Real world long-term impact of intensive treatment on disease activity, disability and health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis

Pain sensitisation and joint inflammation in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Despite better therapies and strategies, many people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have persistent pain, often from abnormal pain processing, now termed nociplastic pain. However, RA patients with fibromyalgia (FM), a central nociplastic pain syndrome, also have power doppler ultrasound (PDUS+) joint inflammation. To understand the complex causes of pain, we performed clinical examination and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) plus comprehensive PDUS evaluation not previously combined.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study of sequential RA patients with at least moderate DAS28 erythrocyte sedimentation rate disease activity, we assessed 66/68 joints for swelling and tenderness, respectively, FM American College of Rheumatology 2010 diagnostic criteria, completed PROMs for function, quality of life and mood, alongside PDUS examination of 44 joints. Statistical analysis included logistic regression modelling and regularised (lasso) logistic regression methods.

RESULTS

From 158 patients, 72 (46%) patients met FM criteria, with significantly worse tender joint counts and PROMs, but no differences in PDUS compared with the non-FM group. Categorising patients by PDUS+ joint presence and/or FM criteria, we identified four distinct groups: 43 (27.2%) patients with -FM-PD, 43 (27.2%) with -FM+PD, 42 (26.6%) with +FM-PD and 30 (19%) with +FM+PD. Both FM+ groups had worse PROMs for fatigue, mood and pain, compared with the FM- groups. We were unable to develop algorithms to identify different groups.

CONCLUSION

The unexpected group -FM-PD group may have peripheral nociplastic pain, not commonly recognised in rheumatology. Only 46% of patients demonstrated PDUS+ inflammation. However clinical examination and PROMs did not reliably differentiate groups, emphasising PDUS remains an important tool.

Can Pharmacological Conditioning as an Add-On Treatment Optimize Standard Pharmacological Treatment in Patients with Recent-Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis? A Proof-of-Principle Randomized Clinical Trial

Medication regimens using conditioning via variable reinforcement have shown similar or improved therapeutic effects as full pharmacological treatment, but evidence in patient populations is scarce. This proof-of-principle double-blind randomized clinical trial examined whether treatment effects in recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be optimized through pharmacological conditioning. After four months of standardized treatment (n = 46), patients in clinical remission (n = 19) were randomized to the Control group (C), continuing standardized treatment (n = 8), or the Pharmacological Conditioning (PC) group, receiving variable treatment according to conditioning principles (n = 11). After eight months, treatment was tapered and discontinued linearly (C) or variably (PC). Standard treatment led to large improvements in disease activity and HRQoL in both groups. The groups did not differ in the percentage of drug-free clinical remission obtained after conditioning or continued standard treatment. The PC group did show a larger decrease in self-reported disease activity (Cohen's d = 0.9) and a smaller increase in TNF-α levels (Cohen's d = 0.7) than the C group. During all phases, more differences between groups were found for the patients who followed protocol than for the intention-to-treat sample. Although the results are not conclusive, pharmacological conditioning may have some advantages in terms of disease progression and stability, especially during the conditioning phase, compared with standard clinical treatment. The effects may be particularly beneficial for patients who show a good initial response to increased medication dosages.

Management and treatment outcomes of rheumatoid arthritis in the era of biologic and targeted synthetic therapies: evaluation of 10-year data from the KURAMA cohort

BACKGROUND

Advances in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment, highlighted by biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs), have altered the paradigm of RA treatment in the last decade. Therefore, real-world clinical evidence is needed to understand how treatment strategies and outcomes have changed.

METHODS

Using an observational cohort of RA from 2012 to 2021, we collected cross-sectional data of RA patients annually to analyze a trend in RA management. For patients who initiated b/tsDMRDs, we evaluated treatment outcomes between b/tsDMARDs. Mixed-effect models were applied to examine the statistical implications of changes over time in treatment outcomes with a background adjustment.

RESULTS

We analyzed annual cross-sectional data from 5070 patients and longitudinal data from 1816 patients in whom b/tsDMARDs were initiated between 2012 and 2021. b/tsDMARD use increased, whereas glucocorticoid use decreased from 2012 to 2021. Disease activity and functional disability measures improved over time. The percentage of tsDMARD prescriptions considerably increased. All b/tsDMARDs showed clinical improvements in disease activity and functional disability. Statistically, TNFi showed better short-term improvements in b/tsDMARD-naïve patients, while IL6Ri demonstrated significant long-term benefits. IL6Ri had better retention rates in switched patients. After adjustment for patient characteristics, the annual change of RA disease activity and functional disability fared significantly better from 2012 to 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

With the development of new RA therapeutics, overall treatment outcomes advanced in the past decade.

