Value of Remission in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Targeted Review

Promoting Prevention and Targeting Remission of Asthma: A EUFOREA Consensus Statement on Raising the Bar in Asthma Care

Asthma is a common, multifaceted respiratory disease with a major impact on quality of life. Despite increased insights into mechanisms underlying various asthma phenotypes and endotypes and the availability of targeted biologic treatment options, the disease remains uncontrolled in a substantial proportion of patients with risk of exacerbations, requiring systemic corticosteroids, and with progressive disease. Current international guidelines advocate for a personalized management approach to patients with uncontrolled severe asthma. The European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases (EUFOREA) asthma expert panel was convened to discuss strategies to optimize asthma care and to prevent systemic corticosteroid overuse and disease progression. In this meeting report, we summarize current concepts and recommendations and provide a rationale to implement personalized asthma management at earlier stages of the disease. The ultimate goal is to move away from the current one-size-fits-most concept, which focuses on a symptom-driven treatment strategy, and shift toward a phenotype- and endotype-targeted approach aimed at curbing the disease course by improving clinical outcomes and preserving health-related quality of life. Herein, we provide a consensus view on asthma care that advocates a holistic approach and highlight some unmet needs to be addressed in future clinical trials and population studies.

Integrating different perspectives to define a concept of comprehensive remission in rheumatoid arthritis: The SUMAR project

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The SUMAR project aimed to establish a consensus on the concept of remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) that takes into account the different perspectives of patients, health care professionals and health care managers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The scientific committee comprised a rheumatologist who acted as a national coordinator, 4 rheumatologists, 1 primary care physician, 1 nurse, 2 hospital pharmacists, 2 health care managers and 1 member of a patient advocacy group. The study was undertaken from 2020 to 2021 in three phases: (1) analysis of several perspectives on remission in RA with the participation of 275 patients, 160 rheumatologists and 31 health care managers; (2) an integrative definition of remission, which included two multidisciplinary workshops with 11 and 12 participants; and (3) extension and dissemination with up to 200 participants in 7 regional multidisciplinary meetings.

RESULTS

The concept of remission in the different settings and by the different stakeholders was heterogeneous. It was agreed that, in addition to inflammatory activity, remission should include pain and functionality as well as the duration of remission. For the participants, the definition of remission varied depending on the clinical scenario, without or with structural damage, seeking to "normalize" the outcomes in the former and avoid progression in the latter. The implementation of the concept of comprehensive remission was considered less feasible, and the main barriers to implementation were the lack of time for consultation and the variability in information technology systems across the different autonomous communities.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This definition of remission is not only based on the concept of the presence or absence of inflammatory activity based on existing indexes, but also includes variables directly reported by the patient that are related to their health and quality of life.

Barriers to, Facilitators of, and Interventions to Support Treat-to-Target Implementation in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Treat-to-target is recommended in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) but its implementation is suboptimal. We aimed to identify interventional strategies targeted at improving treat-to-target implementation in RA by systematically reviewing published evidence on barriers to, facilitators of, and interventions to support treat-to-target implementation.

METHODS

Systematic and scoping literature searches in PubMed/MEDLINE, BIOSIS Previews, Derwent Drug File, Embase, EMCare, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and SciSearch were conducted to identify barriers/facilitators and interventions relating to treat-to-target implementation in RA. The quality of included studies was assessed using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists. Data related to barriers/facilitators and interventions were extracted, grouped, and summarized descriptively, and a narrative synthesis was generated.

RESULTS

In total, 146 articles were analyzed, of which 123 (84%) included ≥50% of the items assessed by CASP checklists. Of the 146 studies, 76 evaluated treat-to-target barriers and facilitators, from which 329 relevant statements were identified and regrouped into 18 target areas, including health care professional (HCP) or patient knowledge or perceptions; patient-HCP communication or alignment; and time or resources. Overall, 56 interventions were identified from 70 studies across the 18 target areas; 54% addressed disease activity or patient-reported outcome assessments. Of the 56 interventions identified, 36 improved treat-to-target implementation and/or patient outcomes in RA.

