Four-year follow-up of inflammatory arthropathy patients treated with golimumab: Data from the observational multicentre NOR-DMARD study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare (1) golimumab drug survival and efficacy in bDMARD naïve compared with non-naïve rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (ax-SpA) patients, (2) golimumab drug survival in RA and PsA patients treated with/without concomitant csDMARDs, (3) predictors of golimumab drug discontinuation. METHODS: Patients starting golimumab were included from the prospective observational multicenter Norwegian DMARD study. Drug survival was explored by Kaplan-Meier analyses with log rank test. Treatment responses were compared using ANCOVA. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of golimumab discontinuation. RESULTS: We included 808 patients (163 RA, 266 PsA, 379 ax-SpA). Golimumab drug survival after 1/2/4 years were not significantly different between bDMARD naïve and non-naïve patients (all, p ≥ 0.12; RA, p ≥ 0.07; PsA, p ≥ 0.28; ax-SpA, p ≥ 0.61), nor between RA (p ≥ 0.10) and PsA (p ≥ 0.07) patients treated with vs. without csDMARD comedication. bDMARD naïve compared with non-naïve ax-SpA patients had better 3-month ASDAS/BASDAI/MHAQ responses (p ≤ 0.02). bDMARD naïve compared with non-naïve RA and PsA patients had a trend towards better treatment responses. Identified predictors of 4-year golimumab discontinuation were patient's global and female gender in patients overall and in subgroups of PsA and ax-SpA patients, and patient's global and CRP in RA. CONCLUSION: Golimumab drug survival was not significantly different between bDMARD naïve and non-naïve RA, PsA and ax-SpA patients, nor between RA and PsA patients treated with vs. without concomitant csDMARDs. Treatment responses were significantly better for bDMARD naïve than non-naïve ax-SpA patients. Identified predictors of golimumab discontinuation were patient's global and female gender in patients overall and in subgroups of PsA and ax-SpA patients, and patient's global and CRP in RA.

Treat to target strategy in early rheumatoid arthritis versus routine care - A comparative clinical practice study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the 2-year effect on disease activity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of implementing a clinical practice treat-to-target (T2T) strategy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients in the Norwegian Very Early Arthritis Cohort 2.0 (NOR-VEAC 2.0), included 2010-2015, were treated according to T2T principles with visits at baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12 months, then every 6 months plus monthly visits until DAS28 <2.6. These patients were compared to a pre-T2T cohort of patients included in the Norwegian Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drug (NOR-DMARD) register 2006-2009. Both groups had a clinical diagnosis of RA (≤1 year) and were DMARD naïve. Disease activity and HRQoL outcomes were analysed, and the primary outcome was SDAI remission (≤3.3) at 2years. RESULTS: The T2T cohort included 293 patients (mean (SD) age 54 (13) years, 66% females, disease duration median (25,75 perc) 98 (57,164) days) and the routine care cohort 392 patients (age 54 (13) years, 68% females, 4 (0,30) days since diagnosis). At 2years, the proportion of patients achieving SDAI remission was 46% in the T2T cohort compared to 31% in the routine care cohort. EQ-5D was similar at baseline, but differed significantly between groups at 2years (median (25,75 perc) 0.77 (0.69, 0.85) vs 0.73 (0.59, 0.80), p < 0.001). Methotrexate monotherapy was the dominant DMARD regimen used to achieve SDAI remission in both cohorts. CONCLUSION: Higher remission rates and better HRQoL were achieved in patients following a T2T strategy in clinical practice compared to routine care.

Predicting achievement of the treatment targets at 6 months from 3-month response levels in rheumatoid arthritis: data from real-life follow-up in the NOR-DMARD study.

OBJECTIVE: When initiating a new therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), current treatment recommendations suggest escalating therapy in case of poor clinical improvement by 3 months or if the treatment target has not been reached by 6 months. We investigated which disease activity improvement levels at 3 months predicted achievement of the treatment targets at 6 months in a real-life clinical setting. METHODS: We included 1610 patients with RA enrolled in the NOR-DMARD study between 2000 and 2012. Analyses were performed for the total group of patients and repeated for subgroups stratified by baseline disease activity, disease duration or treatment with methotrexate or a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor. We used a diagnostic test approach to explore the associations between 3-month response and 6-month outcome. RESULTS: Not achieving 50% improvement in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) by 3 months significantly decreased the likelihood of reaching remission at 6 months in all subgroups (negative likelihood ratios (LRs-) 0.15-0.36). Patients with high disease activity when initiating treatment were likely to fail reaching remission if they achieved less than SDAI 70% response by 3 months (LR- 0.25 and negative predictive value 0.98). Achieving a major response (SDAI 85%) at 3 months significantly increased the likelihood of reaching remission at 6 months (LRs+ 6.56). CONCLUSION: Levels of 3-month disease activity improvement can inform clinicians when deciding to continue or adjust ongoing therapy in a treat-to-target strategy aiming for remission or low disease activity within 6 months. The required levels of 3-month improvement varied with baseline disease activity.

