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.

Differences in treatment response between female and male psoriatic arthritis patients during IL-12/23 therapy with or without methotrexate: post hoc analysis of results from the randomised MUST trial.

BACKGROUND: The influence of sex on treatment outcomes during interleukin-12/23 therapy in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has not been explored. OBJECTIVE: To conduct exploratory post hoc analyses of sex-stratified data from the MUST trial, an investigator-initiated, multicentre, phase 3b study in which patients with active PsA initiating treatment with open-label ustekinumab were randomised to treatment with placebo or methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: We evaluated baseline characteristics, key treatment outcomes and adverse events stratified by sex, with a focus on outcomes that did not include erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) as a component due to the known elevation of ESR in females. RESULTS: A total of 166 patients were treated with ustekinumab+MTX (37 female, 50 male) or ustekinumab+placebo (32 female, 47 male). At baseline, females had a significantly longer time since PsA diagnosis and greater impairment in physical function, but similar joint counts. At week 24, both females and males showed marked improvements to ustekinumab with or without MTX. Females generally had numerically reduced treatment responses compared with males, although differences did not achieve statistical significance. MTX did not show an overall effect on treatment outcomes, but was associated with faster enthesitis responses in males only. Adverse events were generally comparable, but females in the ustekinumab+MTX group had higher levels of gastrointestinal disorders. CONCLUSION: Females and males with PsA had differences in baseline characteristics, treatment responses and adverse events during therapy. A better understanding of sex-based differences in PsA may help optimise treatment.

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.

Application of clinical and molecular profiling data to improve patient outcomes in psoriatic arthritis.

Achieving a good outcome for a person with Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) is made difficult by late diagnosis, heterogenous clinical disease expression and in many cases, failure to adequately suppress inflammatory disease features. Single-centre studies have certainly contributed to our understanding of disease pathogenesis, but to adequately address the major areas of unmet need, multi-partner, collaborative research programmes are now required. HIPPOCRATES is a 5-year, Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) programme which includes 17 European academic centres experienced in PsA research, 5 pharmaceutical industry partners, 3 small-/medium-sized industry partners and 2 patient-representative organizations. In this review, the ambitious programme of work to be undertaken by HIPPOCRATES is outlined and common approaches and challenges are identified. It is expected that, when completed, the results will ultimately allow for changes in the approaches to diagnosing, managing and treating PsA allowing for better short-term and long-term outcomes.

Improving outcomes in Psoriatic Arthritis Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) is a form of arthritis which is found in approximately 30% of people who have the skin condition, Psoriasis. Frequently debilitating and progressive, achieving a good outcome for a person with PsA is made difficult by late diagnosis, disease clinical features and in many cases, failure to adequately control features of inflammation. Research studies from individual centres have certainly contributed to our understanding of why people develop PsA but to adequately address the major areas of unmet need, multi-centre, collaborative research programmes are now required. HIPPOCRATES is a 5-year, Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) programme which includes 17 European academic centres experienced in PsA research, 5 pharmaceutical industry partners, 3 small-/medium-sized industry partners and 2 patient representative organisations (see appendix). In this review, the ambitious programme of work to be undertaken by HIPPOCRATES is outlined and common approaches and challenges are identified. The participation of patient research partners in all stages of the work of HIPPOCRATES is highlighted. It is expected that, when completed, the results will ultimately allow for changes in the approaches to diagnosing, managing and treating PsA allowing for improvements in short-term and long-term outcomes.

Association between biological immunotherapy for psoriasis and time to incident inflammatory arthritis: limitations and opportunities.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory immune-mediated disease that affects approximately 30% of psoriasis patients. In most cases, skin disease clearly precedes the musculoskeletal disease. Some studies suggest that targeted treatment may intercept the disease course and prevent psoriasis patients from developing PsA. A recent population-based retrospective analysis in 15 501 psoriasis patients evaluated the association between different biological treatment strategies and time to incident inflammatory arthritis based on data in a US electronic health records database. A cumulative incidence of 2.6 PsA cases per 100 person-years was determined. The multivariable regression analysis revealed a significantly lower risk of developing inflammatory arthritis in patients who had been prescribed interleukin (IL)-12/23 or IL-23 inhibitors compared with tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor-treated patients, whereas there was no significant difference in risk for patients prescribed inhibitors of IL-17 versus TNF. Although the analysis was based on a large set of clinical data and the findings were rigorously evaluated, there are some limitations in interpretation due to the study design. Prospective clinical trials are missing, and retrospective data analyses from clinical trials or population-based studies show conflicting results. Overall, the recent data on prevention of PsA in patients with psoriasis support the high need to characterise biomarkers of increased risk and perform prospective clinical trials to give a clear guidance on possibilities for disease interception in psoriatic disease.

