Hand function is already reduced before RA development and reflects subclinical tenosynovitis.

BACKGROUND: Clinically suspect arthralgia (CSA) is characterised by arthralgia of small joints and considered a risk stage for development of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, it remains unknown if the function of the hands is already affected and what mechanisms underlie impaired hand-function in CSA. METHODS: We studied various measures of hand function in two CSA populations. CSA patients in the TREAT EARLIER-trial (n=236) were evaluated at baseline for: grip strength on a dynamometer (GS), patient-reported difficulties in the grip domain of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) questionnaire and incomplete fist closure at physical examination. Findings were validated in an independent CSA cohort (n=600) where hand function was measured as: GS evaluated by squeezing the examiner's fingers, grip domain of the HAQ questionnaire and fist closure. Contrast-enhanced MRI of the hands measured synovitis, tenosynovitis and bone marrow oedema (summed as subclinical inflammation) in both cohorts. RESULTS: GS (on a dynamometer) was reduced in 75% compared with reference values in healthy controls, 60% reported grip difficulties and 13% had incomplete fist closure. Reduced GS was associated with subclinical inflammation (-0.38 kg/point inflammation, 95% CI -0.68 to -0.08). Studying separate MRI features, GS reduction was independently associated with tenosynovitis, decreasing with -2.63 kg (95% CI -2.26 to -0.33)/point tenosynovitis (range observed tenosynovitis scores: 0-20). Similar relations with tenosynovitis were seen for patient-reported grip difficulties (OR 1.12/point, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.42) and incomplete fist closure (OR 1.36/point, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.79). In the validation cohort, 36% had decreased examiner-assessed GS, 51% reported grip difficulties and 14% incomplete fist closure: all were associated with tenosynovitis. Decreased dynamometer-measured GS was most sensitive for detecting tenosynovitis (75%), while incomplete fist closure was most specific (88%-90%). CONCLUSION: Hand function is already often affected before RA development. These limitations are related to subclinical inflammation and tenosynovitis in particular.

Baseline autoantibody profile in rheumatoid arthritis is associated with early treatment response but not long-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The autoantibody profile of seropositive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is very diverse and consists of various isotypes and antibodies to multiple post-translational modifications. It is yet unknown whether this varying breadth of the autoantibody profile is associated with treatment outcomes. Therefore, we investigated whether the composition of the autoantibody profile in RA, as a marker of the underlying immunopathology, influences initial and long-term treatment outcomes. METHODS: In serum from 399 seropositive patients with RA in the IMPROVED study, drawn at baseline and at the moment of drug tapering, we measured IgG, IgM, and IgA isotypes for anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide-2 and anti-carbamylated protein antibodies, IgM and IgA rheumatoid factor, and reactivity against four citrullinated and two acetylated peptides (anti-modified protein antibodies (AMPAs)). We investigated the effect of the breadth of the autoantibody profile on (1) change in disease activity score (DAS)44 between 0 and 4 months, (2) initial drug-free remission (DFR, drug-free DAS44 < 1.6) achieved between 1 and 2 years of follow up, and (3) long-term sustained DFR until last follow up. RESULTS: Patients with a broad autoantibody profile at baseline had a significantly better early treatment response: ΔDAS 0-4 months of 1-2, 3-4, and 5-6 vs 7-8 isotypes, -1.5 (p < 0.001), -1.7 (p = 0.03), and -1.8 (p = 0.04) vs -2.2. Similar results were observed for AMPA number. However, patients with a broad baseline autoantibody profile achieved less initial DFR. For long-term sustained DFR there was no longer an association with the breadth of the autoantibody response. When assessing autoantibodies at the moment of tapering, similar trends were observed. CONCLUSIONS: A broad baseline autoantibody profile is associated with a better early treatment response. The breadth of the baseline autoantibody profile, reflecting a break in tolerance against several different autoantigens and extensive isotype switching, may indicate a more active humoral autoimmunity, which could make the underlying disease processes initially more suppressible by medication. The lack of association with long-term sustained DFR suggests that the relevance of the baseline autoantibody profile diminishes over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN11916566 . Registered on 7 November 2006. EudraCT, 2006- 06186-16. Registered on 16 July 2007.

