Patient research partner involvement in rheumatology research: a systematic literature review informing the 2023 updated EULAR recommendations for the involvement of patient research partners.

BACKGROUND: Patient research partners (PRPs) are people with a disease who collaborate in a research team as partners. The aim of this systematic literature review (SLR) was to assess barriers and facilitators to PRP involvement in rheumatology research. METHODS: The SLR was conducted in PubMed/Medline for articles on PRP involvement in rheumatology research, published between 2017 and 2023; websites were also searched in rheumatology and other specialties. Data were extracted regarding the definition of PRPs, their role and added value, as well as barriers and facilitators to PRP involvement. The quality of the articles was assessed. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and principles of thematic content analysis was applied to qualitative data. RESULTS: Of 1016 publications, 53 articles were included; the majority of these studies were qualitative studies (26%), opinion articles (21%), meeting reports (17%) and mixed-methods studies (11%). Roles of PRPs ranged from research partners to patient advocates, advisors and patient reviewers. PRPs were reported/advised to be involved early in the project (32% of articles) and in all research phases (30%), from the conception stage to the implementation of research findings. The main barriers were challenges in communication and support for both PRPs and researchers. Facilitators of PRP involvement included more than one PRP per project, training of PRPs and researchers, a supportive environment for PRPs (including adequate communication, acknowledgement and compensation of PRPs) and the presence of a PRP coordinator. CONCLUSION: This SLR identified barriers and facilitators to PRP involvement, and was key to updating the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology recommendations for PRP-researcher collaboration based on scientific evidence.

Exploring the effect on primary endpoints in trials testing targeted therapy interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-epidemiological study on the appropriate use of a core outcome set.

OBJECTIVES: To explore which core domain is best associated with the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% response in trials assessing the effect of targeted interventions in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A meta-epidemiological study was performed on randomised trials investigating biologics and targeted agents compared with placebo or conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with RA. The main outcome measures were ORs for the ACR 20% response and at least one of the eight core domains according to the existing RA core outcome set (COS) analysed based on standardised mean differences. RESULTS: 115 trials involving 55 422 patients with RA were eligible. The OR for achieving ACR 20% response was 3.19 (95% CI 2.96 to 3.44) for the experimental interventions relative to the comparators. The median number of COS domains reported was 6; 18 trials reported only 1 domain, 17 all 8. Univariable meta-regression analyses indicated that each of the eight core domains was significantly associated with ACR 20% response, yet improvements in physical disability explain a successful ACR 20% response the most. Including only trials reporting on all eight core domains, univariable meta-regression analyses proved improvement in fatigue to explain a successful ACR 20% response the most. CONCLUSIONS: Within this dataset, it is evident that the conclusions concerning our primary objective were significantly influenced by both the amount and characteristics of missing data. Our data suggest that fatigue could be more important for the primary endpoint than previously assumed, but this is based on limited data.

EULAR recommendations for the involvement of patient research partners in rheumatology research: 2023 update.

BACKGROUND: Since the publication of the 2011 European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) recommendations for patient research partner (PRP) involvement in rheumatology research, the role of PRPs has evolved considerably. Therefore, an update of the 2011 recommendations was deemed necessary. METHODS: In accordance with the EULAR Standardised Operational Procedures, a task force comprising 13 researchers, 2 health professionals and 10 PRPs was convened. The process included an online task force meeting, a systematic literature review and an in-person second task force meeting to formulate overarching principles (OAPs) and recommendations. The level of agreement of task force members was assessed anonymously (0-10 scale). RESULTS: The task force developed five new OAPs, updated seven existing recommendations and formulated three new recommendations. The OAPs address the definition of a PRP, the contribution of PRPs, the role of informal caregivers, the added value of PRPs and the importance of trust and communication in collaborative research efforts. The recommendations address the research type and phases of PRP involvement, the recommended number of PRPs per project, the support necessary for PRPs, training of PRPs and acknowledgement of PRP contributions. New recommendations concern the benefits of support and guidance for researchers, the need for regular evaluation of the patient-researcher collaboration and the role of a designated coordinator to facilitate collaboration. Agreements within the task force were high and ranged between 9.16 and 9.96. CONCLUSION: The updated EULAR recommendations for PRP involvement are more substantially based on evidence. Together with added OAPs, they should serve as a guide for researchers and PRPs and will ultimately strengthen the involvement of PRPs in rheumatology research.

