The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of treat-to-target strategies in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

Development and validation of a prediction model for falls among older people using community-based data

This is the first study to employ multilevel modeling analysis to develop a predictive tool for falls in individuals who have participated in community group exercise over a year. The tool may benefit healthcare workers in screening community-dwelling older adults with various levels of risks for falls.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to develop a calculation tool to predict the risk of falls 1 year in the future and to find the cutoff value for detecting a high risk based on a database of individuals who participated in a community-based group exercise.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a total of 7726 physical test and Kihon Checklist data from 2381 participants who participated in community-based physical exercise groups. We performed multilevel logistic regression analysis to estimate the odds ratio of falls for each risk factor and used the variance inflation factor to assess collinearity. We determined a cutoff value that effectively distinguishes individuals who are likely to fall within a year based on both sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

The final model included variables such as age, sex, weight, balance, standing up from a chair without any aid, history of a fall in the previous year, choking, cognitive status, subjective health, and long-term participation. The sensitivity, specificity, and best cutoff value of our tool were 68.4%, 53.8%, and 22%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Using our tool, an individual's risk of falls over the course of a year could be predicted with acceptable sensitivity and specificity. We recommend a cutoff value of 22% for use in identifying high-risk populations. The tool may benefit healthcare workers in screening community-dwelling older adults with various levels of risk for falls and support physicians in planning preventative and follow-up care.

Efficacy and safety of treat-to-target strategy studies in rheumatic diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The concept of treat-to-target (T2T), a treatment strategy in which treatment is directed to reach and maintain a defined goal such as remission or low disease activity (LDA), has been explored for several diseases including rheumatic diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, a comprehensive review of T2T in all rheumatic diseases has not recently been undertaken.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of a T2T strategy in the management of adult patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

METHODS

PUBMED, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched from January 1990 to December 2023 using key words related to a T2T strategy and rheumatic diseases; T2T strategy clinical trials or observational studies were included. Clinical, physical function and radiologic outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and adverse events (AEs) of the T2T strategies were investigated and a random-effect meta-analysis was conducted for the most commonly used outcomes in RA studies.

RESULTS

The search identified 7896 studies, of which 66 fit inclusion criteria, including 50 in RA, 3 in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), 1 in spondyloarthritis (SpA) and 12 in gout. For the studies comparing a T2T strategy with usual care (UC) in RA, 83.3% (20/24) showed a T2T strategy could achieve significantly better clinical outcomes, and the meta-analysis showed that patients treated with a T2T strategy were more likely to be in remission (pooled RR: 1.68 (1.47-1.92), p<0.001] and achieve DAS-28 response (pooled standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.47 (0.26-0.69), P<0.001] at 1 year than patients treated with UC. Sensitivity analyses showed that a T2T strategy with a predefined treatment protocol had better clinical efficacy than that without protocol. In terms of improving physical function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), 11/19 (57.9%) studies found a T2T strategy was significantly more likely to achieve these than UC, with the meta-analysis for the mean change of HAQ score supporting this conclusion (pooled SMD: 1.48 (0.46-2.51), p=0.004). Five out of 9 studies (55.6%) demonstrated greater benefit regarding radiographic progression from a T2T strategy. In terms of cost-effectiveness and AEs, 2/2 studies found a T2T strategy was more cost-effective than UC and 8/8 studies showed no tendency for AEs to occur more often with a T2T strategy. For the studies in PsA and SpA, a T2T strategy was also demonstrated to be more effective than UC in clinical and functional benefits, but not in radiologic outcomes. All gout studies showed that sUA level could be controlled more effectively with a T2T strategy, and 2 studies revealed that the T2T strategy could inhibit erosion development or crystal deposition.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with active RA, a T2T strategy has been shown in mulitple studies to increase the likelihood of achieving clinical response and improving HRQoL without increasing economic costs and AEs. Limited studies have shown clinical and functional benefits from T2T strategies in active PsA and SpA. A T2T strategy has also been found to improve clinical and radiologic outcomes in gout. T2T trials in other rheumatic diseases are lacking.

