Real-world apremilast use in biologic-naïve psoriatic arthritis patients. Data from Spanish clinical practice / Uso real de apremilast en pacientes con artritis psoriásica sin tratamiento biológico. Datos de la práctica clínica española

Introduction: Apremilast is approved for treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Real-world evidence on apremilast effectiveness in clinical practice is limited. Methods: Observational study enrolling adult patients, across 21 Spanish centres, who had initiated apremilast in the prior 6 (±1) months and were biologic naive. Data were collected at routine follow-up visits 6 and 12 months after apremilast initiation. Primary outcome was 6 and 12-month persistence to apremilast. Secondary outcomes included Disease Activity for PsA (DAPSA), joint erosions, enthesitis, dactylitis, and patient-reported quality of life (QoL, measured using the PsA impact of disease [PsAID] questionnaire). Results: We included 59 patients. Most had oligoarticular PsA, moderate disease activity, and high comorbidity burden. Three-quarters were continuing apremilast at 6 months and two-thirds at 12 months; mean (SD) apremilast treatment duration was 9.43 (1.75) months. DAPSA scores showed improved disease activity: one-third of patients in remission or low activity at apremilast initiation versus 62% and 78% at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Eleven of 46 patients with radiographic assessments had joint erosions at apremilast initiation and none at month 12. Median (Q1, Q3) number of swollen joints was 4.0 (2.0, 6.0) at apremilast initiation versus 0.0 (0.0, 2.0) at 12 months. Incidence of dactylitis and enthesitis decreased between apremilast initiation (35.6% and 28.8%, respectively) and month 12 (11.6% and 2.4%, respectively). Over two-thirds of patients had a PSAID-9 score <4 (cut-off for patient-acceptable symptom state) at month 12. Conclusions: In Spanish clinical practice, two-thirds of PsA patients continued apremilast at 12 months, with clinical benefits at the joint level, no radiographic progression of erosions, and a positive impact on patient-reported QoL.(AU)

Introducción: Apremilast está aprobado para el tratamiento de la psoriasis y la artritis psoriásica (APs). La evidencia sobre la efectividad de apremilast en la práctica clínica es limitada. Métodos: Estudio observacional en el que se incluyó a pacientes adultos, de 21 centros españoles, que habían iniciado apremilast en los 6 (± 1) meses previos y no habían recibido biológicos. Los datos se recogieron en visitas rutinarias de seguimiento a los 6 y 12 meses del inicio de apremilast. El objetivo primario fue la persistencia de apremilast a los 6 y 12 meses. Los objetivos secundarios incluyeron la actividad de la enfermedad para APs (DAPSA), erosiones articulares, entesitis, dactilitis y la calidad de vida informada por el paciente (CdV, medida mediante el cuestionario “PsA Impact of disease [PsAID]”). Resultados: Se incluyó a 59 pacientes. La mayoría presentaba APs oligoarticular, actividad moderada de la enfermedad y alta comorbilidad. Tres cuartas partes continuaban con apremilast a los 6 meses y 2 tercios a los 12 meses; la duración media (DE) del tratamiento con apremilast fue de 9,43 (1,75) meses. Las puntuaciones DAPSA mostraron una mejora de la actividad de la enfermedad: un tercio de los pacientes en remisión o baja actividad al inicio de apremilast frente al 62 y el 78% a los 6 y 12 meses, respectivamente. Once de 46 pacientes con evaluaciones radiográficas presentaban erosiones articulares al inicio de apremilast y ninguno en el mes 12. La mediana (Q1, Q3) del número de articulaciones inflamadas fue de 4,0 (2,0, 6,0) al inicio de apremilast frente a 0,0 (0,0, 2,0) a los 12 meses. La incidencia de dactilitis y la entesitis disminuyeron entre el inicio de apremilast (el 35,6 y el 28,8%, respectivamente) y el mes 12 (el 11,6 y el 2,4%, respectivamente). Más de 2 tercios de los pacientes tenían una puntuación PSAID-9 < 4 (punto de corte del estado sintomático aceptable para el paciente) en el mes 12.(AU)