Effect of Bimekizumab on Patient-Reported Disease Impact in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: 1-Year Results from Two Phase 3 Studies.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate 1-year bimekizumab efficacy in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) from the patient perspective using the 12-item PsA Impact of Disease (PsAID-12) questionnaire. METHODS: BE OPTIMAL (NCT03895203; biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug [bDMARD]-naïve), BE COMPLETE (NCT03896581; inadequate response/intolerance to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors [TNFi-IR]) and BE VITAL (NCT04009499; open-label extension) assessed bimekizumab 160 mg every 4 weeks in patients with PsA. Post hoc analyses of patient-reported disease impact, assessed by the PsAID-12 questionnaire, are reported to 1 year (collected to week 40 in BE COMPLETE). RESULTS: Overall, 1,112 total patients were included (698 bimekizumab, 414 placebo). Rapid improvements observed with bimekizumab treatment at week 4 continued to week 16 and were sustained to 1 year. At 1 year, mean (standard error) change from baseline in PsAID-12 total score was comparable between bimekizumab-randomized patients and patients who switched to bimekizumab at week 16 (bDMARD-naïve bimekizumab -2.3 [0.1], placebo/bimekizumab -2.2 [0.1]; TNFi-IR bimekizumab -|2.5 [0.1], placebo/bimekizumab -2.2 [0.2]). Proportions of bimekizumab-randomized patients achieving clinically meaningful within-patient improvement (≥3-point decrease from baseline) at week 16 were sustained to 1 year (bDMARD-naïve 49.0%; TNFi-IR 48.5%) and were similar for placebo/bimekizumab patients (bDMARD-naïve 44.4%; TNFi-IR 40.6%). Across studies and arms, 35.3% to 47.8% of patients had minimal or no symptom impact at 1 year. Improvements were observed to 1 year across all single-item domains, including pain, fatigue and skin problems. CONCLUSION: Bimekizumab treatment resulted in rapid and sustained clinically meaningful improvements in disease impact up to 1 year in bDMARD-naïve and TNFi-IR patients with PsA.

Matching researchers' needs and patients' contributions: practical tips for meaningful patient engagement from the field of rheumatology.

There is an increasing recognition of the importance of patient engagement and involvement in health research, specifically within the field of rheumatology. In general, researchers in this specialty appreciate the value of patients as partners in research. In practice, however, the majority of researchers does not involve patients on their research teams. Many researchers find it difficult to match their needs for patient engagement and the potential contributions from individuals living with rheumatic disease. In this Viewpoint, we provide researchers and patients practical tips for matching 'supply and demand,' based on our own experiences as patient engagement consultants and trainers in rheumatology research. All authors started as a 'naïve' patient or caregiver, an identity that evolved through a process of 'adversarial growth': positive changes that are experienced as a result of the struggle with highly challenging life circumstances. Here, we introduce four stages of adversarial growth in the context of research. We submit that all types of patients have their own experiences, qualities and skills, and can add specific input to research. The recommendations for engagement are not strict directives. They are meant as starting points for discussion or interview. Regardless of individual qualities and knowledge, we believe that all patients engaged in research have a single goal in common: to contribute to research that ultimately will change the lives of many other patients.

American College of Rheumatology/EULAR remission criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: 2022 revision.

OBJECTIVE: In 2011, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and EULAR endorsed provisional criteria for remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), both Boolean-based and index-based. Based on recent studies indicating that a higher threshold for the patient global assessment (PtGA) may improve agreement between the two sets of criteria, our goals were to externally validate a revision of the Boolean remission criteria using a higher PtGA threshold and to validate the provisionally endorsed index-based criteria. METHODS: We used data from four randomised trials comparing biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs to methotrexate or placebo. We tested the higher proposed PtGA threshold of 2 cm (Boolean2.0) (range 0-10 cm) compared with the original threshold of 1 cm (Boolean1.0). We analysed agreement between the Boolean-based and index-based criteria (Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)) for remission and examined how well each remission definition predicted later good physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score≤0.5) and radiographic non-progression. RESULTS: Data from 2048 trial participants, 1101 with early RA and 947 with established RA, were included. The proportion of patients with disease in remission at 6 months after treatment initiation increased when using Boolean2.0 compared with Boolean1.0, from 14.8% to 20.6% in early RA and 4.2% to 6.0% in established RA. Agreement between Boolean2.0 and the SDAI or CDAI remission criteria was better than for Boolean1.0, particularly in early disease. Boolean2.0, SDAI, and CDAI remission criteria had similar positive likelihood ratios (LRs) to predict radiographic nonprogression and a HAQ score of ≤0.5 (positive LR 3.8-4.3). The omission of PtGA (BooleanX) worsened the prediction of good functional outcomes. CONCLUSION: Using the Boolean 2.0 criteria classifies, more patients as achieving remission and increases the agreement with index-based remission criteria without jeopardising predictive value for radiographic or functional outcomes. This revised Boolean definition and the previously provisionally endorsed index-based criteria were endorsed by ACR and EULAR.

