Management of Dactylitis in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: An Updated Literature Review Informing the 2021 GRAPPA Treatment Recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: This literature review aimed to identify the most efficacious current interventions for dactylitis and provide up-to-date scientific evidence to support the 2021 Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) recommendations on the management of psoriatic arthritis. METHODS: Original articles published from 2013 to 2020, registered in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library, describing interventional trials and reporting dactylitis-related outcomes were included. The 20 members of the GRAPPA dactylitis group were divided into 9 subgroups according to treatment, and members of each group independently extracted data from articles/abstracts corresponding to their group by using a standardized data extraction form. RESULTS: Forty-nine publications were analyzed, representing 40 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and including 16,752 patients. Dactylitis was assessed as a secondary outcome in 97.5% of these trials and more than 40% of RCTs did not employ a specific dactylitis measure or instrument. CONCLUSION: The emergence of agents with novel mechanisms of action in recent years, such as interleukin 17 (IL-17), IL-12/23, IL-23, and Janus kinase inhibitors, has significantly expanded the available treatment options for dactylitis. This article points out the lack of consensus regarding dactylitis assessment and the paucity of data concerning the effect of local steroid injections, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, and conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Clinical trials evaluating the effect of these traditional and low-cost medications used to treat dactylitis should be encouraged.

Real-World Efficacy and Safety of Apremilast in Belgian Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: Results from the Prospective Observational APOLO Study.

INTRODUCTION: Apremilast is approved for the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Real-world evidence on the efficacy and safety of apremilast in clinical practice is limited. We assessed the use of apremilast in patients with PsA in Belgium clinical practice. METHODS: The multicentre, observational, prospective APOLO study enrolled patients with active PsA initiating apremilast in Belgium between April 2017 and December 2018. Primary outcome was PsA Response Criteria (PsARC) after 6 months of apremilast treatment. Secondary outcomes included PsA Impact of Disease 12 (PsAID12) and Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI). Disease-specific outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were analysed for patients who received apremilast within 30 days prior to their study inclusion and completed at least 150 days of treatment (reference set [REF]). RESULTS: Of 107 patients enrolled in the study, 106 received at least one dose of apremilast and 69 were included in the REF. PsARC response was achieved by 43.5% of patients (30/69) in the REF at month 6; mean global and composite scores including 68-joint count for pain/tenderness (68-TJC) and 66-joint count for swelling (66-SJC) improved, and 27% and 42% of patients with 68-TJC and 66-SJC > 0 at baseline had complete joint count resolution, respectively. Mean global and composite PsAID12 and HAQ-DI scores decreased at 6 months, indicating improved quality of life. Apremilast was well tolerated and the reported adverse events were in line with the known safety profile. CONCLUSION: Results from the APOLO study indicate that treatment with apremilast in Belgian clinical practice improves the signs and symptoms of PsA as well as patient quality of life. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03096990.

The burden of psoriatic arthritis in the biologics era: data from the Belgian Epidemiological Psoriatic Arthritis Study.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the frequency of PsA subtypes, estimate the severity based on damage and inflammation and estimate the impact of PsA on patients' health-related quality of life. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal observational study in 17 academic and non-academic centres in Belgium. Patients with PsA fulfilling Classification Criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis were recruited. Three visits were scheduled: at baseline (T0), at 1 year (±1 month; T1) and at 2 years (±1 month; T2) of follow-up. Demographics, clinical data and patient-reported outcome measures were collected at T0, T1 and T2. X-rays of the hands and feet were collected yearly (T0, T1 and T2). X-rays of the spine were collected at T0 and T2. Here we report on the burden of disease based on the clinical data and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 461 patients were recruited; 73.5% had combined peripheral and axial involvement and 13.7% had hip involvement. Plaque psoriasis was predominant (83.9%). At inclusion, 42.7% and 58.8% had no tender or swollen joints, respectively. Dactylitis and enthesitis were still present in 13.7% and 24.1% of the patients, respectively. Patients was treated with DMARDs (68%) and/or anti-TNF (44.2%). Forty-three per cent of the patients had a state of minimal disease activity and 62% considered the actual state as satisfactory. The mean HAQ score was 0.7%, with 32.5% of patients having a normal score (<0.3). CONCLUSION: Despite the availability of different treatment options, including biologics (anti-TNF), a substantial number of patients have active disease and have a high disease burden.

Tapering of biological antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis patients is achievable and cost-effective in daily clinical practice: data from the Brussels UCLouvain RA Cohort.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Studies have demonstrated that rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who achieve low disease activity or remission are able to taper biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the proportion of patients in whom bDMARDs can be tapered in daily practice and to analyse the characteristics of these patients. Other objectives were to analyse which bDMARDs are more suitable for dose reduction and the cost savings. RESULTS: Data from 332 eligible RA patients from our Brussels UCLouvain cohort were retrospectively analysed; 140 patients (42.1%) received a tapered regimen, and 192 received stable doses of bDMARDs. The age at diagnosis (43.1 vs 38.7 years, p = 0.04), health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) score (1.3 vs 1.5, p = 0.048), RF positivity rate (83.3 vs 72.9%, p = 0.04) and disease duration at the time of bDMARD introduction (9.7 vs 12.1 years, p = 0.034) were significantly different between the reduced-dose and stable-dose groups. Interestingly, relatively more patients receiving a tapered dose were treated with a combination of bDMARDs and methotrexate (MTX) (86.7% vs 73.8%, p = 0.005). In our cohort, anti-TNF agents were the most commonly prescribed medications (68%). Only 15 patients experienced a flare during follow-up. Adalimumab, etanercept and rituximab were the most common bDMARDs in the reduced-dose group and were associated with the most important reductions in annual cost. CONCLUSION: In daily practice, tapering bDMARDs in RA patients who have achieved low disease activity or remission is an achievable goal in a large proportion of patients, thereby reducing potential side effects and annual drug-associated costs. The combination of bDMARDs with MTX could improve the success of dose reduction attempts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This retrospective non-interventional study was retrospectively registered with local ethics approval.