[Revised version of the statement by the DGRh on biosimilars-update 2017]

The treatment of rheumatic diseases with bioloics has significantly improved the prognosis of patients. Currently, there are 13 preparations available in Germany for the treatment of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. These original preparations generally have-depending on the individual country-15 years of patent protection. As soon as the patent has expired, approved biosimilars can be brought into use. For the approval of a biosimilar, authorities such as the European Medical Agency or the American Food and Drug Administration require proof of the best possible comparability with respect to efficacy and safety in comparison to the original or reference product. Since 2015, biosimilars of inifliximab, adalimumab, etanercept and rituximab have been granted approval in the European Union, the USA, Japan and in other countries. Further biosimilar products for these reference products are in development for treatment in rheumatology. From a societal and medical point of view, this opens up the possibility to increase the availability of biopharmaceutical products for patients through lower prices. In Germany, this possibility has already occurred-statutory health insurance physicians have introduced quotas for biosimilars, which will ultimately decrease spending and healthcare costs. This can lead to price reductions of the original products, which has already happened in Germany. Biosimilars can be prescribed for new patients or as a change from the original to the generic drug. When switching, a distinction is made between individual switching (interchangeability), which is made in individual consultation between the physician and the patient, and nonmedical switching (substitution) made at the societal or governmental level, which is made in the context of health care cost containment, and then, for example, implemented at the pharmacy level. Preliminary data from Norway and Denmark are available for substitution on the basis of results from large studies or registries in which systematic changes were made. The previous conclusion was that this does not lead to new problems for the patients. The German Society for Rheumatology recognizes the advantages of introducing biosimilars in Germany, but recommends that their use be based primarily on a joint decision by the treating physician and patient.

[Memorandum of the German Society for Rheumatology on the quality of treatment in rheumatology - Update 2016]

On behalf of the Steering Committee of the German Society for Rheumatology, in 2016 the Interdisciplinary Commission on Healthcare Quality updated the 2008 memorandum on rheumatological healthcare in Germany. The update considers changes in therapeutic strategies, treatment targets as well as current structures in healthcare and the political framework. It concentrates on examination of the need for rheumatologists with a background in internal medicine and determines the gap between needs and supply. The internist rheumatologist is responsible for the care of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases and contributes to the care of patients with severe forms of other musculoskeletal diseases. At least 2 internist rheumatologists are needed for the outpatient care of 100,000 adult inhabitants, equivalent to 1350 rheumatologists in Germany. With currently 776 rheumatologists, we have little more than half of what we need. The German Society for Rheumatology calls for specific requirements planning for rheumatologists in outpatient care in order to decrease the deficit. In acute inpatient care we need specialized hospitals and wards that ensure a high quality of treatment for patients with complex diseases. We need up to 50 beds per 1 million inhabitants. At least 2 full-time internist rheumatologists and 3 further physicians are needed per 30 beds. In inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation we need 40 beds or outpatient places per 1 million inhabitants with at least 1 full-time rheumatologist and 1 further physician. In order to reduce the existing deficits and to cover the increasing future need for rheumatologists, more emphasis has to be laid on primary and secondary education. Chairs for internal rheumatology are needed at each medical university and more positions for postgraduate training in rheumatology should be provided. In all segments of healthcare the treatment aims should be jointly defined between patients and physicians. The patients should be treated in an interdisciplinary network, comprising other medical specialties, health professionals as well as patient organizations.

[Evidence-based recommendations for diagnostics and treatment of gouty arthritis in the specialist sector : S2e guidelines of the German Society of Rheumatology in cooperation with the AWMF]

Due to the increasing prevalence of gout, particularly in old age, the disease is becoming of increasing importance in Germany. Gout is one of the most common forms of recurrent inflammatory arthritis and is induced by the deposition of monosodium urate crystals in synovial fluid and other tissues. The principal goals of therapy in chronic gout are the symptomatic treatment of the acute joint inflammation and the causal treatment of the underlying metabolic cause, the hyperuricemia. Only a consistent and permanent reduction of the serum uric acid level ultimately results in an efficient avoidance of further gout attacks and therefore the prevention of structural damage. Due to an often inadequate treatment of gout, the target of healing the disease is often not achieved. A correct and timely diagnosis and adequate assessment of comorbidities associated with gout are, however, of substantial importance for patient and physician to achieve remission of the disease. In order to create a solid basis for a timely and effective treatment of affected patients, in 2016 the German Society of Rheumatology (DGRh) initiated the development of S2e guidelines on gouty arthritis for specialists. This article summarizes these S2e guidelines on the management of gouty arthritis in the specialist sector.