EULAR points to consider for the definition of clinical and imaging features suspicious for progression from psoriasis to psoriatic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: The transition from psoriasis (PsO) to psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and the early diagnosis of PsA is of considerable scientific and clinical interest for the prevention and interception of PsA. OBJECTIVE: To formulate EULAR points to consider (PtC) for the development of data-driven guidance and consensus for clinical trials and clinical practice in the field of prevention or interception of PsA and for clinical management of people with PsO at risk for PsA development. METHODS: A multidisciplinary EULAR task force of 30 members from 13 European countries was established, and the EULAR standardised operating procedures for development for PtC were followed. Two systematic literature reviews were conducted to support the task force in formulating the PtC. Furthermore, the task force proposed nomenclature for the stages before PsA, through a nominal group process to be used in clinical trials. RESULTS: Nomenclature for the stages preceding PsA onset, 5 overarching principles and 10 PtC were formulated. Nomenclature was proposed for three stages towards PsA development, namely people with PsO at higher risk of PsA, subclinical PsA and clinical PsA. The latter stage was defined as PsO and associated synovitis and it could be used as an outcome measure for clinical trials evaluating the transition from PsO to PsA. The overarching principles address the nature of PsA at its onset and underline the importance of collaboration of rheumatologists and dermatologists for strategies for prevention/interception of PsA. The 10 PtC highlight arthralgia and imaging abnormalities as key elements of subclinical PsA that can be used as potential short-term predictors of PsA development and useful items to design clinical trials for PsA interception. Traditional risk factors for PsA development (ie, PsO severity, obesity and nail involvement) may represent more long-term disease predictors and be less robust for short-term trials concerning the transition from PsO to PsA. CONCLUSION: These PtC are helpful to define the clinical and imaging features of people with PsO suspicious to progress to PsA. This information will be helpful for identification of those who could benefit from a therapeutic intervention to attenuate, delay or prevent PsA development.

Consensus statement on blocking interleukin-6 receptor and interleukin-6 in inflammatory conditions: an update.

BACKGROUND: Targeting interleukin (IL)-6 has become a major therapeutic strategy in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory disease. Interference with the IL-6 pathway can be directed at the specific receptor using anti-IL-6Rα antibodies or by directly inhibiting the IL-6 cytokine. This paper is an update of a previous consensus document, based on most recent evidence and expert opinion, that aims to inform on the medical use of interfering with the IL-6 pathway. METHODS: A systematic literature research was performed that focused on IL-6-pathway inhibitors in inflammatory diseases. Evidence was put in context by a large group of international experts and patients in a subsequent consensus process. All were involved in formulating the consensus statements, and in the preparation of this document. RESULTS: The consensus process covered relevant aspects of dosing and populations for different indications of IL-6 pathway inhibitors that are approved across the world, including rheumatoid arthritis, polyarticular-course and systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis, giant cell arteritis, Takayasu arteritis, adult-onset Still's disease, Castleman's disease, chimeric antigen receptor-T-cell-induced cytokine release syndrome, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder and severe COVID-19. Also addressed were other clinical aspects of the use of IL-6 pathway inhibitors, including pretreatment screening, safety, contraindications and monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The document provides a comprehensive consensus on the use of IL-6 inhibition to treat inflammatory disorders to inform healthcare professionals (including researchers), patients, administrators and payers.