Impact of different classes of immune-modulating treatments on B cell-related and T cell-related immune response before and after COVID-19 booster vaccination in patients with immune-mediated diseases and primary immunodeficiency: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the potential of immunosuppressed patients to mount B-cell and T-cell responses to COVID-19 booster vaccination (third vaccination). METHODS: Patients with primary immunodeficiency (PID), immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) on CD20-depleting treatment with rituximab (RTX), or IMIDs treated with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARDs) were included and assessed before (baseline visit (BL)) and 2, 4 and 8 weeks after COVID-19 booster vaccination. Serum B-cell responses were assessed by antibody levels against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (anti-spike IgG antibody (S-AB)) and a surrogate virus neutralisation test (sVNT). T-cell responses were assessed by an interferon gamma release assay (IGRA). RESULTS: Fifty patients with PID (n=6), treated with RTX therapy (n=13), or treated with csDMARDs/bDMARDs (n=31) were included. At BL, anti-S-AB titres in PID and csDMARD/bDMARD-treated patients were low (although significantly higher than RTX patients); measures of B-cell-mediated response increased significantly after booster vaccination. In the RTX cohort, low BL anti-S-AB and sVNT values did not improve after booster vaccination, but patients had significantly elevated IGRA responses post booster vaccination compared with the other groups. csDMARD/bDMARD-treated patients showed the highest BL values in all three assays with greater increases in all parameters after booster vaccination compared with patients with PID. CONCLUSION: Patients with IMID on therapeutic B-cell depletion have low anti-S-AB and sVNT values before and after booster vaccination but show significantly higher levels of IGRA compared with other immunosuppressed patients, suggesting an underlying mechanism attempting to compensate compromised humoral immunity by upregulating T-cell responsiveness. PID appears to have a stronger impact on antiviral immune response than csDMARD/bDMARD treatment.

'Status Quo' on Different Aspects of Gender Distribution in Rheumatology in Germany-Results from a Nationwide Online Survey among Physicians.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the increasing number of female medical students and fellows in Europe, women are still under-represented in higher academic careers and positions in medicine. The aim of this survey was to assess the 'status quo' on gender distribution among rheumatologists in Germany. METHODS: A web-based anonymous survey (21 questions with multiple answers and free text) using QuestionPro® was distributed among rheumatologists in Germany via newsletters, social media and personal contact, including questions regarding hierarchical positions and work characteristics. RESULTS: Among the total of 170 respondents (72% women, 28% men, 1% diverse), 48% were rheumatologists in training, 35% were trained rheumatologists and 7% were heads of rheumatology departments. Regarding the gender ratio at different hierarchical levels, 74% of respondents reported more men than women in leadership positions. Part-time work was possible in the departments of 86% of respondents, with more women working part-time (56%) compared to men (29%). Most respondents stated their impression that employees working part-time did not have the same career chances as full-time workers in their departments. In total, 66% agreed that activities to improve gender equity are necessary. The highest need was seen in reconciling work and family through, e.g., part-time models, flexible childcare options at work and a higher acceptance of part-time work in leadership positions. CONCLUSIONS: According to our results, a gender imbalance is prevalent among rheumatologists in Germany, with lower numbers of women evident at higher hierarchical levels. Traditional role assignments are still represented by a higher proportion of part-time work in women. The establishment of structural changes to achieve better gender equity is needed.

An HPA-1a-positive platelet-depleting agent for prevention of fetal and neonatal alloimmune thrombocytopenia: a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled, single-center, phase 1/2 proof-of-concept study.