Nurse-supported care versus rheumatologist-led care in patients with rheumatoid arthritis at high disease activity: A retrospective study of two Chinese centers

The European League Against Rheumatism recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis advised the involvement of clinical nurses for the management of rheumatoid arthritis. However, The European League Against Rheumatism recommendations are difficult to apply to Chinese institutes. In China, the rheumatology nursing service is not widely adopted because the feasibility and quality of rheumatology nursing service have not been confirmed in the Chinese population by the Chinese authorities. The objectives of the study were to compare 2.5 years clinical outcomes of patients of rheumatoid arthritis (6 months history) with disease activity score 28-joint count with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) > 5.1 who received nurse-supported care against those of patients who received rheumatologist-led care. Patients received 30 minutes/day and 6 times/week nurse-supported care (NC cohort, n = 127) or Patients had received 20 minutes session at every 3 months of conventional outpatient-based rheumatologist-led care (n = 131). Both types of care have involved the history of patients, care regarding effects and adverse effects of pharmacological treatments, patients education, overall well-being, everyday life, counseling, clarifications, and rehabilitation. Additionally, there were a cohort in which patients did not receive any nontreatment care (NN cohort, n = 141). All patients have definite depression and anxiety (hospital anxiety and depression scale Chinese version score ≥ 11) before nontreatment interventions. At 2.5 years of treatments with or without nontreatment interventions (EL) DAS28-CRP, depression, and anxiety scores of patients of the NC cohort were decreased as compared to their before any type of nontreatment interventions conditions and those of patients of the RC and NN cohorts at EL (P < .001 for all). At EL numbers of patients with moderate disease activity, (DAS28-CRP score: 3.2-5.1) and borderline depression and anxiety (hospital anxiety and depression scales Chinese version score: 8-10) were greater in the NC cohort than those of the RC and NN cohorts (P < .001 for all). Outpatient care satisfaction scores of patients of the NC cohort were higher than those of the RC [23 (27-17) vs 17 (21-14)] and NN [23 (7-17) vs 15 [18-12]) cohorts (P < .001 for both). Physiological and psychological conditions of patients with rheumatoid arthritis with DAS28-CRP > 5.1 are required to improve. Nurse-supported care is superior nontreatment compared to rheumatologist-led care in rheumatoid arthritis patients with high disease activity (Level of Evidence: IV; Technical Efficacy: Stage 5).

A subset of type-II collagen-binding antibodies prevents experimental arthritis by inhibiting FCGR3 signaling in neutrophils

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) involves several classes of pathogenic autoantibodies, some of which react with type-II collagen (COL2) in articular cartilage. We previously described a subset of COL2 antibodies targeting the F4 epitope (ERGLKGHRGFT) that could be regulatory. Here, using phage display, we developed recombinant antibodies against this epitope and examined the underlying mechanism of action. One of these antibodies, R69-4, protected against cartilage antibody- and collagen-induced arthritis in mice, but not autoimmune disease models independent of arthritogenic autoantibodies. R69-4 was further shown to cross-react with a large range of proteins within the inflamed synovial fluid, such as the complement protein C1q. Complexed R69-4 inhibited neutrophil FCGR3 signaling, thereby impairing downstream IL-1β secretion and neutrophil self-orchestrated recruitment. Likewise, human isotypes of R69-4 protected against arthritis with comparable efficiency. We conclude that R69-4 abrogates autoantibody-mediated arthritis mainly by hindering FCGR3 signaling, highlighting its potential clinical utility in acute RA.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of questionnaires to screen for pain sensitisation and neuropathic like pain in inflammatory arthritis

BACKGROUND

Targeted pain relief is a major unmet medical need for patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA), where approximately 40% of patients experience persistent pain. Self-reported questionnaires which report on pain sensitivity and neuropathic like pain may provide an insight into certain pain types to guide targeted treatment.

OBJECTIVE

In this systematic review and meta-analysis we evaluated self-reported pain sensitivity and neuropathic like pain in subjects with IA, as defined by questionnaires.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO and google scholar were searched for publications and conference abstracts, reporting on pain sensitivity and neuropathic pain using painDETECT, DN4, LANSS, CSI, PSQ and McGill pain questionnaire in adult patients with IA. Risk of bias was assessed using National Institute of Health Quality Assessment Tool. Meta-analysis according to individual questionnaire criteria, was undertaken.