Tolerability and comparative effectiveness of TNF-, IL-17-, and IL-23(p19) inhibitors in psoriatic arthritis: A target trial emulation study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare tolerability and effectiveness of two different classes of biological Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (bDMARDs; interleukin (IL)-17- and IL-23(p19) inhibitors) relative to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) regarding the drug survival rates and treatment outcomes in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: We emulated a target trial on comparative effectiveness using observational data from a prospective cohort study based on the Parker Institute's PsA cohort - the PIPA cohort. All patients underwent interview and clinical examination programme at baseline and at follow-up visits at four and twelve months. The primary endpoint, drug survival, was assessed up to 12 months from baseline. We estimated hazard ratios from proportional hazards model and used propensity score adjustment in an attempt to deconfound and emulate a random treatment assignment. RESULTS: We included a total of 109 patients in the intention-to-monitor population at baseline initiating either TNFi (75 patients), IL17i (26 patients), or IL23(19)i (8 patients). Hazard ratios in the propensity adjusted model comparing IL-17i and IL-23(p19)i to TNFi were 1.36 (95% CI 0.59-3.14) and 0.56 (95% CI 0.10-3.24), respectively. TNFi and IL-17i had comparable effects regarding response rates and changes in clinical outcomes after 12 months, whereas IL-23(p19)i tended to perform better overall. CONCLUSION: No decisive differences between drugs were observed at group level regarding drug survival and clinical outcomes after 12 months. TNFi, IL-17i, and IL-23(p19)i may all be considered equally effective in the treatment of patients with PsA, advocating for investigating more in personalised treatment strategies.

Can numerical rating scales of disease impact be used as targets for patient-centred management in rheumatoid arthritis?

OBJECTIVES: Patient centred care is an increasingly important paradigm. Applying a treat-to-target strategy to the impact of the disease in patients' lives seems a very promising tool to serve this purpose. We aimed to evaluate if maximum acceptable impact scores (target-values) defined at the population level provide an appropriate representation for most individual patients. To determine if the individually established target values of impact are consistent enough to be used in a treat-to-target strategy. METHODS: Consecutive patients with rheumatoid arthritis were asked to indicate, in two consecutive visits, the maximum severity of impact they considered acceptable to live with for the rest of their lives, in the seven domains of Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease score. The individual adequacy of population-based reference values was assessed by measures of dispersion. Stability of individual target-values were evaluated through intraclass correlation coefficient. Socio-demographic, clinical and psychological features were tested as co-factors of stability. RESULTS: 299 patients were included. The dispersion of targets was wide (CV>0.68), thus limiting the use of any population-based single values as targets for the individual patients. Although the mean target values were very similar in both visits for all domains, reliability was poor in all cases (ICCs: 0.37-0.47). Only 25-30% of the patients selected the same target value in the 2 visits. No explanatory factors for (non-)stability were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Quantified impact targets defined at population level are not appropriate for individual patient care. Research on alternative tools to support patient-centred, target-oriented management strategies is warranted.

EULAR points to consider when analysing and reporting comparative effectiveness research using observational data in rheumatology.

BACKGROUND: Comparing treatment effectiveness over time in observational settings is hampered by several major threats, among them confounding and attrition bias. OBJECTIVES: To develop European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) points to consider (PtC) when analysing and reporting comparative effectiveness research using observational data in rheumatology. METHODS: The PtC were developed using a three-step process according to the EULAR Standard Operating Procedures. Based on a systematic review of methods currently used in comparative effectiveness studies, the PtC were formulated through two in-person meetings of a multidisciplinary task force and a two-round online Delphi, using expert opinion and a simulation study. Finally, feedback from a larger audience was used to refine the PtC. Mean levels of agreement among the task force were calculated. RESULTS: Three overarching principles and 10 PtC were formulated, addressing, in particular, potential biases relating to attrition or confounding by indication. Building on Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines, these PtC insist on the definition of the baseline for analysis and treatment effectiveness. They also focus on the reasons for stopping treatment as an important consideration when assessing effectiveness. Finally, the PtC recommend providing key information on missingness patterns. CONCLUSION: To improve the reliability of an increasing number of real-world comparative effectiveness studies in rheumatology, special attention is required to reduce potential biases. Adherence to clear recommendations for the analysis and reporting of observational comparative effectiveness studies will improve the trustworthiness of their results.