Real-world apremilast use in biologic-naïve psoriatic arthritis patients. Data from Spanish clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION: Apremilast is approved for treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Real-world evidence on apremilast effectiveness in clinical practice is limited. METHODS: Observational study enrolling adult patients, across 21 Spanish centres, who had initiated apremilast in the prior 6 (±1) months and were biologic naive. Data were collected at routine follow-up visits 6 and 12 months after apremilast initiation. Primary outcome was 6 and 12-month persistence to apremilast. Secondary outcomes included Disease Activity for PsA (DAPSA), joint erosions, enthesitis, dactylitis, and patient-reported quality of life (QoL, measured using the PsA impact of disease [PsAID] questionnaire). RESULTS: We included 59 patients. Most had oligoarticular PsA, moderate disease activity, and high comorbidity burden. Three-quarters were continuing apremilast at 6 months and two-thirds at 12 months; mean (SD) apremilast treatment duration was 9.43 (1.75) months. DAPSA scores showed improved disease activity: one-third of patients in remission or low activity at apremilast initiation versus 62% and 78% at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Eleven of 46 patients with radiographic assessments had joint erosions at apremilast initiation and none at month 12. Median (Q1, Q3) number of swollen joints was 4.0 (2.0, 6.0) at apremilast initiation versus 0.0 (0.0, 2.0) at 12 months. Incidence of dactylitis and enthesitis decreased between apremilast initiation (35.6% and 28.8%, respectively) and month 12 (11.6% and 2.4%, respectively). Over two-thirds of patients had a PSAID-9 score <4 (cut-off for patient-acceptable symptom state) at month 12. CONCLUSIONS: In Spanish clinical practice, two-thirds of PsA patients continued apremilast at 12 months, with clinical benefits at the joint level, no radiographic progression of erosions, and a positive impact on patient-reported QoL. Trial registration number Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03828045.

Estado actual de la atención multidisciplinar para pacientes con artritis psoriásica en España: proyecto NEXUS 2.0 / Current status of multidisciplinary care in psoriatic arthritis in Spain: NEXUS 2.0 project

OBJETIVO: 1) Analizar la implementación de los modelos de atención multidisciplinar en pacientes con artritis psoriásica (APs), y 2) definir estándares de calidad de mínimos y de excelencia. MÉTODOS: Se envió una encuesta a profesionales que ya realizan atención multidisciplinar o están en vías preguntando por: 1) tipo de modelo de abordaje multidisciplinar, y 2) grado, prioridad y facilidad de la implementación de los estándares de calidad de estructura, proceso y resultado. En 6 reuniones regionales se presentaron y discutieron los resultados de la encuesta, tanto a nivel nacional como regional, y se definió la prioridad definitiva de los estándares de calidad. En una reunión de grupo nominal, 11 expertos (reumatólogos y dermatólogos) analizaron los resultados de la encuesta y las reuniones regionales. Con ello definieron qué estándares de calidad son actualmente de mínimos y cuáles de excelencia. RESULTADOS: Los modelos de atención multidisciplinar conjunto y paralelo son los más implementados, y los de los estándares de calidad es muy variable: en los de estructura varía del 22 al 74%, en los de proceso del 17 al 54% y en los de resultado del 2 al 28%. De los 25 estándares de calidad originales, 9 se consideran solo de mínimos, 4 de excelencia y 12 tienen definidos unos criterios para ser de mínimos y otros para la excelencia. CONCLUSIONES: La definición de estándares de calidad de mínimos y de excelencia ayudará en la consecución del objetivo de la atención multidisciplinar para pacientes con APs, que es la mejor asistencia sanitaria posible

OBJECTIVE: 1) To analyze the implementation of multidisciplinary care models in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients, 2) To define minimum and excellent standards of care. METHODS: A survey was sent to clinicians who already performed multidisciplinary care or were in the process of undertaking it, asking: 1) Type of multidisciplinary care model implemented; 2) Degree, priority and feasibility of the implementation of quality standards in the structure, process and result for care. In 6 regional meetings the results of the survey were presented and discussed, and the ultimate priority of quality standards for care was defined. At a nominal meeting group, 11 experts (rheumatologists and dermatologists) analyzed the results of the survey and the regional meetings. With this information, they defined which standards of care are currently considered as minimum and which are excellent. RESULTS: The simultaneous and parallel models of multidisciplinary care are those most widely implemented, but the implementation of quality standards is highly variable. In terms of structure it ranges from 22% to 74%, in those related to process from 17% to 54% and in the results from 2% to 28%. Of the 25 original quality standards for care, 9 were considered only minimum, 4 were excellent and 12 defined criteria for minimum level and others for excellence. CONCLUSIONS: The definition of minimum and excellent quality standards for care will help achieve the goal of multidisciplinary care for patients with PAs, which is the best healthcare possible

Current status of multidisciplinary care in psoriatic arthritis in Spain: NEXUS 2.0 project. / Estado actual de la atención multidisciplinar para pacientes con artritis psoriásica en España: proyecto NEXUS 2.0.