RESULTS

63 studies (38 full text and 25 conference abstracts) were included in the review, reporting on a total of 13,035 patients. On meta-analysis, prevalence of pain sensitivity/neuropathic like pain in IA was 36% (95% CI 31-41%) according to painDETECT, 31% (95% CI 26-37%) according to the DN4, 40% (95% CI 32-49%) according to the LANSS and 42% (95% CI 34-51%) according to the CSI. On meta-regression, prevalence of pain sensitivity/neuropathic pain in RA was significantly lower than SpA (p = 0.01) and PsA (p = 0.002) using the painDETECT questionnaire. Across all questionnaires, pain sensitivity and neuropathic like pain were significantly associated with worse pain severity, disease activity, disability, quality of life and anxiety and depression measures. Studies reporting on whether neuropathic like pain is a predictor of treatment outcome were inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

Pain sensitivity and neuropathic like pain contribute to pain perception in up to 42% of patients with IA. Despite substantial heterogeneity between studies on meta-analysis, this review highlights the large proportion of patients with IA who may experience pain due to underlying mechanisms other than, or in addition to, synovial inflammation.

A Narrowing Mortality Gap: Temporal Trends of Cause-Specific Mortality in a National Matched Cohort Study in US Veterans With Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To examine temporal trends in all-cause and cause-specific mortality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).

METHODS

We conducted a matched cohort study in the VHA from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2017. Incident RA patients were matched up to 1:10 on age, sex, and VHA enrollment year to non-RA patients, then followed until death or end of study period. Cause of death was obtained from the National Death Index. Multivariable Cox regression models stratified by RA diagnosis years were used to examine trends in RA-related risk of all-cause and cause-specific mortality.

RESULTS

Among 29,779 incident RA patients (matched to 245,226 non-RA patients), 9,565 deaths occurred. RA patients were at increased risk of all-cause (adjusted hazard ratio [HRadj ] 1.23 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.20-1.26]), cardiovascular (HRadj 1.19 [95% CI 1.14-1.23]), cancer (HRadj 1.19 [95% CI 1.14-1.24]), respiratory (HRadj 1.46 [95% CI 1.38-1.55]), and infection-related mortality (HRadj 1.59 [95% CI 1.41-1.80]). Interstitial lung disease was the cause of death most strongly associated with RA (HRadj 3.39 [95% CI 2.88-3.99]). Nearly 70% of excess deaths in RA were attributable to cardiopulmonary disease. All-cause mortality risk related to RA was lower among those diagnosed during 2012-2017 (HRadj 1.10 [95% CI 1.05-1.15]) compared to 2000-2005 (HRadj 1.31 [95% CI 1.26-1.36]), but still higher than for non-RA controls (P < 0.001). Cause-specific mortality trends were similar.

CONCLUSION

Excess RA-related mortality was driven by cardiovascular, cancer, respiratory, and infectious causes, particularly cardiopulmonary diseases. Although our findings support that RA-related mortality risk is decreasing over time, a mortality gap remains for all-cause and cause-specific mortality in RA.

What is the best target in a treat-to-target strategy in rheumatoid arthritis? Results from a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

OBJECTIVES

A treat-to-target (T2T) strategy has been shown to be superior to usual care in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but the optimal target remains unknown. Targets are based on a disease activity measure (eg, Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28), Simplified Disease Activity Indices/Clinical Disease Activity Indices (SDAI/CDAI), and a cut-off such as remission or low disease activity (LDA). Our aim was to compare the effect of different targets on clinical and radiographic outcomes.

METHODS

Cochrane, Embase and (pre)MEDLINE databases were searched (1 June 2022) for randomised controlled trials and cohort studies after 2003 that applied T2T in RA patients for ≥12 months. Data were extracted from individual T2T study arms; risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Using meta-regression, we evaluated the effect of the target used on clinical and radiographic outcomes, correcting for heterogeneity between and within studies.

RESULTS

115 treatment arms were used in the meta-regression analyses. Aiming for SDAI/CDAI-LDA was statistically superior to targeting DAS-LDA regarding DAS-remission and SDAI/CDAI/Boolean-remission outcomes over 1-3 years. Aiming for SDAI/CDAI-LDA was also significantly superior to DAS-remission regarding both SDAI/CDAI/Boolean-remission (over 1-3 years) and mean SDAI/CDAI (over 1 year). Targeting DAS-remission rather than DAS-LDA only improved the percentage of patients in DAS-remission, and only statistically significantly after 2-3 years of T2T. No differences were observed in Health Assessment Questionnaire and radiographic progression.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeting SDAI/CDAI-LDA, and to a lesser extent DAS-remission, may be superior to targeting DAS-LDA regarding several clinical outcomes. However, due to the risk of residual confounding and the lack of data on (over)treatment and safety, future studies should aim to directly and comprehensively compare targets.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021249015.

