Comparison of the effect of treatment with NSAIDs added to anti-TNF therapy versus anti-TNF therapy alone on the progression of structural damage in the spine over 2 years in patients with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis from the randomised-controlled CONSUL trial.

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to evaluate the effect of adding a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), celecoxib (CEL), to a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), golimumab (GOL), compared with TNFi monotherapy on radiographic spinal progression in patients with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) over 2 years. METHODS: R-axSpA patients, having risk factors for radiographic progression (high disease activity plus C reactive protein >5 mg/L and/or ≥1 syndesmophyte(s)), underwent a 12-week run-in phase with GOL 50 mg every 4 weeks. In the core phase (96 weeks), only patients with a good clinical response at week 12 were randomised (1:1) to GOL+CEL 200 mg two times per day (combination therapy) or GOL monotherapy. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression assessed by modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (mSASSS) change at week 108 in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients were enrolled in the run-in phase; and 109 patients were randomised at week 12 to monotherapy (n=55) or combination therapy (n=54). At week 108, 97 (52 vs 45) patients completed the study. The change in mSASSS at week 108 was 1.7 (95% CI 0.8 to 2.6) in the monotherapy vs 1.1 (95% CI 0.4 to 1.8) in the combination therapy groups (p=0.79). New syndesmophytes occurred in 25% of patients in the monotherapy vs 11% of patients in the combination therapy groups (p=0.12). During the study, no significant differences in adverse events and serious adverse events were observed between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with GOL+CEL did not demonstrate statistically significant superiority over GOL monotherapy in retarding radiographic spinal progression over 2 years in r-axSpA.

How do patient reported outcome measures affect treatment intensification and patient satisfaction in the management of psoriatic arthritis? A cross sectional study of 503 patients.

OBJECTIVES: The ASSIST study investigated prescribing in routine psoriatic arthritis (PsA) care and whether the patient reported outcome: PsA Impact of Disease questionnaire (PsAID-12), impacted treatment. This study also assessed a range of patient and clinician factors and their relationship to PsAID-12 scoring and treatment modification. METHODS: Patients with PsA were selected across the UK and Europe between July 2021-March 2022. Patients completed the PsAID questionnaire, with the results shared with their physician. Patient characteristics, disease activity, current treatment methods, treatment strategies, medication changes and patient satisfaction scores were recorded. RESULTS: 503 patients recruited. 36.2% had changes made to treatment, 88.8% of this had treatment escalation. Overall, the mean PsAID-12 score was higher for patients with treatment escalation; the PsAID-12 score was associated with odds of treatment escalation (OR: 1.58; p< 0.0001). However, most clinicians reported PsAID-12 did not impact their decision to escalate treatment, instead supporting treatment reduction decisions. Physician's assessment of disease activity had the most statistically significant effect on likelihood of treatment escalation, (OR = 2.68, per 1-point score increase). Escalation was more likely in patients not treated with biologic therapies. Additional factors associated with treatment escalation included: patient characteristics, physician characteristics, disease activity and disease impact. CONCLUSION: This study highlights multiple factors impacting treatment decision making for individuals with PsA. PsAID-12 scoring correlates with multiple measures of disease severity and odds of treatment escalation. However, most clinicians reported the PsAID-12 did not influence treatment escalation decisions. PsAID scoring could be used to increase confidence in treatment de-escalation.

An international multi-centre analysis of current prescribing practices and shared decision-making in psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Shared decision-making (SDM) is advocated to improve patient outcomes in Psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We analysed current prescribing practices and the extent of SDM in PsA across Europe. METHODS: The ASSIST study was a cross-sectional observational study of PsA patients aged ≥18 years attending face-to-face appointments between July 2021-March 2022. Patient demographics, current treatment and treatment decisions were recorded. SDM was measured by the clinician's effort to collaborate (CollaboRATE questionnaire) and patient communication confidence (PEPPI-5 tool). RESULTS: 503 patients were included from 24 centres across the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Physician- and patient-reported measures of disease activity were highest in the UK. Conventional synthetic DMARDs constituted a higher percentage of current PsA treatment in UK than continental Europe (66.4% vs 44.9%), which differed from biologic DMARDs (36.4% vs 64.4%). Implementing treatment escalation was most common in the UK. CollaboRATE and PEPPI-5 scores were high across centres. Of 31 patients with low CollaboRATE scores (<4.5), no patients with low PsAID-12 scores (<5) had treatment escalation. However, of 465 patients with CollaboRATE scores ≥4.5, 59 patients with low PsAID-12 scores received treatment escalation. CONCLUSIONS: Higher rates of treatment escalation seen in the UK may be explained by higher disease activity and a younger cohort. High levels of collaboration in face-to-face PsA consultations suggests effective implementation of the SDM approach. Our data indicate that, in patients with mild disease activity, only those with higher perceived collaboration underwent treatment escalation. Prospective studies should examine the impact of SDM on PsA patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05171270.