Patient Experienced Symptom State in rheumatoid arthritis: sensitivity to change in disease activity and impact.

OBJECTIVES: The Patient Experienced Symptom State (PESS) is a single-question, patient-reported outcome that is validated to assess global disease impact in RA. This study addresses its sensitivity to change, and reliability. METHODS: Disease activity, disease impact in the seven domains of RA Impact of Disease (RAID) and PESS were assessed in patients with RA from the NOR-DMARD registry, at two visits, 6 months apart. The PESS over the last week was scored at five levels, from 'very bad' to 'very good'. Disease impact and disease activity were compared between patients who improved, maintained or worsened PESS over time, through one-way analysis of variance, with post hoc Bonferroni correction. Correlations between changes in these parameters were assessed through Spearman's correlation coefficient. Sensitivity to change was assessed by standardized response mean (SRM) between the two visits. Reliability was analysed through intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between the two visits in patients with stable disease activity and impact. RESULTS: In 353 patients [76.8% females, mean (s.d.) 9.9 (9.6) years disease duration], improvement in PESS level was associated with substantial improvements in mean impact in all domains as well as disease activity (P <0.02). PESS change was moderately to strongly correlated with RAID domains and disease activity (rho: 0.4-0.7). PESS was responsive to change (SRM: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.76), particularly among RAID responders (SRM: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.54, 1.99). PESS was moderately reliable in patients with stable condition (ICC: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.52, 0.83). CONCLUSION: PESS is valid, feasible, reliable and responsive, representing an opportunity to improve the assessment of disease impact with minimal questionnaire burden.

Exploring discordance between Health Literacy Questionnaire scores of people with RMDs and assessment by treating health professionals.

OBJECTIVES: We studied discordance between health literacy of people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) and assessment of health literacy by their treating health professionals, and explored whether discordance is associated with the patients' socioeconomic background. METHODS: Patients with RA, spondyloarthritis (SpA) or gout from three Dutch outpatient rheumatology clinics completed the nine-domain Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). Treating health professionals assessed their patients on each HLQ domain. Discordance per domain was defined as a ≥2-point difference on a 0-10 scale (except if both scores were below three or above seven), leading to three categories: 'negative discordance' (i.e. professional scored lower), 'probably the same' or 'positive discordance' (i.e. professional scored higher). We used multivariable multilevel multinomial regression models with patients clustered by health professionals to test associations with socioeconomic factors (age, gender, education level, migration background, employment, disability for work, living alone). RESULTS: We observed considerable discordance (21-40% of patients) across HLQ domains. Most discordance occurred for 'Critically appraising information' (40.5%, domain 5). Comparatively, positive discordance occurred more frequently. Negative discordance was more frequently and strongly associated with socioeconomic factors, specifically lower education level and non-Western migration background (for five HLQ domains). Associations between socioeconomic factors and positive discordance were less consistent. CONCLUSION: Frequent discordance between patients' scores and professionals' estimations indicates there may be hidden challenges in communication and care, which differ between socioeconomic groups. Successfully addressing patients' health literacy needs cannot solely depend on health professionals' estimations but will require measurement and dialogue. VIDEO ABSTRACT: A video abstract of this article can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggnB1rATdQ4.

Novel formulations of oral bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis.

Oral bisphosphonates are a key intervention in the treatment of osteoporosis and in reducing the risk of fragility fractures. Their use is supported by over 3 decades of evidence; however, patient adherence to oral bisphosphonates remains poor in part due to complex dosing instructions and adverse events, including upper gastrointestinal symptoms. This problem has led to the development of novel oral bisphosphonate formulations. Buffered, effervescent alendronate is dissolved in water and so seeks to reduce upper gastro-intestinal adverse events, and gastro-resistant risedronate aims to reduce the complexity of dosing procedure (e.g. fasting prior to consumption) whilst still maintaining the efficacy of fracture risk reduction. Clinical trials and real-world data have been employed to demonstrate some benefits in terms of reduced upper gastro-intestinal adverse events, adherence, persistence and health economic outcomes. This report describes the result of an ESCEO (European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis) expert working group, which explores where oral bisphosphonates sit in current clinical practice guidelines, review their risk-benefit profile and the consequences of poor adherence before exploring novel oral bisphosphonate formulations and their potential clinical and health economic impact. Further research is required but there are signs that these novel, oral bisphosphonate formulations may lead to improved tolerance of oral bisphosphonates and thus, improved adherence and fracture outcomes.