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and its outcomes in an aging society: a single-center cohort study in Japan from 2011 to 2020

Background

We conducted a single-center cohort study of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients from 2011 to 2020 to understand their real world treatment and outcomes, especially changes in physical function and quality of life (QOL) in elderly patients, including those aged ≥ 80 years.

Methods

For RA patients attending our outpatient clinic, we annually recorded tender and swollen joint counts, laboratory findings, therapeutic drugs, and scores from the Japanese Health Assessment Questionnaire and EuroQoL-5 Dimensions questionnaire. We examined changes in treatment and outcomes over time, by age group, in patients enrolled over a 10-year period, from 2011 to 2020.

Results

One thousand eight hundred thirty RA patients were enrolled and data were recorded once a year, and a total of 9299 patient records were evaluated. The average age of patients increased by 3.7 years during the study period; the patients aged rapidly. Intensive pharmacological treatment was more frequent in younger patients. Disease activity, physical function, and QOL showed improvement in all age groups over the study period. Physical function and QOL showed greater changes with aging, compared with disease activity. This may be due to the effects of accumulated RA damage, disability due to aging, and depression.

Conclusions

Intensive pharmacological treatment contributes to not only control of disease activity but also the improvement of physical activity and QOL, even in elderly patients. Relieving age-related physical impairment and depression may improve the QOL of very elderly RA patients.

Fibroblasts: the neglected cell type in peripheral sensitisation and chronic pain? A review based on a systematic search of the literature

Chronic pain and its underlying biological mechanisms have been studied for many decades, with a myriad of molecules, receptors and cell types known to contribute to abnormal pain sensations. Besides an obvious role for neurons, immune cells like microglia, macrophages and T cells are also important drivers of persistent pain. While neuroinflammation has therefore been widely studied in pain research, there is one cell type that appears to be rather neglected in this context: the humble fibroblast. Fibroblasts may seem unassuming but actually play a major part in regulating immune cell function and driving chronic inflammation. Here, our aim was to determine the breadth and quality of research that implicates fibroblasts in chronic pain conditions and models.

OBJECTIVES

We set out to analyse the current literature on this topic-using systematic screening and data extraction methods to obtain a balanced view on what has been published.

METHODS

We categorised the articles we included-stratifying them according to what was investigated, the estimated quality of results and any common conclusions.

RESULTS

We found that there has been surprisingly little research in this area: 134 articles met our inclusion criteria, only a tiny minority of which directly investigated interactions between fibroblasts and peripheral neurons.

CONCLUSIONS

Fibroblasts are a ubiquitous cell type and a prominent source of many proalgesic mediators in a wide variety of tissues. We think that they deserve a more central role in pain research and propose a new, testable model of how fibroblasts might drive peripheral neuron sensitisation.

Applying Early Intervention Strategies to Autoimmune Skin Diseases. Is the Window of Opportunity Preclinical? A Dermato-Rheumatology Perspective

Many inflammatory skin diseases exhibit a chronic course with unsatisfactory long-term outcomes. Insights into early intervention approaches in other autoimmune contexts could improve the trajectory of lifelong diseases in terms of sustained remission or minimal disease activity, reduced requirement for therapy and medical resource use, and improved QoL. In both rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA), we have learned that the timing and intensity of early interventions can influence later outcomes. Investigation into early RA, PsA, and systemic lupus erythematosus has shown that the optimal window of opportunity may even extend into asymptomatic preclinical phases of diseases. Notably, early and preclinical diseases may have pathogenic mechanisms and therapeutic targets that differ from those of the established disease. In this paper, we review the literature on these insights and discuss how similar research and therapeutic strategies may be investigated in cutaneous autoimmunity. We highlight the contribution of skin-resident cells to diseases that were previously thought to be initiated in the primary and secondary lymphoid organs of the immune system. We focus on two dermato‒rheumatology conditions-lupus and psoriasis-which share the commonality that effective early cutaneous disease therapy may have far-reaching implications on abrogating potentially severe systemic disease.

