Enthesitis in a European registry-based cohort of patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors: clinical burden, patient-reported outcomes, and treatment response.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the registration of enthesitis among biologic-naïve patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) initiating tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) treatment across 12 European registries, compare the disease burden and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between patients with and without enthesitis, and assess the enthesitis treatment response. METHOD: Demographics, clinical characteristics, and PROs at first TNFi (TNFi-1) initiation (baseline) were assessed in patients with PsA, diagnosed by a rheumatologist, with versus without assessment of entheses and between those with versus without enthesitis. Enthesitis scores and resolution frequency were identified at follow-up. RESULTS: Of 10 547 patients in the European Spondyloarthritis (EuroSpA) Research Collaboration Network initiating TNFi, 1357 underwent evaluation for enthesitis. Eight registries included a validated scoring system for enthesitis. At baseline, 874 patients underwent entheses assessment [Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score (MASES) 485 patients, Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) 389 patients]. Enthesitis was detected by MASES in 170/485 (35%, mean score ± sd 3.1 ± 2.4) and by SPARCC in 236/389 (61%, 4 ± 3.4). Achilles enthesitis was most frequent, by both MASES (unilateral/bilateral 28%/9%) and SPARCC (48%/18%). MASES/SPARCC baseline and follow-up scores for TNFi-1 were available for 100/105 patients. Of these, 63 patients (63%) (MASES) and 46 (43.8%) (SPARCC) achieved resolution of enthesitis. The site-specific enthesitis resolution was overall lower at SPARCC sites (peripheral; 63-80%) than at MASES sites (mainly axial; 82-100%) following TNFi-1. Disease activity and PROs were worse in patients with versus without enthesitis. CONCLUSION: Entheseal assessments are only registered in a minority of patients with PsA in routine care. When assessed, enthesitis was common, and a substantial proportion demonstrated resolution following treatment with TNFi-1.

Risk of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and the effect of orthopaedic implants on the risk: a nationwide observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: It remains disputed how much the risk of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB) is increased in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and the extent to which orthopaedic implants explain the risk. We assessed SAB incidence rates (IRs) and incidence rate ratios (IRRs), comparing RA patients with a general population cohort (GPC) and individuals with versus without orthopaedic implants. METHOD: Danish residents aged ≥ 18 years without prior RA or SAB (=GPC) were followed up for RA and microbiologically verified SAB events (1996-2017). IRRs were calculated by age- and sex-stratified Poisson regression adjusted for age, comorbidities, calendar year, and socioeconomic status. RESULTS: The GPC comprised 5 398 690 individuals. We identified 33 567 incident RA patients (=RA cohort) (median follow-up 7.3 years, IQR 3.6-12.3). We observed 25 023 SAB events (n = 224 in the RA cohort). IRs per 100 000 person-years were 81.0 (RA cohort) and 29.9 (GPC). IRs increased with age. Adjusted IRRs in 18-59-year-old RA patients were 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.8-3.7) for women and 1.8 (1.1-3.1) for men, compared with same sex and age group GPC. IRRs declined with age. Compared with the GPC without implants, IRRs for RA patients with implants ranged from 1.9 (1.3-2.8) (women ≥ 70 years) to 5.3 (2.2-12.8) (18-59-year-old men). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide registry-based cohort study RA was a risk factor for SAB, and orthopaedic implants further increased the risk. Clinicians should be aware of potential SAB in patients with RA and orthopaedic implants.

Extremely poor patient-reported outcomes are associated with lack of clinical response and decreased retention rate of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor treatment in patients with axial spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) patients with extremely poor patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at start of first tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) treatment have poorer treatment response and shorter treatment retention than other patients. METHOD: This observational cohort study was based on the nationwide DANBIO registry. Patients with axSpA who started first TNFi during 2011-2016 were stratified according to baseline Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI ≥ 0.0 to ≤ 4.0, > 4.0 to ≤ 5.0, > 5.0 to ≤ 6.0, > 6.0 to ≤ 7.0, > 7.0 to ≤ 8.0, > 8.0 to ≤ 9.0, and > 9.0 to ≤ 10.0). An extremely poor BASDAI was defined as BASDAI > 9.0 to ≤ 10.0. Treatment responses after 6 months [≥ 50% improvement from baseline BASDAI (BASDAI50), ≥ 40% improvement in Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS40) response, and ASAS partial remission] in patients with extremely poor PROs were compared with other patients by chi-squared tests, and retention rates by log-rank tests. Similar analyses were done for Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), pain score, and patient global score. RESULTS: The study included 1396 patients (median age 39 years, 60% men). Patients with extremely poor baseline BASDAI [63 patients (5%)] were more often women, ever smokers, and human leucocyte antigen-B27 negative, and had higher body mass index. Response rates were poorer in patients with extremely poor BASDAI vs remaining patients (BASDAI50 19% and 41%, respectively, p < 0.001; ASAS40 16% and 35%, p = 0.002; ASAS partial remission 6% and 22%, p < 0.001). Patients with extremely poor BASDAI had lower 1 year treatment retention (51% and 68%, p < 0.001). Largely similar results were found for patients with extremely poor BASFI, pain score, and patient global score. CONCLUSION: Patients who reported an unusually large symptom burden at baseline had poor response rates and low retention rate. In such cases, competing causes of pain should carefully be taken into account when considering treatment with TNFi.

