targets in Psoriatic Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify (1) which composite measure is the most stringent target of remission; and (2) which disease component target proves the most difficult to achieve in the different states of minimal disease activity (MDA), Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI), Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), and clinical DAPSA (cDAPSA) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: There were 258 patients with PsA recruited. Disease remission was evaluated comparing 4 different composite measures and using remission cutoffs as previously proposed (very low disease activity [VLDA], CPDAI ≤ 2, DAPSA ≤ 4, cDAPSA ≤ 4). RESULTS: Patients met VLDA criteria (MDA 7/7) in 9.0% of visits, DAPSA remission in 19.8%, cDAPSA remission in 23.4% and CPDAI remission in 30.2%. Of 258 patients, MDA criteria (≥ 5/7) were fulfilled in 46.5%. Of those in MDA, VLDA criteria were reached in 25.0%. Patients met the pain visual analog scale (VAS) target in 57.5% of visits when they were in MDA, 43.3% when in low disease activity (MDA 5-6/7), and 44.8% when in CPDAI remission. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that pain VAS was the least likely target to be achieved. Patients with inflammatory-type back pain had significantly higher pain scores; further, a significant relationship was seen between Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index and pain VAS. CONCLUSION: Based on our analysis, VLDA proved the most stringent target of disease remission in PsA compared to CPDAI, DAPSA, and cDAPSA. The pain VAS target of ≤ 1.5 cm was the most difficult component to achieve. CPDAI ≤ 2 was found to be the least stringent remission target; however, measurements of axial involvement, which contributed to the elevated pain VAS score in patients not achieving VLDA, were included as a domain in CPDAI only.

Using Acute-phase Reactants to Inform the Development of Instruments for the Updated Psoriatic Arthritis Core Outcome Measurement Set.

OBJECTIVE: Systemic inflammationˆ is assessed through measurement of acute-phase reactants such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). With few exceptions, most randomized controlled trials (RCT) have assessed acute-phase reactants (CRP and ESR) as part of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response criteria. As part of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) working group, we performed a systematic review of the literature to assess the performance of inflammatory biomarkers in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed and Embase was performed. The search included peer-reviewed articles and scientific meeting abstracts about RCT and longitudinal observational studies that assessed systemic inflammation using acute-phase reactants in PsA. Studies were assessed following the components of the OMERACT filter including construct validity, responsiveness, and predictive validity. RESULTS: There were 2764 articles retrieved, and 71 articles were included for this systematic review. Twenty-eight articles reported CRP and/or ESR separately, and the remaining articles reported CRP and/or ESR as part of the ACR response criteria. Studies assessing OMERACT responsiveness provided conflicting reports. Inflammatory biomarkers had construct validity for more active disease. Evidence suggests that an elevation of ESR predicts cardiovascular outcomes. CONCLUSION: Data regarding assessment of systemic inflammation using acute-phase reactants (CRP and ESR) are limited. There is only weak evidence to support normalization of these biomarkers in predicting good clinical outcomes/remission criteria. The predictive value for cardiovascular outcomes was generally good. Further studies to assess systemic inflammation in PsA using acute-phase reactants and other laboratory biomarkers are needed.

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.

Role of Methotrexate in the Management of Psoriatic Arthritis.

Methotrexate is known to be safe and efficacious in the management of rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis and thus has been used for the management of psoriatic arthritis despite a lack of evidence to support efficacy in psoriatic arthritis from randomized controlled trials. Although the largest randomized trial to date did not support its use as a disease-modifying therapy, observational studies have supported its role, and current treatment recommendations approve of its use as a first-line agent for the management of psoriatic arthritis with predominant peripheral arthritis. The first treat-to-target study in psoriatic arthritis, comparing tight control with standard care, has shown the efficacy of methotrexate as monotherapy in the first 12 weeks. This trial demonstrated the effectiveness of methotrexate with improvement in peripheral arthritis, skin and nail disease, enthesitis, and dactylitis over the course of 12 weeks. There is conflicting evidence about the role of combination (concomitant methotrexate and anti-tumor necrosis factor) therapy. However, drug survival and immunogenicity of certain anti-tumor necrosis factors seem to be better when used in combination with methotrexate. This report reviews the available evidence on the efficacy and effectiveness of methotrexate in psoriatic arthritis and its role in treating psoriatic arthritis to target, as well as in combination with biologic agents. Ideally, randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials evaluating methotrexate (using subcutaneous route of delivery) would provide much-needed clarity on the role of methotrexate in the management of psoriatic arthritis; however, issues around using a placebo in patients with active psoriatic arthritis may render such a trial unfeasible.