Long-Term Outcomes of Patients With Recent-Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis After 10 Years of Tight Controlled Treatment: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Treat-to-target therapy is effective for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but long-term results of continued targeted treatment are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term outcomes in patients with early RA after 10 years of targeted treatment in 4 treatment strategies. DESIGN: Randomized trial. (Nederlands Trial Register: NTR262 and NTR265). SETTING: The Netherlands. PATIENTS: 508 patients with early active RA. INTERVENTION: Sequential monotherapy (strategy 1), step-up combination therapy (strategy 2), or initial combination therapy with prednisone (strategy 3) or with infliximab (strategy 4), all followed by targeted treatment aiming at low disease activity. MEASUREMENTS: Functional ability (Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ] score) and radiographic progression (Sharp-van der Heijde score) were primary end points. Survival in the study population was compared with the general population using the standardized mortality ratio. RESULTS: 195 of 508 of patients (38%) dropped out of the study (28% in strategy 4 vs. 40% to 45% in strategies 1 to 3, respectively). At year 10, mean HAQ score (SD) was 0.57 (0.56); 53% and 14% of patients were in remission and drug-free remission, respectively, without differences among the strategies. Over 10 years, mean HAQ scores were 0.69, 0.72, 0.64, and 0.58 in strategies 1 to 4, respectively (differences not clinically relevant). Radiographic damage was limited for all strategies, with mean Sharp-van der Heijde estimates during follow-up of 11, 8, 8, and 6 in strategies 1 to 4, respectively (P = 0.15). Standardized mortality ratio was 1.16 (95% CI, 0.92 to 1.46) based on 72 observed and 62 expected deaths, with similar survival among the 4 strategies (P = 0.81). LIMITATION: Dropout rate varied by strategy. CONCLUSION: In patients with early RA, initial (temporary) combination therapy results in faster clinical improvement and targeted treatment determines long-term outcomes. Drug-free remission, with prevention of functional deterioration and clinically relevant radiographic damage, and normalized survival are realistic outcomes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Dutch College of Health Insurance Companies, Schering-Plough, and Janssen.

Determinants of reaching drug-free remission in patients with early rheumatoid or undifferentiated arthritis after one year of remission-steered treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess whether baseline characteristics in patients with undifferentiated arthritis or early RA affect the possibility of achieving drug-free remission after 1 year (DFR1 year) of early remission induction therapy. METHODS: We included 375 patients participating in the IMPROVED study who achieved remission (DAS < 1.6) after 4 months (early remission) and were by protocol able to achieve DFR1 year. Having started with MTX plus prednisone, patients tapered prednisone to zero; after 8 months, those still in remission tapered MTX to zero, while those not in remission restarted prednisone. Characteristics of patients achieving and not achieving DFR1 year were compared. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of DFR1 year. RESULTS: After 1 year, 119 patients (32%) were in DFR. Presence of RF, fulfilling the 2010 criteria for RA, and a low tender joint count were associated with achieving DFR1 year, whereas presence of ACPA was not. None of the baseline characteristics was independently associated with DFR1 year. DFR1 year was sustained for 4 months in 65% of the patients. ACPA-positive patients less often had sustained DFR than ACPA-negative patients (58% vs 80%, P = 0.013). CONCLUSION: After 1 year of remission-steered treatment, 32% of the patients who had achieved early remission after 4 months were able to taper medication and achieved DFR. Neither the presence of ACPA nor any other baseline characteristics were independently associated with achieving DFR1 year, but in ACPA-positive patients DFR was less often sustained.

Five-year outcomes of probable rheumatoid arthritis treated with methotrexate or placebo during the first year (the PROMPT study).

OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term disease outcome of undifferentiated arthritis (UA) after initial treatment with methotrexate (MTX) or placebo. METHODS: 110 patients with UA were randomised to receive MTX (n=55) or placebo (n=55) for 1 year. After 5 years the outcomes for diagnosis (rheumatoid arthritis, 1987 criteria (RA (1987)), UA or UA in remission) and radiographic progression were compared between treatment arms and anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-positive and -negative patients. Outcomes were recalculated for patients who, with hindsight, might have been classified at baseline as having RA according to the 2010 criteria (RA (2010)). RESULTS: 25 patients in the MTX group and 29 in the placebo group progressed to RA (1987) (p=0.45). MTX delayed progression from UA to RA (1987) but only in ACPA-positive patients. Drug-free remission was achieved in 35 patients, 20 of whom were initially treated with MTX, and 32 were ACPA-negative. ACPA-positive patients had more radiographic progression, regardless of treatment. Forty-three patients (39%) could be reclassified as having had RA (2010) at baseline, 6/24 (25%) of whom achieved remission after placebo treatment. CONCLUSIONS: After 5 years there is no lasting benefit of a 1 year initial course of MTX for patients with undifferentiated arthritis, compared with initial placebo. Progression to classifiable RA was not suppressed, drug-free remission not induced and the progression of radiological damage was similar in both groups. Reclassification at baseline with the 2010 criteria showed that 25% of patients with RA (2010) achieved spontaneous drug-free remission.