MITIG.RA: study protocol of a tailored psychological intervention for managing fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite remarkable medical advances in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a subset of patients fails to achieve complete clinical remission, as the Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of disease activity remains above 1, even after the inflammatory process is brought under control. This so-called state of 'PGA-near-remission' negatively impacts individuals' functioning and potentiates inadequate care. Fatigue is a distressing and disabling symptom frequently reported by patients in PGA-near-remission, and its management remains challenging. While classic cognitive-behavioural interventions show some benefits in managing fatigue, there is potential for improvement. Recently, contextual-cognitive behavioural therapies (CCBT), like mindfulness, acceptance, and compassion-based interventions, have shown promising results in fatigue-associated disorders and their determinants. This study primarily aims to examine the efficacy of the Compassion and Mindfulness Intervention for RA (MITIG.RA), a novel intervention combining different components of CCBT, compared to treatment-as-usual (TAU) in the management of RA-associated fatigue. Secondary aims involve exploring whether MITIG.RA produces changes in the perceived impact of disease, satisfaction with disease status, levels of depression, and emotion-regulation skills.

METHODS

This is a single center, two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial. Patients will be screened for eligibility and willingness to participate and will be assessed and randomized to the experimental (MITIG.RA + TAU) or control condition (TAU) using computer randomization. MITIG.RA will be delivered by a certified psychologist and comprises eight sessions of 2 h, followed by two booster sessions. Outcomes will be assessed through validated self-report measures, including fatigue (primary outcome), perceived impact of disease, depressive symptoms, mindfulness, self-compassion, safety, and satisfaction (secondary outcomes). Assessment will take place at baseline, post-intervention, before the first and second booster sessions (weeks 12 and 20, respectively), and at 32 and 44 weeks after the interventions' beginning.

DISCUSSION

We expect MITIG.RA to be effective in reducing levels of RA-associated fatigue. Secondarily, we hypothesize that the experimental group will show improvements in the overall perceived impact of disease, emotional distress, and emotion regulation skills. Our findings will contribute to determine the benefits of combining CCBT approaches for managing fatigue and associated distress in RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05389189. Registered on May 25, 2022.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on referrals to musculoskeletal services from primary care and subsequent incidence of inflammatory rheumatic musculoskeletal disease: an observational study

Objective

The aim was to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic upon referral patterns and incident diagnosis of inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (iRMDs).

Methods

UK primary care data were used to describe referral patterns for patients with musculoskeletal conditions. Trends in referrals to musculoskeletal services and incident diagnoses of iRMDs (specifically, RA and JIA) were described using Joinpoint Regression and comparisons made between key pandemic time periods.

Results

The incidence of RA and JIA reduced by -13.3 and -17.4% per month, respectively, between January 2020 and April 2020, then increased by 1.9 and 3.7% per month, respectively, between April 2020 and October 2021. The incidence of all diagnosed iRMDs was stable until October 2021. Referrals decreased between February 2020 and May 2020 by -16.8% per month from 4.8 to 2.4% in patients presenting with a musculoskeletal condition. After May 2020, referrals increased significantly (16.8% per month) to 4.5% in July 2020. The time from first musculoskeletal consultation to RA diagnosis and from referral to RA diagnosis increased in the early pandemic period [rate ratio (RR) 1.11, 95% CI 1.07, 1.15 and RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.17, 1.30, respectively] and remained consistently higher in the late pandemic period (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.11, 1.16 and RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.23, 1.32, respectively), compared with the pre-COVID-19 pandemic period.

Conclusion

Patients with underlying RA and JIA that developed during the pandemic might be yet to present or might be in the referral and/or diagnostic process. Clinicians should remain alert to this possibility, and commissioners should be aware of these findings, enabling the appropriate planning and commissioning of services.

Evaluation of the anti-RANKL monoclonal antibody in rheumatoid arthritis rats

Objectives: In this study, we aimed to investigate the therapeutic effect of anti-receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-κB ligand (RANKL) monoclonal antibodies R748-1-1-1, R748-1-1-2 and R748-1-1-3 on rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a rat model.