BACKGROUND: Fetal/neonatal alloimmune thrombocytopenia (FNAIT) is a rare and potentially life-threatening bleeding disorder of the fetus/newborn. Antibodies against human platelet antigen 1a (HPA-1a) are associated with the most frequent FNAIT cases. There are no approved therapies for FNAIT prevention or treatment. RLYB211 is a polyclonal HPA-1a hyperimmune IgG being developed to prevent FNAIT. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether a single dose of anti-HPA-1a (1000 IU) could markedly accelerate the elimination of HPA-1ab platelets transfused into healthy, HPA-1a-negative participants as compared with placebo. METHODS: This randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled, single-center, phase 1/2 proof-of-concept study (EudraCT: 2019-003459-12) included HPA-1a- and HLA-A2-negative healthy men. Cohort 1 received intravenous RLYB211 or placebo 1 hour after transfusion of HPA-1ab platelets. Cohort 1B received RLYB211 or placebo, followed by platelet transfusion 1 week later. Primary endpoint was the half-life of transfused platelets in circulation after administration of RLYB211 or placebo, determined by flow cytometry. Proof of concept was ≥90% reduction of half-life relative to placebo. RESULTS: Twelve participants were allocated to cohort 1 or 1B and randomized to receive RLYB211 (n = 9) or placebo (n = 3). RLYB211 markedly accelerated the elimination of HPA-1ab platelets in all participants vs placebo. In cohort 1B, this effect was observed 7 days after RLYB211 administration. Two treatment-emergent adverse events were possibly related to treatment, both in RLYB211-treated participants. No participants developed HPA-1a antibodies at 12 or 24 weeks. CONCLUSION: These data support the hypothesis that anti-HPA-1a could be used as prophylaxis in women at risk of having an FNAIT-affected pregnancy.

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

OBJECTIVE: Enthesitis is a key pathological and clinical feature of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in children and adults. Enthesitis is typically assessed clinically using several validated enthesitis scoring systems that have been used in clinical trials. Enthesitis treatment response has been reported as change in the total enthesitis score or the proportion of patients who achieved complete resolution. The majority of trials in PsA did not require patients to have enthesitis at study entry since enthesitis was evaluated only as a secondary outcome. Despite the inherent limitations of the clinical assessment of enthesitis, imaging of the entheses using ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging has rarely been used in clinical trials to assess response to treatment of enthesitis. This systematic review summarizes existing evidence regarding pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical interventions for enthesitis in patients with PsA to facilitate an evidence-based update of the Group for Research and Assessment in Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) treatment recommendations for PsA. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review to identify 41 randomized clinical trials that reported enthesitis treatment response in patients with PsA. For each intervention, the response effect size was summarized and the quality of evidence was graded. Recommendations were then formulated for the various pharmacological and nonpharmacological therapies. RESULTS: We included 41 randomized clinical trials in our review and graded each intervention. CONCLUSION: Several classes of systemic conventional and advanced therapies and local measures were recommended for active enthesitis in patients with PsA.

