Long-term follow-up of patients in the TIght COntrol of inflammation in early Psoriatic Arthritis (TICOPA) trial

Early intervention in psoriasis: Where do we go from here?

Patients with psoriasis often have comorbidities and are at increased risk of developing several complications compared with the general population. Knowledge on the role of immune mediators and systemic inflammation in psoriasis has led to the hypothesis that early intervention with systemic therapy has the potential to modify the course of the disease and reduce the risk of long-term adverse outcomes. In this article, we address some potential issues that need to be considered before early intervention can be implemented routinely. The first is determining what constitutes "early" intervention for psoriasis. A second point is whether the intervention should be considered for patients with early disease or for selected subsets based on risk stratification. A third important consideration is defining success for early intervention. Finally, adoption of early and effective intervention should be based on high-level evidence. Ideally, randomized trials would be the best strategy to compare early vs. late systemic treatment in patients with psoriasis, probably using the frequency of long-term outcomes as primary endpoint, with cutaneous and pharmacoeconomic outcomes assessed secondarily.

In Patients with Early Peripheral Psoriatic Arthritis Baseline C-Reactive Protein, Pain and Ultrasound-Detected Synovitis Predict Subsequent Treatment with ts/bDMARDs. A Retrospective Analysis

With the availability of effective treatment with targeted synthetic and biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (ts/bDMARDs) for psoriatic arthritis (PsA), it is crucial to identify predictors of access to this treatment since disease onset. We retrospectively enrolled patients with peripheral PsA, assessed in an early arthritis clinic from 2005 to 2020. The main baseline demographic, clinical and ultrasonographic (assessment of bilateral wrist and metacarpophalangeal joints) features were evaluated through descriptive statistics and tested as predictors by univariate and multivariate Cox models. The outcome of interest was the indication for ts/bDMARDs within 2 years from diagnosis. We included 238 patients with PsA, with a mean (sd) age of 51.04 (13.98) years; 90 (37.8%) were male, and the median (IQR) symptom duration was 6.12 (3.29–12.25) months. In univariate analyses, C-reactive protein (RR, 95% CI 1.204 (1.065,1.362)), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain (1.027 (1.005,1.048)), the number of tender joints on 28 joints (1.087 (1.025, 1.153)), and a synovial power Doppler (PD) score > 1 (3.63 (1.307, 10.08)) emerged as significant predictors. C-reactive protein, VAS pain and PD confirmed their predictive value also in multivariate models. These results provide preliminary evidence on the features that might characterize patients with early peripheral PsA requiring more intensive monitoring and treatment escalation.

Management of particular clinical situations in psoriatic arthritis: an expert's recommendation document based on systematic literature review and extended Delphi process

To establish practical recommendations for the management of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) with particular clinical situations that might lead to doubts in the pharmacological decision-making. A group of six expert rheumatologists on PsA identified particular clinical situations in PsA. Then, a systematic literature review (SLR) was performed to analyse the efficacy and safety of csDMARDs, b/tsDMARDs in PsA. In a nominal group meeting, the results of the SLR were discussed and a set of recommendations were proposed for a Delphi process. A total of 65 rheumatologists were invited to participate in the Delphi. Agreement was defined if ≥ 70% of the participants voted ≥ 7 (from 1, totally disagree to 10, totally agree). For each recommendation, the level of evidence and grade of recommendation was established based on the Oxford Evidence-Based Medicine categorisation. Particular clinical situations included monoarthritis, axial disease, or non-musculoskeletal manifestations. The SLR finally comprised 131 articles. A total of 16 recommendations were generated, all but 1 reached consensus. According to them, it is crucial to carefully analyse the impact of individual manifestations on patients (disability, quality of life, etc.), but also to recognise the impact of each drug singularities on selected clinical phenotypes to adopt the most appropriate treatment strategy. Early diagnosis and treatment to target approach, along with a close risk management, is also necessary. These recommendations are intended to complement gaps in national and international guidelines by helping health professionals address and manage particular clinical situations in PsA.

Psoriatic arthritis screening: A systematic literature review and experts' recommendations

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the performance of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) screening tools, examine their implementation in daily practice, and reach a consensus about the best screening tool for implementation in daily practice in different medical settings.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR), structured telephone interviews to hospitals, and a multidisciplinary nominal group meeting were all conducted. The SLR employed sensitive search strategies using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2020. Two reviewers independently selected articles that reported data on PsA screening tools and that included sufficient data to at least calculate the sensitivity and specificity of those tools (e.g., questionnaires, algorithms, specific questions, and biomarkers). The hospital interviews collected data regarding the process of suspected PsA diagnosis and referral to rheumatology, the implementation of PsA screening tools, and barriers and facilitators to implementation of those tools. In the nominal group meeting, a multidisciplinary team of experts discussed all these data and subsequently recommended a screening tool for implementation.

RESULTS

The SLR included 41 moderate-quality studies that analyzed 14 PsA screening tools, most of which were questionnaire-based tools. All of these studies reported a moderate-good performance but presented different characteristics regarding the time to completion or the number and type of items or questions. The implementation of screening tools was low (30.5%). The experts ultimately recommended regular use of a PsA screening tool, preferably the PURE-4 questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of PsA screening tools like the PURE-4 questionnaire in daily practice likely improves the prognosis of PsA patients.