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

The treat-to-target strategy, which defines clinical remission as the primary therapeutic goal for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), is a widely recommended treatment approach in clinical guidelines. Achieving remission has been associated with improved clinical outcomes, quality of life, and productivity. These benefits are likely to translate to reduced economic burden in terms of lower healthcare costs and resource utilization. As such, a literature review was conducted to better understand the economic value of remission. Despite the large heterogeneity found in RA-related economic outcomes across studies, patients in remission consistently had lower direct medical and indirect costs, less healthcare resource utilization, and greater productivity compared to those without remission. Remission was associated with 19–52% savings in direct medical costs and 37–75% savings in indirect costs. The economic value of remission should thus be considered in economic analyses of RA therapies to inform treatment and reimbursement decisions.

Evaluation of a multidisciplinary care model to improve quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Health-Related Quality of Life (HR-QOL) is an important patient-reported domain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The uptake of multidisciplinary team (MDT) care in RA is generally low, due to initial high demand for resources. We hypothesised that whilst pharmacological treatments are effective in controlling disease activity, a multipronged intervention in an MDT may have a positive impact on HR-QOL.

METHODS

This was a single-centre randomized parallel group, single-blind controlled trial of MDT vs. usual care in an established RA clinic. Data were collected through face-to-face questionnaires, medical records review, and joint counts by a blinded assessor at 0, 3 and 6 months. Adult RA patients were randomly assigned in a single visit to a 6-member MDT (rheumatologist, nurse, social worker, physiotherapist, occupational therapist, and podiatrist) or usual care. MDT providers prescribed medications and counselled patients on managing flares, medication adherence, coping, joint protection, exercise, footwear. The primary outcome was minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in HR-QOL (increase in European QOL-5-Dimension-3-Level, EQ-5D-3L by 0.1) at six months.

RESULTS

140 patients (86.3% female, 53.4% Chinese, median (IQR) age 56.6 (46.7, 62.4) years); 70 were randomized to each arm. Median (IQR) disease duration was 5.5 (2.4, 11.0) years and disease activity in 28 joints (DAS28) was 2.87 (2.08, 3.66). 123 patients completed the study. Twenty-six (40.6%) MDT vs. 23 (34.3%) usual care patients achieved an MCID in EQ-5D-3L, OR 1.3 (0.6, 2.7). In multivariable logistic regression, baseline EQ-5D-3L was the only predictor of achieving MCID. There was more disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug escalation in MDT (34.4% vs. 19.4%). Patients with high disease activity were more likely to achieve MCID in the MDT arm.

CONCLUSIONS

A single visit by stable patients with low disease activity to an MDT failed to achieve MCID in the EQ-5D-3L; however, did achieve small but significant improvements in the EQ-5D-3L, DAS28, pain, coping and self-efficacy. To be sustainable, MDT care should be targeted at patients with high disease activity or those with a new diagnosis of RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03099668.

Developing a Novel Measurement of Sleep in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Study Proposal for Approach and Considerations

The development of novel digital endpoints (NDEs) using digital health technologies (DHTs) may provide opportunities to transform drug development. It requires a multidisciplinary, multi-study approach with strategic planning and a regulatory-guided pathway to achieve regulatory and clinical acceptance. Many NDEs have been explored; however, success has been limited. To advance industry use of NDEs to support drug development, we outline a theoretical, methodological study as a use-case proposal to describe the process and considerations when developing and obtaining regulatory acceptance for an NDE to assess sleep in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). RA patients often suffer joint pain, fatigue, and sleep disturbances (SDs). Although many researchers have investigated the mobility of joint functions using wearable technologies, the research of SD in RA has been limited due to the availability of suitable technologies. We proposed measuring the improvement of sleep as the novel endpoint for an anti-TNF therapy and described the meaningfulness of the measure, considerations of tool selection, and the design of clinical validation. The recommendations from the FDA patient-focused drug development guidance, the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) pathway for developing novel endpoints from DHTs, and the V3 framework developed by the Digital Medicine Society (DiMe) have been incorporated in the proposal. Regulatory strategy and engagement pathways are also discussed.

Effect of nurse-led care on outcomes in patients with ACPA/RF-positive rheumatoid arthritis with active disease undergoing treat-to-target: a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Objective

To determine the non-inferiority of nurse-led care (NLC) in patients with anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-positive and/or rheumatoid factor (RF)-positive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with active disease who are starting disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy, following treat-to-target (T2T) recommendations.