Methotrexate plus ustekinumab versus ustekinumab monotherapy in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (MUST): a randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 3b, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of methotrexate in combination with biological agents in patients with psoriatic arthritis remains unclear. The MUST phase 3b trial aimed to compare the efficacy of ustekinumab plus placebo with ustekinumab plus methotrexate in patients with active psoriatic arthritis. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 3b non-inferiority trial done in 22 centres in Germany, patients with active psoriatic arthritis received open-label ustekinumab and were randomly assigned (1:1) to masked concomitant therapy with placebo or methotrexate (ongoing or new). The primary outcome was non-inferiority of mean Disease Activity Score-28 joints (DAS28) at week 24 for ustekinumab monotherapy (ustekinumab plus placebo) versus ustekinumab combination therapy (ustekinumab plus methotrexate), stratified by previous methotrexate treatment. The key secondary analysis was non-inferiority of DAS28 at week 52. The primary analysis was based on a stratified van Elteren test with an α of 2·5% and a non-inferiority margin of 12·5% by Mann-Whitney estimator. Adverse events and serious adverse events were assessed. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03148860. FINDINGS: Between Jan 24, 2017, and April 12, 2021, 186 patients with active psoriatic arthritis were screened, of whom 173 (93%) patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive concomitant methotrexate therapy (n=88) or placebo (n=85). 84 patients were receiving methotrexate at baseline, and 89 patients had no previous methotrexate treatment. 166 (96%) patients (87 in the ustekinumab plus methotrexate group and 79 in the ustekinumab plus placebo group) were included in the safety and efficacy analyses at week 24 (69 [42%] female; 97 [58%] male; mean age 48·2 years [SE 1·1]). Ustekinumab plus placebo was non-inferior to ustekinumab plus methotrexate in DAS28 at week 24 (2·9 [SD 1·31] vs 3·1 [1·42]); the stratified Mann-Whitney estimator for treatment comparison was 0·5426 (95% CI 0·4545-0·6307). Non-inferiority for ustekinumab plus placebo was also observed in DAS28 at week 52. Serious adverse events occurred in seven (9%) patients in the ustekinumab plus placebo group and eight (9%) patients in the ustekinumab plus methotrexate group. No specific serious adverse events affected more than one patient, and there were no deaths. INTERPRETATION: Interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23 inhibition with ustekinumab is an effective treatment for psoriatic arthritis independent of methotrexate use; concomitant methotrexate did not increase efficacy of ustekinumab (based on DAS28). On the basis of these data, there is no evidence to support the addition or maintainance of methotrexate when initiating ustekinumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis. FUNDING: Janssen Cilag.

Effectiveness of Different Rituximab Doses Combined with Leflunomide in the Treatment or Retreatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Part 2 of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Investigator-Initiated Clinical Trial (AMARA).

BACKGROUND: The optimal dose of rituximab in combination with leflunomide in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is not known. METHODS: In Part 1 (previously reported) of the investigator-initiated AMARA study (EudraCT 2009-015950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01244958), improvements at week (W)24 were observed in patients randomized to rituximab + leflunomide compared with placebo + leflunomide. In the study reported here (Part 2), Part 1 responders received rituximab 500 or 1000 mg at W24/26 plus ongoing leflunomide. Patients were randomized at baseline to their eventual W24 treatment group. The Part 2 primary outcome was the mean Disease Activity Score-28 joints (DAS28) at W52, based on the last observation carried forward (LOCF) analyses and a two-sided analysis of variance. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and adverse events were evaluated. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients received rituximab at W24/26 (31 rituximab→rituximab 1000 mg; 29 rituximab→rituximab 500 mg; 10 placebo→rituximab 1000 mg; 13 placebo→rituximab 500 mg). At W52, there were no significant differences in DAS28 between rituximab doses in patients originally treated with rituximab or those originally treated with placebo. In the Part 1 placebo group, the higher rituximab dose was associated with greater improvements in ACR response rates and some PROs. Adverse events were similar regardless of rituximab dose. CONCLUSIONS: Retreatment with rituximab 500 mg and 1000 mg showed comparable efficacy, whereas an initial dose of rituximab 500 mg was associated with lower response rates versus 1000 mg. Reduced treatment response with the lower dose in patients initially treated with placebo may have been influenced by small numbers and baseline disease activity.

Omics and Multi-Omics Analysis for the Early Identification and Improved Outcome of Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis.

The definitive diagnosis and early treatment of many immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) is hindered by variable and overlapping clinical manifestations. Psoriatic arthritis (PsA), which develops in ~30% of people with psoriasis, is a key example. This mixed-pattern IMID is apparent in entheseal and synovial musculoskeletal structures, but a definitive diagnosis often can only be made by clinical experts or when an extensive progressive disease state is apparent. As with other IMIDs, the detection of multimodal molecular biomarkers offers some hope for the early diagnosis of PsA and the initiation of effective management and treatment strategies. However, specific biomarkers are not yet available for PsA. The assessment of new markers by genomic and epigenomic profiling, or the analysis of blood and synovial fluid/tissue samples using proteomics, metabolomics and lipidomics, provides hope that complex molecular biomarker profiles could be developed to diagnose PsA. Importantly, the integration of these markers with high-throughput histology, imaging and standardized clinical assessment data provides an important opportunity to develop molecular profiles that could improve the diagnosis of PsA, predict its occurrence in cohorts of individuals with psoriasis, differentiate PsA from other IMIDs, and improve therapeutic responses. In this review, we consider the technologies that are currently deployed in the EU IMI2 project HIPPOCRATES to define biomarker profiles specific for PsA and discuss the advantages of combining multi-omics data to improve the outcome of PsA patients.