Feasibility of cardiovascular disease risk assessments in rheumatology outpatient clinics: experiences from the nationwide NOCAR project.

OBJECTIVE: The European League Against Rheumatism recommends implementing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessments for patients with inflammatory joint diseases (IJDs) into clinical practice. Our goal was to design a structured programme for CVD risk assessments to be implemented into routine rheumatology outpatient clinic visits. METHODS: The NOrwegian Collaboration on Atherosclerosis in patients with Rheumatic joint diseases (NOCAR) started in April 2014 as a quality assurance project including 11 Norwegian rheumatology clinics. CVD risk factors were recorded by adding lipids to routine laboratory tests, self-reporting of CVD risk factors and blood pressure measurements along with the clinical joint examination. The patients' CVD risks, calculated by the European CVD risk equation SCORE, were evaluated by the rheumatologist. Patients with high or very high CVD risk were referred to their primary care physician for initiation of CVD preventive measures. RESULTS: Data collection (autumn 2015) showed that five of the NOCAR centres had implemented CVD risk assessments. There were 8789 patients eligible for CVD risk evaluation (rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 4483; ankylosing spondylitis (AS), 1663; psoriatic arthritis (PsA), 1928; unspecified and other forms of spondyloarthropathies (SpA), 715) of whom 41.4 % received a CVD risk assessment (RA, 44.7%; AS, 43.4%; PsA, 36.3%; SpA, 30.6%). Considerable differences existed in the proportions of patients receiving CVD risk evaluations across the NOCAR centres. CONCLUSION: Patients with IJD represent a patient group with a high CVD burden that seldom undergoes CVD risk assessments. The NOCAR project lifted the offer of CVD risk evaluation to over 40% in this high-risk patient population.

Health-related quality of life in patients with psoriatic and rheumatoid arthritis: data from the prospective multicentre NOR-DMARD study compared with Norwegian general population controls.

OBJECTIVES: To compare (1) Short Form-36 (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS), scale scores and Short Form-6 dimensions (SF-6D) between patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and Norwegian general population controls and (2) improvements in these measures between patients with RA and PsA. METHODS: Analyses of covariance were performed to compare SF-36 measures between first-time enrolled patients with RA (n=3898) and PsA (n=1515) from the prospective observational multicentre NORwegian-Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drug study (6 months follow-up) and general population controls (n=2323). RESULTS: In age and gender-adjusted analyses, patients with PsA compared with patients with RA had similar PCS, MCS and SF-6D (p≥0.14), worse vitality and general health, but better physical functioning at 0/6 months (p≤0.03). With additional 28-joint disease activity scores adjustment as a proxy for joint inflammation, PCS, most scale scores and SF-6D were worse in patients with PsA than patients with RA at 0/3/6 months (p≤0.01). PCS was more impaired than MCS both in RA and PsA compared with general population controls (p≤0.001). Mean 3-month and 6-month improvements after disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug treatment were larger in patients with RA than patients with PsA for bodily pain, vitality and mental health (p≤0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Health-related quality of life was overall similar in patients with RA and patients with PsA-with a tendency to worse scores in PsA-and worse compared with Norwegian general population controls.

Do depression and anxiety reduce the likelihood of remission in rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis? Data from the prospective multicentre NOR-DMARD study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the predictive value of baseline depression/anxiety on the likelihood of achieving joint remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) as well as the associations between baseline depression/anxiety and the components of the remission criteria at follow-up. METHODS: We included 1326 patients with RA and 728 patients with PsA from the prospective observational NOR-DMARD study starting first-time tumour necrosis factor inhibitors or methotrexate. The predictive value of depression/anxiety on remission was explored in prespecified logistic regression models and the associations between baseline depression/anxiety and the components of the remission criteria in prespecified multiple linear regression models. RESULTS: Baseline depression/anxiety according to EuroQoL-5D-3L, Short Form-36 (SF-36) Mental Health subscale ≤56 and SF-36 Mental Component Summary ≤38 negatively predicted 28-joint Disease Activity Score <2.6, Simplified Disease Activity Index ≤3.3, Clinical Disease Activity Index ≤2.8, ACR/EULAR Boolean and Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis ≤4 remission after 3 and 6 months treatment in RA (p≤0.008) and partly in PsA (p from 0.001 to 0.73). Baseline depression/anxiety was associated with increased patient's and evaluator's global assessment, tender joint count and joint pain in RA at follow-up, but not with swollen joint count and acute phase reactants. CONCLUSION: Depression and anxiety may reduce likelihood of joint remission based on composite scores in RA and PsA and should be taken into account in individual patients when making a shared decision on a treatment target.