Comparing patient-reported outcomes entered at home versus at hospital, and testing touch screens for initial recruitment to scientific trials in arthritis patients.

OBJECTIVES: Touch screens for entering patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are available at all Danish departments of rheumatology reporting to the nationwide DANBIO registry. This project comprises two substudies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA), aiming to (A) investigate the feasibility of first line patient recruitment for research via touch screens, and (B) compare PROs collected at hospital versus at home, including patient preferences. METHOD: Substudy A: using a touch screen, patients answered whether we could contact them about a clinical research project (yes/no). Characteristics of patients who accepted/declined were explored using chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U-tests. Substudy B (randomized crossover agreement study): a random sample of patients from the accepting group in substudy A was contacted by telephone. According to prespecified power and sample size estimation, 56 patients were included. After randomization, 50% of patients entered PROs and information on comorbidities and lifestyle from home and then at hospital, and 50% first from hospital and then at home. Finally, they stated their preference for data entry (hospital/home/equally good). Differences in PROs entered from home and in the hospital were compared (limits of agreement, 95% confidence intervals, and intraclass correlation coefficients). RESULTS: The touch-screen invitation was accepted by 428/952 patients (45%). Patients who accepted and those who declined had similar PROs and demographics. Substudy B was completed by 42 patients (22 RA, 20 AxSpA). They had no significant differences between PROs and lifestyle/comorbidity data entered from home and hospital, except for AxSpA patients on the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index item 5. The preferred method of data entry was hospital (10%), home (50%), and equally good (40%). CONCLUSION: Touch screens seem feasible for first line research recruitment. PROs collected from home were similar to the touch-screen solution. Patients preferred data entry from home.

Biological treatment in ankylosing spondylitis in the Nordic countries during 2010-2016: a collaboration between five biological registries.

OBJECTIVES: Large-scale observational cohorts may be used to study the effectiveness and rare side effects of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in ankylosing spondylitis (AS), but may be hampered by differences in baseline characteristics and disease activity across countries. We aimed to explore the research infrastructure in the five Nordic countries regarding bDMARD treatment in AS. METHOD: This observational cohort study was based on data from biological registries in Denmark (DANBIO), Sweden (SRQ/ARTIS), Finland (ROB-FIN), Norway (NOR-DMARD), and Iceland (ICEBIO). Data were collected for the years 2010-2016. Registry coverage, registry inventory (patient characteristics, disease activity measures), and national guidelines for bDMARD prescription in AS were described per country. Incident (first line) and prevalent bDMARD use per capita, country, and year were calculated. In AS patients who started first line bDMARDs during 2010-2016 (n = 4392), baseline characteristics and disease activity measures were retrieved. RESULTS: Registry coverage of bDMARD-treated patients ranged from 60% to 95%. All registries included extensive prospectively collected data at patient level. Guidelines regarding choice of first line drug and prescription patterns varied across countries. During the period 2010-2016 prevalent bDMARD use increased (p < 0.001), whereas incident use tended to decrease (p for trend < 0.004), with large national variations (e.g. 2016 incidence: Iceland 10.7/100 000, Finland 1.7/100 000). Baseline characteristics were similar regarding C-reactive protein, but differed for other variables, including the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) (range 3.5-6.3) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) (2.7-3.8) (both p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Collaboration across the five Nordic biological registries regarding bDMARD use in AS is feasible but national differences in coverage, prescription patterns, and patient characteristics must be taken into account depending on the scientific question.

[Pancreatitis in a patient with Crohn disease treated with mesalazine and azathioprine]. / Pancreatitis hos en patient med morbus Crohn behandlet med mesalazin og azathioprin.

Azathioprine and 5-aminosalicylic-acid are used to treat patients with Crohn's disease. It is well known that both drugs are able to cause pancreatitis as a side effect. This is discussed in the light of a new case report where a patient developed acute pancreatitis following treatment with mesalazine, and again after discontinuation when initiating azathioprine.