Fluorescence-optical imaging as a promising easy-to-use imaging biomarker to increase early psoriatic arthritis detection in patients with psoriasis: a cross-sectional cohort study with follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the ability of fluorescence-optical imaging (FOI) to detect preclinical musculoskeletal inflammatory signs in patients with skin psoriasis at risk of developing psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: This investigator-initiated prospective exploratory study evaluated adult patients with psoriasis with musculoskeletal complaints and/or nail psoriasis within the last 6 months. Patients underwent a comprehensive rheumatological clinical examination (CE) along with musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) and FOI of both hands at a single visit. Patients with CE-/MSUS-/FOI+ findings had MRI performed on the symptomatic or dominant hand within 7 days. If MRI was negative, the patients were followed over 2 years for the onset of clinically manifest PsA. RESULTS: A total of 389 patients were referred from dermatology centres and evaluated at 14 rheumatology sites in Germany. Seventy-seven (20%) patients with CE-/US-/FOI- were considered to have psoriasis only. PsA was diagnosed in 140/389 patients (36%) based on CE alone and in another 55 patients (14%) by additional MSUS; overall, 50% of the patient cohort was diagnosed with PsA. One hundred sixteen patients (30%) were FOI+ (CE-) of which 40 (37%) were FOI+/MRI+. In the 2-year follow-up of the FOI+/CE- patients, clinical PsA was confirmed in another 12%. CONCLUSION: FOI is a promising method for the detection of signs of musculoskeletal inflammation in hands that may serve as an early imaging biomarker for transitions from psoriasis to PsA. This imaging technique has the potential to detect PsA in at-risk patients with psoriasis, reduce time to PsA diagnosis and improve patient outcomes.

Rituximab plus leflunomide in rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized, placebo-controlled, investigator-initiated clinical trial (AMARA study).

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of rituximab + LEF in patients with RA. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, patients with an inadequate response to LEF who had failed one or more DMARD were randomly assigned 2:1 to i.v. rituximab 1000 mg or placebo on day 1 and 15 plus ongoing oral LEF. The primary efficacy outcome was the difference between ≥50% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR50 response) rates at week 24 (P ≤ 0.025). Secondary endpoints included ACR20/70 responses, ACR50 responses at earlier timepoints and adverse event (AE) rates. The planned sample size was not achieved due to events beyond the investigators' control. RESULTS: Between 13 August 2010 and 28 January 2015, 140 patients received rituximab (n = 93) or placebo (n = 47) plus ongoing LEF. Rituximab + LEF resulted in an increase in the ACR50 response rate that was significant at week 16 (32 vs 15%; P = 0.020), but not week 24 (27 vs 15%; P = 0.081), the primary endpoint. Significant differences favouring the rituximab + LEF arm were observed in some secondary endpoints, including ACR20 rates from weeks 12 to 24. The rituximab and placebo arms had similar AE rates (71 vs 70%), but the rituximab arm had a higher rate of serious AEs (SAEs 20 vs 2%), primarily infections and musculoskeletal disorders. CONCLUSION: The primary endpoint was not reached, but rituximab + LEF demonstrated clinical benefits vs LEF in secondary endpoints. Although generally well tolerated, the combination was associated with additional SAEs and requires monitoring. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT: 2009-015950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01244958.

Correction to: Sustained improvement in work outcomes in employed patients with rheumatoid arthritis during 2 years of adalimumab therapy: an observational cohort study.

The original version of this article was published without open access. With the author(s)' decision to opt for Open Choice the copyright of the article changed.].