OBJECTIVE: 1) To analyze the implementation of multidisciplinary care models in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients, 2) To define minimum and excellent standards of care. METHODS: A survey was sent to clinicians who already performed multidisciplinary care or were in the process of undertaking it, asking: 1) Type of multidisciplinary care model implemented; 2) Degree, priority and feasibility of the implementation of quality standards in the structure, process and result for care. In 6 regional meetings the results of the survey were presented and discussed, and the ultimate priority of quality standards for care was defined. At a nominal meeting group, 11 experts (rheumatologists and dermatologists) analyzed the results of the survey and the regional meetings. With this information, they defined which standards of care are currently considered as minimum and which are excellent. RESULTS: The simultaneous and parallel models of multidisciplinary care are those most widely implemented, but the implementation of quality standards is highly variable. In terms of structure it ranges from 22% to 74%, in those related to process from 17% to 54% and in the results from 2% to 28%. Of the 25 original quality standards for care, 9 were considered only minimum, 4 were excellent and 12 defined criteria for minimum level and others for excellence. CONCLUSIONS: The definition of minimum and excellent quality standards for care will help achieve the goal of multidisciplinary care for patients with PAs, which is the best healthcare possible.

The EJES-3D tool for personalized prescription of exercise in axial spondyloarthritis through multimedia animations: pilot study.

To develop and evaluate a web application based on multimedia animations, combined with a training program, to improve the prescription of exercises in spondyloarthritis (SpA). After a review of exercises included in the main clinical trials and recommendations of international societies, a multidisciplinary team-rehabilitators, rheumatologists, physiotherapists, computer scientists and graphic designers-developed a web application for the prescription of exercises (EJES-3D). Once completed, this was presented to 12 pairs of rehabilitators-rheumatologists from the same hospital in a workshop. Knowledge about exercise was tested in rheumatologists before and 6 months after the workshop, when they also evaluated the application. The EJES-3D application includes 38 multimedia videos and allows prescribing predesigned programs or customizing them. A patient can consult the prescribed exercises at any time from a device with internet connection (mobile, tablet, or computer). The vast majority of the evaluators (89%) were satisfied or very satisfied and considered that their expectations regarding the usefulness of the web application had been met. They highlighted the ability to tailor exercises adapted to the different stages of the disease and the quality and variety of the videos. They also indicated some limitations of the application and operational problems. The EJES-3D tool was positively evaluated by experts in SpA, potentially the most demanding group of users with the most critical capacity. This allows a preliminary validation of the contents, usefulness, and ease of use. Analyzing and correcting the errors and limitations detected is allowing us to improve the EJES-3D tool.

Lumbalgia mecánica como forma de presentación de vértebra limbus anterior / Mechanical low back pain as a presentation of anterior limbus vertebra

No disponible

Modelos de atención multidisciplinar en pacientes con artritis psoriásica en España / Multidisciplinary care models for patients with psoriatic arthritis

Objetivo. Describir la estructura y procesos de distintos modelos de atención multidisciplinar de pacientes con artritis psoriásica (APs) en España, así como las barreras y facilitadores en su implantación. Métodos. Se realizó un estudio cualitativo mediante entrevistas estructuradas a 24 profesionales (12 reumatólogos y 12 dermatólogos que realizan atención multidisciplinar en pacientes con APs). Se recogieron datos relacionados con el centro, servicio, población atendida y sobre el modelo de atención multidisciplinar (tipo, recursos materiales y humanos, requerimientos de los profesionales, objetivos, criterios de entrada y salida, agendas, protocolos de actuación, responsabilidades, toma de decisiones, actividad investigadora y docente, sesiones clínicas conjuntas, creación/inicio, planificación, ventajas/desventajas del modelo y barreras/facilitadores en la implantación del modelo. Se describen sus características. Resultados. Analizamos 12 modelos de atención multidisciplinar en APs, implantados desde hace al menos 1-2 años, que globalmente pueden resumirse en 3 subtipos diferentes: presencial conjunto, presencial paralelo y circuito preferencial. La implantación de uno u otro modelo es consecuencia de la adaptación a las circunstancias del centro y profesionales. Una correcta planificación de la implantación es fundamental. La implicación y buena sintonía entre profesionales así como un acceso y criterios de derivación bien definidos son facilitadores muy importantes en la implantación de un modelo. La gestión de las agendas y la recogida de datos para medir resultados de salud de estos modelos son las principales barreras. Conclusiones. Existen distintos modelos de atención multidisciplinar implantados que tienen como objetivo intentar mejorar la atención del paciente con APs, la eficiencia del sistema y la colaboración entre especialistas (AU)