CONCLUSION

Despite long-established treat-to-target recommendations, there remain many barriers to its implementation. Interventions to improve treat-to-target should be developed further and assessed, with a particular focus on tailoring them to individual countries, regions, and health care settings.

A Real-World Comparison of Clinical Effectiveness in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Upadacitinib, Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors, and Other Advanced Therapies After Switching from an Initial Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor

INTRODUCTION

This study compared the clinical effectiveness of switching from tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) to upadacitinib (TNFi-UPA), another TNFi (TNFi-TNFi), or an advanced therapy with another mechanism of action (TNFi-other MOA) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Data were drawn from the Adelphi RA Disease Specific Programme™, a cross-sectional survey administered to rheumatologists and their consulting patients in Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the UK, Japan, Canada, and the USA from May 2021 to January 2022. Patients who switched treatment from an initial TNFi were stratified by subsequent therapy of interest: TNFi-UPA, TNFi-TNFi, or TNFi-other MOA. Physician-reported clinical outcomes including disease activity (with formal DAS28 scoring available for 29% of patients) categorized as remission, low/moderate/high disease activity, as well as pain were recorded at initiation of current treatment and ≥ 6 months from treatment switch. Fatigue and treatment adherence were measured ≥ 6 months from treatment switch. Inverse-probability-weighted regression adjustment compared outcomes by subsequent class of therapy: TNFi-UPA versus TNFi-TNFi, or TNFi-UPA versus TNFi-other MOA.

RESULTS

Of 503 patients who switched from their first TNFi, 261 were in TNFi-UPA, 128 in TNFi-TNFi, and 114 in TNFi-other MOA groups. At the time of switch, most patients had moderate/high disease activity (TNFi-UPA: 73%; TNFi-TNFi: 52%; TNFi-other MOA: 60%). After adjustment for differences in characteristics at point of switch, patients in TNFi-UPA group (n = 261) were significantly more likely to achieve physician-reported remission (67.7% vs. 40.3%; p = 0.0015), no pain (55.7% vs. 25.4%; p = 0.0007), and complete adherence (60.0% vs. 34.2%; p = 0.0049) compared with patients in TNFi-TNFi group (n = 121). Similar findings were observed for TNFi-UPA versus TNFi-other MOA groups (n = 111).

CONCLUSION

Patients who switched from TNFi to UPA had significantly better clinical outcomes of remission, no pain, and complete adherence than those who cycled TNFi or switched to another MOA.

Dendritic cells and antigen-specific immunotherapy in autoimmune rheumatic diseases

Dendritic cells (DCs) are professional antigen-presenting cells and trigger downstream immune responses to antigen while integrating cellular pathogen and damage-associated molecular pattern (PAMP and DAMP) or immunomodulatory signals. In healthy individuals, resting and tolerogenic DCs draining skin and intestine facilitate expansion of regulatory T cells (Treg) to maintain peripheral antigen-specific immune tolerance. In patients with rheumatic diseases, however, DCs activated by PAMPs and DAMPs expand self-reactive effector T cells, including follicular helper T cells that promote the expansion of activated autoreactive B cells, chronic inflammation and end-organ damage. With the development of cellular and nanoparticle (NP)-based self-antigen-specific immunotherapies we here consider the new opportunities and the challenges for restoring immunoregulation in the treatment and prevention of autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic conditions through DCs.

An engineered glove to follow finger function in rheumatoid arthritis: an observational prospective study

The engineered Hand Test System (HTS) glove has shown high reliability in assessing the baseline functional status of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) hand. Starting from this achievement, the aim of the present observational prospective study was to assess the functionality of the single fingers of rheumatoid hand at follow-up. Eighty RA patients performed HTS glove tests at baseline and among these fifty-six patients were re-tested after 7 months. The HTS glove parameters [Touch Duration (TD), Movement Rate (MR), Inter Tapping Interval (ITI)] were correlated with disease activity and disability clinimetric indexes [Disease Activity Score 28 joint count-C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), grip strength, visual analogue scale of pain (VAS), patient global assessment (PGA)], and with laboratory values. HTS glove parameters (TD, ITI, and MR) showed statistically significant correlations with clinimetric and clinical indexes at both time points (p < 0.05). During follow-up, a statistically significant variation of all HTS glove parameters for the fingers that have performed both the worst or best HTS test at baseline was detected (p < 0.05), while the mean HTS glove parameter values by considering all fingers did not show a statistically significant variation over time, as well as the traditional clinimetric indexes. Besides the objective role in assessing the RA hand function by integrating the traditional clinimetric indexes, the HTS glove seems a useful tool for evaluating worst or best finger function during time by measuring the movement speed.