Does concomitant methotrexate confer clinical benefits in patients treated with prior biologic therapy? Analysis of data from a noninterventional study of rheumatoid arthritis patients initiating treatment with adalimumab.

Most studies of methotrexate (MTX) in combination with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors have focused on treatment-naive patients with early disease. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether previous biologic therapy influenced the impact of concomitant MTX in patients initiating treatment with adalimumab.We retrospectively analyzed data from 2 large noninterventional studies of German patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who initiated adalimumab therapy during routine clinical practice. Patients were seen between April 2004 and February 2013 for study 1 and between April 2003 and March 2013 for study 2. Key outcomes were Disease Activity Score-28 joints (DAS28), patient global assessment of health (PGA), and pain. Subgroup analyses by prior biologic treatment were performed on patients treated with continuous adalimumab monotherapy or adalimumab plus MTX for 12 months and 2-sample t tests were used to evaluate differences. We also assessed outcomes in subgroups in which MTX had been added or removed at 6 months and compared outcomes with 1-sample t tests.Of 2654 patients, 1911 (72%) were biologic naive and 743 (28%) had received prior biologic therapy, usually with a TNF inhibitor. All subgroups showed improvements following initiation of adalimumab therapy. In patients with no previous biologic treatment, continuous adalimumab plus MTX was associated with greater improvements in DAS28, PGA, and pain at month 12 compared with continuous adalimumab monotherapy (P = .0006, .0031, and .0032, respectively). In patients with previous biologic treatment, concomitant MTX was associated with statistically significant benefits in pain only. Adding MTX at month 6 resulted in additional benefits in patients with no prior biologic therapy, but not those with previous biologics.We conclude that concomitant MTX resulted in additional improvements in DAS28 and PGA vs adalimumab monotherapy in patients with no previous biologic therapy, but changes were not statistically significant in patients treated with prior biologics. These findings may help inform the patient/provider treatment decision during routine clinical care.

Sustained improvement in work outcomes in employed patients with rheumatoid arthritis during 2 years of adalimumab therapy: an observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the long-term impact of adalimumab therapy on work-related outcomes in employed patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHOD: We utilized data from an observational cohort of German patients who initiated adalimumab treatment during routine clinical care. Analyses were based on employed patients (part-time or full-time) who continued adalimumab treatment for 24 months. Major outcomes were self-reported sick leave days in the previous 6 months, absenteeism, presenteeism, and total work productivity impairment as assessed by the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire and disease activity assessments. The normal number of sick leave days was based on data from the German Federal Statistical Office. RESULTS: Of 783 patients, 72.3% were women, mean age was 47.9 years, and mean disease duration was 7.8 years. At baseline (before adalimumab initiation), 42.9% of patients had higher than normal sick leave days (> 5) in the previous 6 months. During 24 months of adalimumab treatment, 61% of patients with higher than normal sick leave days at baseline returned to normal sick leave values (≤ 5 days/6 months). Overall, mean sick leave days/6 months decreased from 14.8 days at baseline to 7.4 days at month 24. Improvements were observed in WPAI assessments and disease activity measures, although presenteeism levels remained high (32.2% at month 24). CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab treatment was associated with strong and sustained improvements in work-related outcomes in employed patients who continued on adalimumab for 24 months. Presenteeism appears to be the work outcome most resistant to improvement during RA treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01076205 Key Points • Long-term adalimumab therapy was associated with sustained improvements in work outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. • Despite improvements in sick leave days and work absenteeism, presenteeism (impairment while at work) remained relatively high.

Individual therapeutic DAS28-dcrit responses differentiate between effectiveness of rheumatoid arthritis therapies and reflect patient-reported outcomes: retrospective analysis of DAS28 responses in comparative tocilizumab studies.