Methods

A multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial was conducted to assess clinical effectiveness, anxiety, depression and patient satisfaction following a non-inferiority design. The participants were 224 adults with ACPA/RF-positive RA who were randomly assigned to either NLC or rheumatologist-led care (RLC). The primary outcome was the Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints measured with C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) assessed at baseline and after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. A DAS28-CRP difference of 0.6 was set as the non-inferiority margin. Mean differences between the groups were assessed following per-protocol and intention-to-treat strategies.

Results

Demographic data and baseline characteristics of patients in the NLC group (n=111) were comparable to those of patients in the RLC group (n=113). The improvement in disease activity (change in DAS28-CRP, primary outcome) over the course of 12 months was significant in both groups (p<0.001). No significant differences were observed between the NLC and RLC groups (p=0.317). Non-inferiority of NLC was shown for the primary outcome and all secondary outcomes.

Conclusion

This study supported the non-inferiority of NLC in managing T2T and follow-up care of patients with RA with moderate to high disease activity and poor prognostic factors in addition to RLC.

Trial registration number

DRKS00013055.

A Structural Equation Model of Health-Related Quality of Life in Chinese Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Background: The aim of this study was to examine how body image, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, the feeling of being anxious, depression, fatigue, quality of sleep, and pain influence the quality of life (QoL) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: A multicenter cross-sectional survey with convenience sampling was conducted from March 2019 and December 2019, 603 patients with RA from five hospitals were evaluated using the Body Image Disturbance Questionnaire, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Fatigue Severity Scale, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Short Form 36 Health Survey, and Global Pain Scale. The relationship between quality of life and other variables was evaluated by using the structural equation model (SEM). Results: A total of 580 patients were recruited. SEM fitted the data very well with a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.072. Comparative fit index of 0.966, and Tucker-Lewis index of 0.936. The symptoms and the normalized factor load of six variables showed that the normalized factor load of pain was 0.99. Conclusions: The QoL model was used to fit an SEM to systematically verify and analyze the population disease data, biological factors, and the direct and indirect effects of the symptom group on the QoL, and the interactions between the symptoms. Therefore, the diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of RA is a long-term, dynamic, and complex practical process. Patients' personal symptoms, needs, and experiences also vary greatly. Comprehensive assessment of patients' symptoms, needs, and experiences, as well as the role of social support cannot be ignored, which can help to meet patients' nursing needs, improve their mood and pain-based symptom management, and ultimately improve patients' QoL.

Intensive therapy for moderate established rheumatoid arthritis: the TITRATE research programme

Background

Rheumatoid arthritis is a major inflammatory disorder and causes substantial disability. Treatment goals span minimising disease activity, achieving remission and decreasing disability. In active rheumatoid arthritis, intensive management achieves these goals. As many patients with established rheumatoid arthritis have moderate disease activity, the TITRATE (Treatment Intensities and Targets in Rheumatoid Arthritis ThErapy) programme assessed the benefits of intensive management.

Objectives

To (1) define how to deliver intensive therapy in moderate established rheumatoid arthritis; (2) establish its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in a trial; and (3) evaluate evidence supporting intensive management in observational studies and completed trials.

Design

Observational studies, secondary analyses of completed trials and systematic reviews assessed existing evidence about intensive management. Qualitative research, patient workshops and systematic reviews defined how to deliver it. The trial assessed its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in moderate established rheumatoid arthritis.

Setting

Observational studies (in three London centres) involved 3167 patients. These were supplemented by secondary analyses of three previously completed trials (in centres across all English regions), involving 668 patients. Qualitative studies assessed expectations (nine patients in four London centres) and experiences of intensive management (15 patients in 10 centres across England). The main clinical trial enrolled 335 patients with diverse socioeconomic deprivation and ethnicity (in 39 centres across all English regions).

Participants

Patients with established moderately active rheumatoid arthritis receiving conventional disease-modifying drugs.

Interventions

Intensive management used combinations of conventional disease-modifying drugs, biologics (particularly tumour necrosis factor inhibitors) and depot steroid injections; nurses saw patients monthly, adjusted treatment and provided supportive person-centred psychoeducation. Control patients received standard care.

Main outcome measures

Disease Activity Score for 28 joints based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR)-categorised patients (active to remission). Remission (DAS28-ESR < 2.60) was the treatment target. Other outcomes included fatigue (measured on a 100-mm visual analogue scale), disability (as measured on the Health Assessment Questionnaire), harms and resource use for economic assessments.