[Digital ulcers in systemic sclerosis : A retrospective heath service study analysing treatment with bosentan and other vasoactive therapies]

BACKGROUND

Digital ulcers (DU) affect up to 60 % of patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) and have a considerable impact on quality of life and morbidity. It is unclear to what extent authorised medicines are used, and if therapy guidelines are implemented in everyday practice.

METHOD

This retrospective health care study examined current standards of treatment for therapy and prevention of SSc-associated DU in an online survey with 83 physicians. Additionally, data from 161 case studies of SSc patients with DU were analysed, and the effect of DU treatment on the course of the disease determined.

RESULTS

For treatment and prevention of active DU, physicians predominantly indicated topical therapies, calcium channel blockers, iloprost and endothelin receptor antagonists. According to the case studies, 90 % of episodes with acute DU were treated with bosentan and iloprost in mono- or combination therapy. Preventive treatment was only administered during 50 % of episodes without DU, even after three or more phases with active DU. For the prevention of new DU, bosentan was used in mono- or combination therapy in 57 % of episodes without DU. Bosentan therapy during prevention shortened the following acute phase by 32 %. Additionally, continuous treatment with bosentan in acute and prevention phases reduced the duration of the following acute phase and increased the time to onset of new DU by 16 %. Moreover, bosentan stabilised the number of new DU.

CONCLUSION

In summary, these data confirm the efficacy of bosentan in preventing new DU when used in DU-free episodes and possibly also in phases of acute DU. Therapy recommendations for the treatment of DU are currently not fully implemented. In the future, even more attention should be paid to DU therapy.

[Do we still need clinical studies in rheumatology?]

Despite a large number of approved therapies demonstrating efficacy in the treatment of rheumatic diseases, only 60-85 % of patients with the indications for rheumatoid arthritis are adequately treated in Germany. Additionally, approved therapies for other immune-mediated diseases are often entirely lacking, indicating the great medical need for the development of new innovative therapies in this specialized field. The development of new drugs is expensive due to the high costs of conducting clinical trials in all phases of development up to obtaining approval; therefore, pharmaceutical companies are looking for ways to save costs in the particular developmental stages. Although the classical regions for drug development (i.e. western Europe, the USA and Japan) offer both a high level of data quality and a good infrastructure to conduct clinical trials due to high standards of education and quality, clinical trials are expensive in these regions. Beside high costs, the comparatively low recruitment rates in these regions are one of the main reasons for the shifting of drug developmental stages from classical regions to eastern European, Latin American and Asian countries, which provide services for drug development and high recruitment rates for comparatively less money. However, there are many strong arguments for the participation of regions in western Europe, especially German sites in clinical trials. In this article these arguments are discussed and possible solutions and strategies for conducting and compensation of study centers in Germany for clinical trials in the field of rheumatology are provided.

[Fibroblasts as pathogenic cells in rheumatic inflammation]

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease characterized by synovitis, synovial hyperplasia and progressive degeneration of affected joints. These processes are mediated by cells of the immune system as well as by synovial fibroblasts (RASF) originating from the lining layer of the synovium. In this scenario RASFs display an activated phenotype: they show an altered expression of adhesion molecules which allows attachment to articular cartilage and by synthesis of proteases they mediate progressive cartilage and bone destruction. Furthermore, they produce various cytokines and chemokines, which are essential for promoting the inflammatory response. In recent years it has become evident that RASFs not only passively respond to the proinflammatory milieu in the joints of RA patients but also actively contribute by the overproduction of several cytokines and chemokines. These proinflammatory cytokines trigger the transformation of RASFs into an aggressive and invasive phenotype. Additionally, the primarily altered genuine RASFs are actively involved in the recruitment and activation of immune cells. Taken together, they are key players in the development of the well-known chronic, destructive inflammatory response in joints affected by RA.