Blood pressure changes in patients with recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis treated with four different treatment strategies: a post hoc analysis from the BeSt trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of disease activity and antirheumatic treatment on blood pressure (BP) in patients with recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: 508 patients with RA were randomised to receive (1) sequential monotherapy, (2) step-up combination therapy, (3) initial combination with prednisone or (4) with infliximab. Systolic and diastolic BP (SBP, DBP), disease activity score (DAS) and body mass index (BMI) were evaluated every 3 months. A linear mixed model was used to model SBP and DBP in each treatment group during year 1, adjusting for baseline BP, changes in BMI, DAS and cardiovascular medication. RESULTS: In all groups, mean SBP and DBP were lower for patients with DAS < or =2.4 than for patients with DAS >2.4. In addition, patients initially treated with infliximab (group 4) had a larger decrease in SBP and DBP over time than patients in groups 1-3. The decrease in BP was also observed in patients treated with infliximab after failure on conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in groups 1-3. The decrease in BP associated with treatment with infliximab occurred irrespective of the DAS response. CONCLUSION: A lower DAS is associated with lower BP. An additional decrease in BP was observed in patients treated with infliximab. Further research is needed to confirm the effect of infliximab on BP.

Prevalence and relative risk of dysphonia in rheumatoid arthritis.

SUMMARY: Laryngeal involvement in rheumatoid arthritis is not uncommon and may include cricoarytenoid arthritis or vocal fold lesions such as vocal fold rheumatoid nodules or bamboo nodes. Dysphonia or voicing problems can be the result of such laryngeal involvement. This cohort study investigates the prevalence and the relative risk of dysphonia when suffering from rheumatoid arthritis compared to that of healthy subjects. One hundred and sixty-six subjects with rheumatic arthritis and 148 healthy control subjects completed two quality-of-life questionnaires: the Voice Handicap Index and a three-item outcome scale. Both instruments measure the quality of the voice itself and the extent of impairment resulting from dysphonia as experienced by the patient in social and occupational settings. Patients proved to have statistically significant higher prevalence and relative risk of dysphonia. Depending on the questionnaire being used, prevalence data of dysphonia in patients varied between 12% and 27%, whereas the healthy subjects showed prevalence data varying from about 3% to 8%. A patient's relative risk varied from about 3 to 4 when compared to healthy subjects. Patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis have a clearly higher risk of dysphonia compared to healthy subjects.

Efficacy of methotrexate treatment in patients with probable rheumatoid arthritis: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients with undifferentiated arthritis (UA; inflammatory, nontraumatic arthritis that cannot be diagnosed using current classification criteria) benefit from treatment with methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: The PRObable rheumatoid arthritis: Methotrexate versus Placebo Treatment (PROMPT) study was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter trial involving 110 patients with UA who fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1958 criteria for probable RA. Treatment started with MTX (15 mg/week) or placebo tablets, and every 3 months the dosage was increased if the Disease Activity Score was >2.4. After 12 months, the study medication was tapered and discontinued. Patients were followed up for 30 months. When a patient fulfilled the ACR criteria for RA (primary end point), the study medication was changed to MTX. Joint damage was scored on radiographs of the hands and feet. RESULTS: In 22 of the 55 patients (40%) in the MTX group, UA progressed to RA compared with 29 of 55 patients (53%) in the placebo group. However, in the MTX group, patients fulfilled the ACR criteria for RA at a later time point than in the placebo group (P = 0.04), and fewer patients showed radiographic progression over 18 months (P = 0.046). CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence for the efficacy of MTX treatment in postponing the diagnosis of RA, as defined by the ACR 1987 criteria, and retarding radiographic joint damage in UA patients.

Patient preferences for treatment: report from a randomised comparison of treatment strategies in early rheumatoid arthritis (BeSt trial).

OBJECTIVE: To determine treatment preferences among patients with recent onset rheumatoid arthritis participating in a randomised controlled trial comparing four therapeutic strategies. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all 508 participants of the BeSt trial, treated for an average of 2.2 years with either sequential monotherapy (group 1), step-up combination therapy (group 2), initial combination therapy with tapered high-dose prednisone (group 3), or initial combination therapy with infliximab (group 4). Treatment adjustments were made every 3 months to achieve low disease activity (DAS < or =2.4). The questionnaire explored patients' preferences or dislikes for the initial therapy. RESULTS: In total, 440 patients (87%) completed the questionnaire. Despite virtually equal study outcomes at 2 years, more patients in group 4 reported much or very much improvement of general health: 50%, 56%, 46% and 74% in groups 1-4, respectively (overall, P<0.001). Almost half of the patients expressed no preference or aversion for a particular treatment group, 33% had hoped for assignment to group 4 and 38% had hoped against assignment to group 3. This negative perception was much less prominent in patients actually in group 3. Nevertheless, 50% of patients in group 3 disliked having to take prednisone, while only 8% in group 4 disliked going to the hospital for intravenous treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of our retrospective study, patients clearly preferred initial combination therapy with infliximab and disliked taking prednisone. After actual exposure, this preference remained, but the perception of prednisone improved. Patient perceptions need to be addressed when administering treatment.