Objetive. To describe (structure, processes) of the multidisciplinary care models in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in Spain, as well as barriers and facilitators of their implementation. Methods. A qualitative study was performed following structured interviews with 24 professionals (12 rheumatologists, 12 dermatologists who provide multidisciplinary care for patients with PsA). We collected data related to the hospital, department, population and multidisciplinary care model (type, physical and human resources, professional requirements, objectives, referral criteria, agendas, protocols, responsibilities, decision- making, research and education, clinical sessions, development and planning of the model, advantages and disadvantages of the model, barriers and facilitators in the implementation of the model. The models characteristics are described. Results. We analyzed 12 multidisciplinary care models in PsA, with at least 1-2 years of experience, and 3 subtypes of models, face-to-face, parallel, and preferential circuit. All are adapted to the hospital and professionals characteristics. A proper implementation planning is essential. The involvement and empathy between professionals and an access and well-defined referral criteria are important facilitators in the implementation of a model. The management of agendas and data collection to measure the multidisciplinary care models health outcomes are the main barriers. Conclusions. There are different multidisciplinary care models in PsA that can improve patient outcomes, system efficiency and collaboration between specialists (AU)

Multidisciplinary Care Models for Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis. / Modelos de atención multidisciplinar en pacientes con artritis psoriásica en España.

OBJETIVE: To describe (structure, processes) of the multidisciplinary care models in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in Spain, as well as barriers and facilitators of their implementation. METHODS: A qualitative study was performed following structured interviews with 24 professionals (12 rheumatologists, 12 dermatologists who provide multidisciplinary care for patients with PsA). We collected data related to the hospital, department, population and multidisciplinary care model (type, physical and human resources, professional requirements, objectives, referral criteria, agendas, protocols, responsibilities, decision- making, research and education, clinical sessions, development and planning of the model, advantages and disadvantages of the model, barriers and facilitators in the implementation of the model. The models characteristics are described. RESULTS: We analyzed 12 multidisciplinary care models in PsA, with at least 1-2 years of experience, and 3 subtypes of models, face-to-face, parallel, and preferential circuit. All are adapted to the hospital and professionals characteristics. A proper implementation planning is essential. The involvement and empathy between professionals and an access and well-defined referral criteria are important facilitators in the implementation of a model. The management of agendas and data collection to measure the multidisciplinary care models health outcomes are the main barriers. CONCLUSIONS: There are different multidisciplinary care models in PsA that can improve patient outcomes, system efficiency and collaboration between specialists.

Asociación lupus eritematoso sistémico y esclerosis tuberosa, un caso / Coincidence of tuberous sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus-a case report

La esclerosis tuberosa (ET), también llamada enfermedad de Pringle Bourneville, es una facomatosis con posible afectación dérmica, neurológica, renal y pulmonar. Se caracteriza por el desarrollo de proliferaciones benignas en numerosos órganos, que dan lugar a las diferentes manifestaciones clínicas. Se asocia a la mutación de 2 genes: TSC1 (hamartina) y TSC2 (tuberina), con la alteración funcional del complejo diana de la rapamicina (mTOR). La activación de la señal mTOR ha sido descrita recientemente en el lupus eritematoso sistémico (LES), y su inhibición podría resultar beneficiosa en pacientes con nefritis lúpica. Presentamos el caso de una paciente que 30 años después del inicio de LES con afectación renal grave (glomerulonefritis tipo IV), resuelta con pulsos intravenosos de ciclofosfamida, comenzó con manifestaciones clínicas del complejo esclerosis tuberosa (CET). Consideramos de interés la coexistencia de estas 2 entidades, ya que solo hemos encontrado 2 casos similares en la literatura (AU)

Tuberous sclerosis, also called Bourneville Pringle disease, is a phakomatosis with potential dermal, nerve, kidney and lung damage. It is characterized by the development of benign proliferations in many organs, which result in different clinical manifestations. It is associated with the mutation of two genes: TSC1 (hamartin) and TSC2 (tuberin), with the change in the functionality of the complex target of rapamycin (mTOR). MTOR activation signal has been recently described in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and its inhibition could be beneficial in patients with lupus nephritis. We report the case of a patient who began with clinical manifestations of tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) 30 years after the onset of SLE with severe renal disease (tipe IV nephritis) who improved after treatment with iv pulses of cyclophosphamide. We found only two similar cases in the literature, and hence considered the coexistence of these two entities of great interest (AU)

Coincidence of tuberous sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus-a case report. / Asociación lupus eritematoso sistémico y esclerosis tuberosa, un caso.

Tuberous sclerosis, also called Bourneville Pringle disease, is a phakomatosis with potential dermal, nerve, kidney and lung damage. It is characterized by the development of benign proliferations in many organs, which result in different clinical manifestations. It is associated with the mutation of two genes: TSC1 (hamartin) and TSC2 (tuberin), with the change in the functionality of the complex target of rapamycin (mTOR). MTOR activation signal has been recently described in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and its inhibition could be beneficial in patients with lupus nephritis. We report the case of a patient who began with clinical manifestations of tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) 30 years after the onset of SLE with severe renal disease (tipe IV nephritis) who improved after treatment with iv pulses of cyclophosphamide. We found only two similar cases in the literature, and hence considered the coexistence of these two entities of great interest.