Results

Evaluation of existing evidence for intensive rheumatoid arthritis management showed the following. First, in observational studies, DAS28-ESR scores decreased over 10–20 years, whereas remissions and treatment intensities increased. Second, in systematic reviews of published trials, all intensive management strategies increased remissions. Finally, patients with high disability scores had fewer remissions. Qualitative studies of rheumatoid arthritis patients, workshops and systematic reviews helped develop an intensive management pathway. A 2-day training session for rheumatology practitioners explained its use, including motivational interviewing techniques and patient handbooks. The trial screened 459 patients and randomised 335 patients (168 patients received intensive management and 167 patients received standard care). A total of 303 patients provided 12-month outcome data. Intention-to-treat analysis showed intensive management increased DAS28-ESR 12-month remissions, compared with standard care (32% vs. 18%, odds ratio 2.17, 95% confidence interval 1.28 to 3.68; p = 0.004), and reduced fatigue [mean difference –18, 95% confidence interval –24 to –11 (scale 0–100); p < 0.001]. Disability (as measured on the Health Assessment Questionnaire) decreased when intensive management patients achieved remission (difference –0.40, 95% confidence interval –0.57 to –0.22) and these differences were considered clinically relevant. However, in all intensive management patients reductions in the Health Assessment Questionnaire scores were less marked (difference –0.1, 95% confidence interval –0.2 to 0.0). The numbers of serious adverse events (intensive management n = 15 vs. standard care n = 11) and other adverse events (intensive management n = 114 vs. standard care n = 151) were similar. Economic analysis showed that the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £43,972 from NHS and Personal Social Services cost perspectives. The probability of meeting a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 was 17%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio decreased to £29,363 after including patients’ personal costs and lost working time, corresponding to a 50% probability that intensive management is cost-effective at English willingness-to-pay thresholds. Analysing trial baseline predictors showed that remission predictors comprised baseline DAS28-ESR, disability scores and body mass index. A 6-month extension study (involving 95 intensive management patients) showed fewer remissions by 18 months, although more sustained remissions were more likley to persist. Qualitative research in trial completers showed that intensive management was acceptable and treatment support from specialist nurses was beneficial.

Limitations

The main limitations comprised (1) using single time point remissions rather than sustained responses, (2) uncertainty about benefits of different aspects of intensive management and differences in its delivery across centres, (3) doubts about optimal treatment of patients unresponsive to intensive management and (4) the lack of formal international definitions of ‘intensive management’.

Conclusion

The benefits of intensive management need to be set against its additional costs. These were relatively high. Not all patients benefited. Patients with high pretreatment physical disability or who were substantially overweight usually did not achieve remission.

Future work

Further research should (1) identify the most effective components of the intervention, (2) consider its most cost-effective delivery and (3) identify alternative strategies for patients not responding to intensive management.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN70160382.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Current favourable 10-year outcome of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: data from the ESPOIR cohort

OBJECTIVE

To report the 10-year outcome of an inception cohort of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the ESPOIR cohort, and predictors of outcome.

METHODS

From 2003 to 2005, 813 patients were included if they had early arthritis (< 6 months) with a high probability of RA and had never been prescribed DMARDs. Multivariate analysis was used to evaluate predictors of outcome.

RESULTS

In total, 521 (64.1%) RA patients were followed up for 10 years; 35 (4.3%) died which appears similar to the French general population. Overall, 480 (92.1%) patients received a DMARD; 174 (33.4%) received at least one biologic DMARD, 13.6% within 2 years. At year 10, 273 (52.4%) patients were in DAS28 remission, 40.1% in sustained remission, 14.1% in drug-free remission, 39.7% in CDAI remission. Half of the patients achieved a HAQ-DI < 0.5. SF-36 physical component and pain were well controlled. Structural progression was weak, with a mean change from baseline in modified Sharp score of 11.0 ± 17.9. Only 34 (6.5%) patients required major joint surgery. A substantial number of patients showed new comorbidities over 10 years. Positivity for ACPA was confirmed as a robust predictor of long-term outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

We report a very mild 10-year outcome of a large cohort of patients with early RA diagnosed in the early 2000s, which was much better than results for a previous cohort of patients who were recruited in 1993. This current favourable outcome may be related to more intensive care for real-life patients.

The clinical effectiveness of intensive management in moderate established rheumatoid arthritis: The titrate trial

OBJECTIVES

Many trials have shown that intensive management is effective in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). But its benefits are unproven for the large number of RA patients seen in routine care who have established, moderately active RA and are already taking conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). The TITRATE trial studied whether these patients also benefit from intensive management and, in particular, achieve more remissions.