Evaluation of the Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) with a quick quantitative C reactive protein assay (Q-DAPSA) in patients with psoriatic arthritis: a prospective multicentre cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) based on a quick quantitative C reactive protein (qCRP) assay (Q-DAPSA) in a multicentre, prospective, cross-sectional study in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: The assessment of prospectively recruited study patients included joint examination and patient reported outcome (PRO) measures (patient global assessment, patient pain assessment). Following, the DAPSA based on a routine laboratory CRP measurement, Q-DAPSA and clinical DAPSA (cDAPSA) were calculated. Cross-tabulations and weighted Cohen's kappa were performed to analyse the agreement of disease activity categories. Bland-Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficients were used to determine the agreement of numerical values regarding CRP and qCRP as well as different disease activity scores. RESULTS: Altogether, 104 patients with PsA could be included in the statistical analysis. With Q-DAPSA, 102 of 104 (98.1%) patients achieved identical disease activity categories in comparison to DAPSA with a weighted Cohen's kappa of 0.980 (95% CI: 0.952 to 1.000). The agreement between DAPSA and cDAPSA was slightly lower with identical disease activity categories seen in 97 of 104 (93.3%) of patients and with a weighted Cohen's kappa of 0.932 (95% CI 0.885 to 0.980). CONCLUSIONS: The Q-DAPSA showed an almost perfect agreement with the conventional DAPSA regarding identical disease activity categories. Thus, the Q-DAPSA can be used as a timely available disease activity score in patients with PsA with the additional benefit of CRP involvement. Consequently, the Q-DAPSA could facilitate the implementation of the treat-to-target concept in clinical routine and clinical trials.

Interim 2-Year Analysis from SERENA: A Real-World Study in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis or Ankylosing Spondylitis Treated with Secukinumab.

INTRODUCTION: Sustained improvement of high degree in clinical outcomes have been demonstrated in phase 3 trials with secukinumab in both psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). The objective of the SERENA study was to evaluate the effectiveness, retention rates, and safety of secukinumab in patients with PsA and AS. METHODS: SERENA is an ongoing, longitudinal, real-world observational study involving patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, PsA, or AS. Patients had received at least 16 weeks of secukinumab treatment before recruitment to the study. Retention rate was defined as percentage of patients who continued secukinumab treatment over the course of study. Effectiveness of secukinumab in AS and PsA cohorts was assessed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The current interim analysis included 1004 patients with PsA or AS. Overall secukinumab retention rates at 2 years after enrolment were 74.9 and 78.9% in patients with PsA and AS, respectively. At baseline and at 2 years, swollen joint count [3.3 (5.8) vs. 2.9 (5.8)], tender joint count [6.3 (9.4) vs. 5.6 (7.2)] in patients with PsA and BASDAI scores [3.2 (2.3) vs. 2.9 (2.3)] in patients with AS, suggest sustained effectiveness for patients remaining on secukinumab for at least 2 years after enrolment. A total of 73 patients had treatment interruption; 78% of these patients reinitiated secukinumab without a loading dose. No new or unexpected safety signals were reported. CONCLUSIONS: After more than 2 years since initiation, secukinumab demonstrated high retention rates and favorable safety profile as well as sustained effectiveness in patients who continued secukinumab treatment.

Validation of the ASDAS with a quick quantitative CRP assay (ASDAS-Q) in patients with axial SpA: a prospective multicentre cross-sectional study.

Objectives: The objective of the study was to validate the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) based on a quick quantitative C-reactive protein (qCRP) assay (ASDAS-Q) in a multicentre, prospective, cross-sectional study in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axial SpA). Methods: Disease activity assessment was performed in prospectively recruited patients with axial SpA. Routine laboratory CRP was determined in the central laboratory of each study centre, while quick qCRP and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) were measured locally. Consequently, ASDAS-CRP, ASDAS-Q using the qCRP and ASDAS-ESR were calculated. The absolute agreement on the disease activity category ascertainment was analysed with cross-tabulations and weighted Cohen's kappa. Bland-Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to analyse the criterion validity. Results: Overall, 251 axial SpA patients were included in the analysis. The mean qCRP value (6.34 ± 11.13 mg/l) was higher than that of routine laboratory CRP (5.26 ± 9.35 mg/l). The ICC for routine laboratory CRP versus qCRP was 0.985 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.972-0.991]. Comparing ASDAS-Q with ASDAS-CRP, 242 of 251 (96.4%) patients were assigned to the same disease activity categories with a weighted Cohen's kappa of 0.966 (95% CI: 0.943-0.988) and ICC of 0.997 (95% CI: 0.994-0.999). Conclusions: ASDAS-Q showed an almost perfect agreement with ASDAS-CRP in the assignment to specific disease activity categories. Consequently, ASDAS-Q using the qCRP value can be applied as an accurate and quickly available alternative to ASDAS-CRP, thus facilitating the implementation of the treat-to-target concept in clinical trials and clinical routine.