Discordance between tender and swollen joint count as well as patient's and evaluator's global assessment may reduce likelihood of remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis: data from the prospective multicentre NOR-DMARD study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the predictive value of discordance between (1) tender and swollen joint count and (2) patient's and evaluator's global assessment on remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: From the prospective, multicentre Norwegian-Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug study, we included patients with RA and PsA starting first-time tumour necrosis factor inhibitors and DMARD-naïve patients starting methotrexate between 2000 and 2012. The predictive value of ΔTSJ (tender minus swollen joint counts) and ΔPEG (patient's minus evaluator's global assessment) on remission was explored in prespecified logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, disease duration and smoking. RESULTS: A total of 2735 patients with RA and 1236 patients with PsA were included (mean (SD) age 55.0 (13.5)/48.3 (12.4) years, median(range) disease duration 0.7 (0.0-58.0)/1.3 (0.0-48.3) years, 69.7/48.4% females). Baseline ΔTSJ/ΔPEG reduced the likelihood of achieving DAS28<2.6, SDAI≤3.3, CDAI≤2.8, ACR/EULAR Boolean and DAPSA<4 remission after 3 and 6 months in RA (OR 0.95-0.97, p<0.001/OR 0.96-0.99, p≤0.01) and PsA (OR 0.91-0.94, p≤0.004/OR 0.89-0.99, p≤0.002), except for ΔPEG and 6-month DAS28 remission in PsA. CONCLUSIONS: Discordance between patient's and physician's evaluation of disease activity reflected through ΔTSJ and partly ΔPEG may reduce likelihood of remission in RA and PsA. The findings are relevant for use of the treat-to-target strategy in individual patients.

Achievement of Remission and Low Disease Activity Definitions in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Clinical Practice: Results from the NOR-DMARD Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the frequency of 6 definitions for remission and 4 definitions for low disease activity (LDA) after starting a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical practice, and to study whether predictors for achieving remission after 6 months are similar for these definitions. METHODS: Remission and LDA were calculated according to the 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28), the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data (RAPID3), and both the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Boolean remission definitions 3 and 6 months after 4992 DMARD prescriptions for patients enrolled in the NOR-DMARD, a 5-center Norwegian register. Prediction of remission after 6 months was also studied. RESULTS: After 3 months, remission rates varied between definitions from 8.7% to 22.5% and for LDA from 35.5% to 42.7%, and increased slightly until 6 months of followup. DAS28 and RAPID3 gave the highest and ACR/EULAR, SDAI, and CDAI the lowest proportions for remission. Positive predictors for remission after 6 months were similar across the definitions and included lower age, male sex, short disease duration, high level of education, current nonsmoking, nonerosive disease, treatment with a biological DMARD, being DMARD-naive, good physical function, little fatigue, and LDA. CONCLUSION: In daily clinical practice, the DAS28 and RAPID3 definitions identified remission about twice as often as the ACR/EULAR Boolean, SDAI, and CDAI. Predictors of remission were similar across remission definitions. These findings provide additional evidence to follow treatment recommendations and treat RA early with a DMARD.

Involvement of the multidisciplinary team and outcomes in inpatient rehabilitation among patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease.

BACKGROUND: The last decades have for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases seen a shift towards more physically active rehabilitation programs, often provided as out-patients with less use of inpatient facilities. There is little research on which effect the multidisciplinary team has on health outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and connective tissue disease. This study examined patient reported outcomes for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases receiving rehabilitation care as inpatients in departments of rheumatology, and studied how number of consultations with the multidisciplinary team affected these clinical outcomes. METHODS: Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases were included in a multi-center prospective observational study if rehabilitation was considered a focus during an inpatient stay at four departments of rheumatology. At admission, discharge, and after 3 and 6 months, 317 patients were assessed with patients reported outcomes (PRO) including health assessment questionnaire (HAQ), short-form 36 (SF-36), pain, fatigue, patient global assessment of disease activity, self-efficacy scales, rheumatoid arthritis disease activity index (RADAI), and SF-6D utility. Patients stated consultations with the multidisciplinary team. RESULTS: Improvements were short-lived, and at 6 months follow-up period only mental health, pain and utility remained improved with small effect sizes. Extensive involvement of health professionals was not associated with improved outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease receiving inpatient multidisciplinary rehabilitation had small and mainly short-term improvements in most PROs. High use of the multidisciplinary team did not enhance or preserve rehabilitation outcomes in inflammatory rheumatic conditions when admitted as inpatients.