Abatacept reduces synovial regulatory T-cell expression in patients with psoriatic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to study changes in immunohistochemical expression markers of synovial and skin inflammation, clinical outcomes and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scores with abatacept treatment in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: Biological-treatment-naïve PsA patients with active disease including synovitis of a knee were enrolled in this single-centre, crossover study. Patients were randomised to receive intravenous abatacept 3 mg/kg of body weight or placebo infusion on day 1, 15 and 29; thereafter abatacept 10 mg/kg of body weight was administered every 28 days for 5 months. Clinical data were collected at each visit. Synovial biopsy of the involved knee was obtained at baseline and 2 and 6 months. MRI of the same knee and skin biopsy was performed prior to arthroscopy. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were recruited. Significant improvements in the joint-related measures were observed; 90% were European League Against Rheumatism criteria responders and 30% achieved psoriasis area severity index (PASI)50 at 6 months. Reduction in synovitis (P = 0.016) and vascularity (P = 0.039) macroscopic scores consistent with decrease in total MRI score (P = 0.016) were noticed. Abatacept decreased the immunohistological expression of FOXP3+ cells (P = 0.027), specifically the expression of CD4+FOXP3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs) (P = 0.008) in the synovium over 6 months. There was no significant clinical or immunohistological change in any of the skin measures. CONCLUSION: This is the first study assessing synovial and psoriatic skin immunpathological changes following abatacept treatment in PsA. Reduction in Treg expression in the synovium but not in the psoriatic lesion suggests abnormal Treg function in PsA with differential suppressive capacity in the synovium compared to the lesional skin. The results of this study demonstrate that abatacept 10 mg/kg of body weight might be an effective treatment option for joint disease in patients with PsA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Irish Health Products Regulatory Authority. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CT 900/489/1 - Abatacept (case number: 2077284, EudraCT Number: 2009-017525-19, Protocol number: 77777). Registered on 12 March 2010.

Defining Outcome Measures for Psoriatic Arthritis: A Report from 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) Core Set working group recently published the updated 2016 psoriatic arthritis (PsA) core domain set, a set of disease features that should be measured in all clinical trials. At the GRAPPA annual meeting in July 2016, the PsA working group presented the updated PsA core domain set endorsed by 90% of participants at OMERACT in May 2016 and drafted a roadmap for the development of the PsA core outcome measurement set. In this manuscript, we review the development process of the PsA core domain set and the ongoing and proposed work streams for development of a PsA core measurement set.

Updating the Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Domain Set: A Report from the PsA Workshop at OMERACT 2016.

OBJECTIVE: To include the patient perspective in accordance with the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.0 in the updated Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Domain Set for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and longitudinal observational studies (LOS). METHODS: At OMERACT 2016, research conducted to update the PsA Core Domain Set was presented and discussed in breakout groups. The updated PsA Core Domain Set was voted on and endorsed by OMERACT participants. RESULTS: We conducted a systematic literature review of domains measured in PsA RCT and LOS, and identified 24 domains. We conducted 24 focus groups with 130 patients from 7 countries representing 5 continents to identify patient domains. We achieved consensus through 2 rounds of separate surveys with 50 patients and 75 physicians, and a nominal group technique meeting with 12 patients and 12 physicians. We conducted a workshop and breakout groups at OMERACT 2016 in which findings were presented and discussed. The updated PsA Core Domain Set endorsed with 90% agreement by OMERACT 2016 participants included musculoskeletal disease activity, skin disease activity, fatigue, pain, patient's global assessment, physical function, health-related quality of life, and systemic inflammation, which were recommended for all RCT and LOS. These were important, but not required in all RCT and LOS: economic cost, emotional well-being, participation, and structural damage. Independence, sleep, stiffness, and treatment burden were on the research agenda. CONCLUSION: The updated PsA Core Domain Set was endorsed at OMERACT 2016. Next steps for the PsA working group include evaluation of PsA outcome measures and development of a PsA Core Outcome Measurement Set.

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.

Report of the GRAPPA-OMERACT Psoriatic Arthritis Working Group from the GRAPPA 2015 Annual Meeting.

The GRAPPA-OMERACT psoriatic arthritis (PsA) working group is in the process of updating the PsA core domain set to improve and standardize the measurement of PsA outcomes. Work streams comprise literature reviews of domains and outcome measurement instruments, an international qualitative research project with PsA patients to generate domains important to patients, outcome measurement instrument assessment, conduct of domain consensus panels with patients and physicians, and evidence-based selection of instruments. Patient research partners are involved in each of the projects. The working group will present findings and seek endorsement for the new PsA core domain set, outcome measurement set, and research agenda at the OMERACT meeting in May 2016.

Ankylosing spondylitis in Ireland: patient access and response to TNF-α blockers.

To investigate a group of Irish ankylosing spondylitis patients: current prescription practice for TNF blockers and patient response. All patients presenting with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and treated with TNF-alpha between January 2006 and 2008 in the midwestern region of Ireland were studied. Response was evaluated using Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), and CRP results at 6 months. A total of 47 AS patients (32 men: 15 women, mean age 37.7 years, median disease duration 20 years, 80% HLA B27 positive) were identified; 66% were on disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) concomitantly. All patients satisfied BSR/ASAS disease severity criteria for TNF-alpha at baseline, and mean BASDAI was 6.2, BASFI 6.9, and CRP 27.5 mg/L. At 6 months, these had reduced to a mean BASDAI of 3.8, BASFI 4.6, and CRP of 8.9 mg/L. Patients with advanced AS (disease duration >10 years, mean BASFI 7.5) responded at least as well. No allergies or serious side effects were encountered, and one patient successfully switched TNF agent due to secondary failure. Initial good responses at 6 months were seen to be maintained in sub-group analysis at 12 months. Disease severity in patients gaining access to treatment for active AS with TNF blockers in Ireland is very high. Patients mainly satisfy international guidelines for the use of biologics (BSR, EULAR) with some minor exceptions. High disease activity and long disease duration may predict better treatment response. Response rates were good and treatment was well tolerated, and no differences in response were noted between the 3 agents employed.