Remission in Type 2 Inflammatory Diseases: Current Evidence, Unmet Needs, and Suggestions for Defining Remission in Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The development of biological therapies for type 2 inflammatory diseases raises the possibility of addressing remission in those dis-immune conditions. No consensus exists for a definition of remission in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). This review aims to critically evaluate the published data to provide the basis for defining remission in CRSwNP.

RECENT FINDINGS

The published evidence has yet to provide an unequivocal definition on remission in type 2 inflammatory diseases, in part reflecting differences in approaches to diagnosis and follow-up. A multidimensional evaluation is necessary when considering complete remission, including clinical, inflammatory, and histologic criteria, but how to combine or tailor the three perspectives according to disease severity at baseline or timing of assessment of treatment category is yet to reach consensus. We suggest defining remission starting from the approach taken in asthma and eosinophilic esophagitis, that is, including the resolution of symptoms and improvements in objective parameters of disease severity and/or inflammatory activity. Future studies and consensuses should provide validated criteria with cutoffs for the day-to-day definition of remission. The definition of remission in CRSwNP should include the following criteria, to be verified and maintained for a period of ≥ 12 months: absence of symptoms (nasal obstruction, loss of smell, rhinorrhea as the main ones); no impact of symptoms on quality of life; no need of surgery; no chronic or rescue medications (systemic corticosteroids or antibiotics); and recovery of smell function, possibly evaluated by objective test. Assessment of underlying inflammation should also be considered once accurate and feasible biomarkers are available in clinical practice.

The Economic Benefit of Remission for Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Introduction

In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), attaining remission or low disease activity (LDA), as recommended by the treat-to-target approach, has shown to yield improvement in symptoms and quality of life. However, limited evidence from real-world settings is available to support the premise that better disease control is associated with lower healthcare costs. This study fills in evidence gaps regarding the cost of care by RA disease activity (DA) states and by therapy.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study linked medical and prescription claims from Optum Clinformatics Data Mart to electronic health record data from Illumination Health over 1/1/2010–3/31/2020. Mean annual costs for payers and patients were examined, stratifying on DA state and baseline use of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), biologics, and targeted synthetic (ts)DMARDs. Subgroup analysis examining within-person change in costs pre- and post-initiation of new therapy was also performed. Descriptive statistics, means, and boot-strapped confidence intervals were analyzed by DA state and by RA therapy. Furthermore, multivariate negative binomial regression analysis adjusting for key baseline characteristics was conducted.

Results

Of 2339 eligible patients, 19% were in remission, 40% in LDA, 29% in moderate DA (MDA), and 12% in high DA (HDA) at baseline. Mean annual costs during follow-up were substantially less for patients in remission ($40,072) versus those in MDA ($56,536) and HDA ($59,217). For patients in remission, csDMARD use was associated with the lowest mean annual cost ($25,575), tsDMARD was highest ($75,512), and tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) ($69,846) and non-TNFi ($57,507) were intermediate. Among new TNFi (n = 137) and non-TNFi initiators (n = 107), 31% and 26% attained LDA/remission, respectively, and the time to achieve remission/LDA was numerically shorter in TNFi vs. non-TNFi initiators. For those on biologics, mean annual within-person medical and inpatient costs were lower after achieving LDA/remission, although pharmacy costs were higher.

Conclusions

Cost of care increased with increasing DA state, with patients in remission having the lowest costs. Optimizing DA has the potential for substantial savings in healthcare costs, although may be partially offset by the high cost of targeted RA therapies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-022-00473-6.