METHODS

A 12-month multicentre individually randomised trial compared standard care with monthly intensive management appointments which was delivered by specially trained healthcare professionals and incorporated monthly clinical assessments, medication titration and psychosocial support. The primary outcome was 12-month remission assessed using the Disease Activity Score for 28 joints using ESR (DAS28-ESR). Secondary outcomes included fatigue, disability, harms and healthcare costs. Intention-to-treat multivariable logistic- and linear regression analyses compared treatment arms with multiple imputation used for missing data.

RESULTS

459 patients were screened and 335 were randomised (168 intensive management; 167 standard care); 303 (90%) patients provided 12-month outcomes. Intensive management increased DAS28-ESR 12-month remissions compared to standard care (32% vs 18%, p = 0.004). Intensive management also significantly increased remissions using a range of alternative remission criteria and increased patients with DAS28-ESR low disease activity scores. (48% vs 32%, p = 0.005). In addition it substantially reduced fatigue (mean difference -18; 95% CI: -24, -11, p<0.001). There was no evidence that serious adverse events (intensive management =15 vs standard care =11) or other adverse events (114 vs 151) significantly increase with intensive management.

INTERPRETATION

The trial shows that intensive management incorporating psychosocial support delivered by specially trained healthcare professions is effective in moderately active established RA. More patients achieve remissions, there were greater improvements in fatigue, and there were no more harms.

Cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: protocol for the randomised, single-blinded, parallel-group Sleep-RA trial

BACKGROUND

More than half of patients with rheumatoid arthritis complain of insomnia, which is predominantly treated with hypnotic drugs. However, cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia is recommended as the first-line treatment in international guidelines on sleep. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis suffer from debilitating symptoms, such as fatigue and pain, which can also be linked to sleep disturbance. It remains to be determined whether cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia can be effective in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The aim of the Sleep-RA trial is to investigate the efficacy of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia on sleep and disease-related symptoms in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The primary objective is to compare the effect of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia relative to usual care on changes in sleep efficiency from baseline to week 7 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The key secondary objectives are to compare the effect of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia relative to usual care on changes in sleep onset latency, wake after sleep onset, total sleep time, insomnia, sleep quality, fatigue, impact of rheumatoid arthritis and depressive symptoms from baseline to week 26 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

The Sleep-RA trial is a randomised controlled trial with a two-group parallel design. Sixty patients with rheumatoid arthritis, insomnia and low-to-moderate disease activity will be allocated 1:1 to treatment with cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia or usual care. Patients in the intervention group will receive nurse-led, group-based cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia once a week for 6 weeks. Outcome assessments will be carried out at baseline, after treatment (week 7) and at follow-up (week 26).

DISCUSSION

Data on treatment of insomnia in patients with rheumatoid arthritis are sparse. The Sleep-RA trial is the first randomised controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Because symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and insomnia have many similarities, we also find it relevant to investigate the secondary effects of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia on fatigue, impact of rheumatoid arthritis, depressive symptoms, pain, functional status, health-related quality of life and disease activity. If we find cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia to be effective in patients with rheumatoid arthritis this will add weight to the argument that evidence-based non-pharmacological treatment for insomnia in rheumatological outpatient clinics is eligible in accordance with the existing international guidelines on sleep.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03766100. Registered on 30 November 2018.

Neuroimmune interactions: how the nervous and immune systems influence each other

In recent years, researchers worldwide have expanded our understanding of how, and the degree to which, the immune system interacts with the nervous system, and vice versa. In this issue of Clinical & Experimental Immunology, we are pleased to present our new Review Series: 'Neuroimmune interactions: how the nervous and immune systems influence each other', a collection of four Review articles commissioned by Leonie S. Taams from leading researchers in this exciting interdisciplinary field. The collection covers key technical, experimental and clinical findings in the fast-developing field of neuroimmunology.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced inflammatory arthritis as a model of autoimmune arthritis

The development of inflammatory arthritis in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy is increasingly recognized due to the growing use of these drugs for the treatment of cancer. This represents an important opportunity not only to define the mechanisms responsible for the development of this immune-related adverse event and to ultimately predict or prevent its development, but also to provide a unique window into early events in the development of inflammatory arthritis. Knowledge gained through the study of this patient population, for which the inciting event is known, could shed light into the pathogenesis of autoimmune arthritis. This review will highlight the clinical and immunologic features of these entities to define common elements for future study.