Safety and efficacy of faecal microbiota transplantation for active peripheral psoriatic arthritis: an exploratory randomised placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Although causality remains to be established, targeting dysbiosis of the intestinal microbiota by faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has been proposed as a novel treatment for inflammatory diseases. In this exploratory, proof-of-concept study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of FMT in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: In this double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, superiority trial, we randomly allocated (1:1) adults with active peripheral PsA (≥3 swollen joints) despite ongoing treatment with methotrexate to one gastroscopic-guided FMT or sham transplantation into the duodenum. Safety was monitored throughout the trial. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants experiencing treatment failure (ie, needing treatment intensification) through 26 weeks. Key secondary endpoints were change in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) response at week 26. RESULTS: Of 97 screened, 31 (32%) underwent randomisation (15 allocated to FMT) and 30 (97%) completed the 26-week clinical evaluation. No serious adverse events were observed. Treatment failure occurred more frequently in the FMT group than in the sham group (9 (60%) vs 3 (19%); risk ratio, 3.20; 95% CI 1.06 to 9.62; p=0.018). Improvement in HAQ-DI differed between groups (0.07 vs 0.30) by 0.23 points (95% CI 0.02 to 0.44; p=0.031) in favour of sham. There was no difference in the proportion of ACR20 responders between groups (7 of 15 (47%) vs 8 of 16 (50%)). CONCLUSIONS: In this first preliminary, interventional randomised controlled trial of FMT in immune-mediated arthritis, we did not observe any serious adverse events. Overall, FMT appeared to be inferior to sham in treating active peripheral PsA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03058900.

Towards consensus in defining and handling contextual factors within rheumatology trials: an initial qualitative study from an OMERACT working group.

OBJECTIVES: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Initiative established the Contextual Factors Working Group to guide the understanding, identification and handling of contextual factors for clinical trials. In clinical research, different uses of the term 'contextual factors' exist. This study explores the perspectives of researchers (including clinicians) and patients in defining 'contextual factor' and its related terminology, identifying such factors and accounting for them in trials across rheumatology. METHODS: We conducted individual semistructured interviews with researchers (including clinicians) who have experience within the field of contextual factors in clinical trials or other potentially relevant areas, and small focus group interviews with patients with rheumatic conditions. We transcribed the interviews and applied qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 12 researchers and 7 patients. Researcher's and patient's descriptions of contextual factors were categorised into two broad themes, each comprising two contextual factors types. The 'treatment effect' theme focused on factors explaining variations in treatment effects (A) among patients and (B) among studies. The 'outcome measurement' theme focused on factors that explain (C) variations in the measurement result itself (apart from actual changes/differences in the outcome) and (D) variations in the outcome itself (beside treatment of interest). Methods for identifying and handling contextual factors differed among these themes and types. CONCLUSIONS: Two main themes for contextual factors with four types of contextual factors were identified based on input from researchers and patients. This will guide operationalisation of contextual factors. Further research should refine our findings and establish consensus among relevant stakeholders.

Points to consider for the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases with Janus kinase inhibitors: a consensus statement.

OBJECTIVES: Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have been approved for use in various immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. With five agents licensed, it was timely to summarise the current understanding of JAKi use based on a systematic literature review (SLR) on efficacy and safety. METHODS: Existing data were evaluated by a steering committee and subsequently reviewed by a 29 person expert committee leading to the formulation of a consensus statement that may assist the clinicians, patients and other stakeholders once the decision is made to commence a JAKi. The committee included patients, rheumatologists, a gastroenterologist, a haematologist, a dermatologist, an infectious disease specialist and a health professional. The SLR informed the Task Force on controlled and open clinical trials, registry data, phase 4 trials and meta-analyses. In addition, approval of new compounds by, and warnings from regulators that were issued after the end of the SLR search date were taken into consideration. RESULTS: The Task Force agreed on and developed four general principles and a total of 26 points for consideration which were grouped into six areas addressing indications, treatment dose and comedication, contraindications, pretreatment screening and risks, laboratory and clinical follow-up examinations, and adverse events. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendations were determined based on the SLR and levels of agreement were voted on for every point, reaching a range between 8.8 and 9.9 on a 10-point scale. CONCLUSION: The consensus provides an assessment of evidence for efficacy and safety of an important therapeutic class with guidance on issues of practical management.