Assessment of individual therapeutic responses provides valuable information concerning treatment benefits in individual patients. We evaluated individual therapeutic responses as determined by the Disease Activity Score-28 joints critical difference for improvement (DAS28-dcrit) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with intravenous tocilizumab or comparator anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents. The previously published DAS28-dcrit value [DAS28 decrease (improvement) ≥ 1.8] was retrospectively applied to data from two studies of tocilizumab in RA, the 52-week ACT-iON observational study and the 24-week ADACTA randomized study. Data were compared within (not between) studies. DAS28 was calculated with erythrocyte sedimentation rate as the inflammatory marker. Stability of DAS28-dcrit responses and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) good responses was determined by evaluating repeated responses at subsequent timepoints. A logistic regression model was used to calculate p values for differences in response rates between active agents. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs; pain, global health, function, and fatigue) in DAS28-dcrit responder versus non-responder groups were compared with an ANCOVA model. DAS28-dcrit individual response rates were 78.2% in tocilizumab-treated patients and 58.2% in anti-TNF-treated patients at week 52 in the ACT-ion study (p = 0.0001) and 90.1% versus 59.1% at week 24 in the ADACTA study (p < 0.0001). DAS28-dcrit responses showed greater stability over time (up to 52 weeks) than EULAR good responses. For both active treatments, DAS28-dcrit responses were associated with statistically significant improvements in mean PRO values compared with non-responders. The DAS28-dcrit response criterion provides robust assessments of individual responses to RA therapy and may be useful for discriminating between active agents in clinical studies and guiding treat-to-target decisions in daily practice.

Use of a "critical difference" statistical criterion improves the predictive utility of the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index score in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: The Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) is used to assess functional status in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but the change required for meaningful improvements remains unclear. A minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of 0.22 is frequently used in RA trials. The aim of this study was to determine a statistically defined critical difference for HAQ-DI (HAQ-DI-dcrit) and evaluate its association with therapeutic outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from adult German patients with RA enrolled in a multicenter observational trial in which they received adalimumab therapy at the decision of the treating clinician during routine clinical care. The HAQ-DI-dcrit, defined as the minimum change that can be reliably discriminated from random long-term variations in patients on stable therapy, was determined by evaluating intra-individual variation in patient scores. Other outcomes of interest included Disease Activity Score-28 joints and patient-reported pain and fatigue. RESULTS: The HAQ-DI-dcrit was calculated as an improvement (decrease) from baseline of 0.68 in a discovery cohort (N = 1645) of RA patients on stable therapy and with moderate disease activity (mean DAS28 [standard deviation] of 4.4 [1.6]). In the full patient cohort (N = 2740), 22.1% of patients achieved a HAQ-DI-dcrit improvement at month 6. Compared with patients with a small improvement in HAQ-DI (decrease of ≥0.22 to < 0.68) or no improvement (< 0.22), patients achieving a HAQ-DI-dcrit at month 6 had better therapeutic outcomes at months 12 and 24, including stable functional improvements. Change in pain was the most important predictor of HAQ-DI improvement during the first 6 months of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: A HAQ-DI-dcrit of 0.68 is a reliable measure of functional improvement. This measure may be useful in routine clinical care and clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01076205. Registered on February 26, 2010 (retrospectively registered).

Minimal disease activity is a stable measure of therapeutic response in psoriatic arthritis patients receiving treatment with adalimumab.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate minimal disease activity (MDA) assessments in patients with PsA during routine clinical care. Methods: We used data from a multicentre observational study of patients with active PsA who initiated treatment with adalimumab during routine clinical practice and continued treatment for at least 6 months to evaluate achievement of MDA, individual MDA criteria (modified to conform to study assessments) and ACR responses during 24 months of therapy. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to evaluate the association between MDA and individual criteria at month 6; regression models were used to determine the influence of baseline MDA criteria on achievement of MDA at month 6. Results: A total of 1684 patients were included in these analyses; most had long-standing disease. MDA was achieved by 597 patients (35.5%) at month 6. This proportion increased to 45.5% at month 24 in patients remaining on therapy. MDA status was stable over time; >75% of patients with MDA at month 6 recorded MDA at subsequent visits. Pain was the most difficult individual criterion to achieve, and enthesitis was the least difficult. Higher functional status and fewer tender joints at baseline predicted achievement of MDA at month 6. About half of patients (51.5%) with an ACR20 response at month 6 achieved MDA. Conclusion: In this observational cohort of patients with long-standing disease, MDA provided a stable and valid assessment of clinical status over 24 months. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01111240.