What influences patients' opinion of remission and low disease activity in psoriatic arthritis? Principal component analysis of an international study.

OBJECTIVE: In PsA, the treatment objective is remission or low disease activity (LDA), but patients' perception of remission is poorly studied. This analysis aimed to identify factors associated with patient-defined remission. METHODS: This analysis uses ReFlaP data, an international PsA study, with remission defined as 'At this time, is your psoriatic arthritis in remission, if this means: you feel your disease is as good as gone?'. Variables associated with, first, patient-defined remission and, second, LDA were identified using multivariable logistic regression and principal component analysis (PCA) to explore correlated variables. RESULTS: Of 424 patients (50.2% male, mean age 52 years) with established disease, 94 (22.2%) reported themselves as being in remission and 191 (45.0%) as LDA alone. In multivariable analysis pain, psoriasis, impact of disease, physician opinion of symptoms from joint damage and Groll comorbidity index were independent predictors of remission. For LDA, results were similar. Using PCA, variance explained was 74% by five components for men and 80% by six components for women. The key component from PCA for remission was, for both sex, disease impact (Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease, pain and HAQ) explaining 22.2-27.5% of variance. Other factors included musculoskeletal disease activity, chronicity/joint damage, psoriasis, enthesitis and CRP. For LDA, similar factors were identified but the variance explained was lower (64-68%). CONCLUSION: Many factors impact on patients' opinion of remission, dominated by disease impact. Disease activity in multiple domains, chronicity/age, comorbidities and symptoms due to other conditions contribute to a robust model highlighting that patient-defined remission is multifaceted. TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03119805.

Barriers and potential solutions in the recruitment and retention of older patients in clinical trials-lessons learned from six large multicentre randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: older people remain underrepresented in clinical trials, and evidence generated in younger populations cannot always be generalized to older patients. OBJECTIVE: to identify key barriers and to discuss solutions to specific issues affecting recruitment and retention of older participants in clinical trials based on experience gained from six current European randomised controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on older people. METHODS: a multidisciplinary group of experts including representatives of the six RCTs held two networking conferences and compiled lists of potential barriers and solutions. Every item was subsequently allocated points by each study team according to how important it was perceived to be for their RCTs. RESULTS: the six RCTs enrolled 7,612 older patients. Key barriers to recruitment were impaired health status, comorbidities and diverse health beliefs including priorities within different cultural systems. All trials had to increase the number of recruitment sites. Other measures felt to be effective included the provision of extra time, communication training for the study staff and a re-design of patient information. Key barriers for retention included the presence of severe comorbidities and the occurrence of adverse events. Long study duration, frequent study visits and difficulties accessing the study site were also mentioned. Solutions felt to be effective included spending more time maintaining close contact with the participants, appropriate measures to show appreciation and reimbursement of travel arrangements. CONCLUSION: recruitment and retention of older patients in trials requires special recognition and a targeted approach. Our results provide scientifically-based practical recommendations for optimizing future studies in this population.

Proceedings of the 2020 GRAPPA Collaborative Research Network (CRN) Meeting.

At the 2020 Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Collaborative Research Network (CRN) annual meeting, the GRAPPA-CRN group presented a pilot investigator-initiated study protocol to test electronic case report forms (eCRFs) and proposed Standardized Operating Procedures (SOPs) to evaluate biomarkers of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) associated with axial disease. The progress on 3 studies was also presented: BioDAM PsA (Biomarkers as Predictors of structural DAMage in PsA; to validate soluble biomarkers as predictors of structural damage in PsA), PreventPsA (examining the development of PsA and risk factors among patients with psoriasis and no arthritis), and PredictORPsA (Predicting Treatment respOnse in patients with eaRly PsA; in collaboration with Pfizer using samples from the Oral Psoriatic Arthritis TriaL [OPAL], to identify biomarkers of treatment response). GRAPPA-CRN funding partnerships and applications are also underway with both the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) in Europe and Accelerating Medicines Partnerships (AMP) 2.0 in the USA, and the progress of these applications and associated objectives were presented.