Materials and methods: Gene cloning, hybridoma technology, affinity purification, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, general observation, hematoxylin-eosin staining, X-ray, and many other experimental techniques were used in this study.

Results: Improved collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) modeling was successfully constructed. The RANKL gene was cloned and the anti-RANKL monoclonal antibody was prepared. Following treatment with the anti-RANKL monoclonal antibody, the soft tissue swelling of the hind paws, the joint thickening, the narrowed joint gap, and the blurred edge of the bone joint were improved. The pathological changes such as synovial hyperplasia of fibrous tissue, cartilage and bone destruction were significantly decreased in the anti-RANKL monoclonal antibody-treated CIA group. Compared to the normal control group and phosphate buffer saline (PBS)-treated CIA group, the expression of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin-1 (IL-1) in antibody-treated CIA group, positive drug-treated CIA group, and IgG-treated CIA group were decreased (p<0.05).

Conclusion: The anti-RANKL monoclonal antibody can promote the therapeutic effect of RA rats, indicating that the anti-RANKL monoclonal antibody has a certain potential value and may be beneficial to the further study of the mechanism of RA treatment.

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.

Treating-to-target in rheumatology: Theory and practice

Despite its inclusion in current treatment recommendations, adherence to the treat-to-target strategy (T2T) is still poor. Among the issues are the definition(s) of target, especially the caveats of the patient global assessment (PGA), included in all recommended definitions of remission. The PGA is poorly related to inflammation, especially at low levels of disease activity, rather being a measure of the disease impact. Up to 60% of all patients otherwise in remission still score PGA at >1 and as high as 10. These patients (PGA-near-remission) are exposed to overtreatment if current recommendations are strictly followed and will continue to endure significant impact, unless adjuvant measures are implemented. A proposed method to overcome both these risks is to systematically pursue two targets: one focused on the disease process (the biological target) and another focused on the symptoms and impact (the impact target), the dual-target strategy. Candidate instruments to define each of these targets are discussed.

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.

Is a treat-to-target strategy in osteoporosis applicable in clinical practice? Consensus among a panel of European experts

A panel of European experts was convened to establish consensus on a treat-to-target strategy in osteoporosis. Panellists agreed that the ultimate goals of treating osteoporosis are recovering pre-fracture functional level and reducing subsequent fracture risk; there was consensus that total hip bone mineral density is currently the most appropriate treatment target in clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION

A modified Delphi approach was convened to establish consensus among European experts on best practice management for patients with fragility fractures and whether a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy is applicable in osteoporosis.

METHODS

A panel of 12 clinical experts (from eight European countries) voted on 13 final statements relating to a T2T strategy for osteoporosis across three rounds of blinded, remotely conducted electronic surveys (Likert scale: 'strongly disagree', 'disagree', 'unable to answer', 'agree', 'strongly agree'). When panellists disagreed, they were asked how the statement could be adjusted to allow for a positive response, which was used to refine the statement for the following round. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% agreement with a statement. Panellists were selected by UCB Pharma, which provided financial and logistical support.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached for 13/13 statements. Panellists agreed that the most important goals for fragility fracture patients are recovery of pre-fracture functional level and reduction of subsequent fracture risk. There was also consensus that a T2T strategy is applicable to osteoporosis and that bone mineral density (BMD) is currently the most clinically appropriate target. With regard to the definition of a specific BMD treatment target and timeframes applicable to T2T in osteoporosis, no clear consensus was reached; panellists emphasised that these would need to be individually determined.

CONCLUSIONS

According to a panel of European experts, the main goals of fracture management are to recover pre-fracture functional level and reduce fracture risk. Total hip BMD seems to be the most clinically appropriate treatment target within a T2T strategy.

FIRST LINE OF SUBCUTANEOUS ANTI-TNF THERAPY FOR RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY

Objectives: This study aims to evaluate and compare the use of subcutaneous anti-TNF for RA in a Brazilian real-life setting. Methods: A prospective cohort of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD)-naïve patients treated with adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab, and certolizumab was developed. Medication persistence, disease activity by the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), functionality by the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), quality of life by the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), and safety were evaluated at 6 and 12 months. Results: In a total of 327 individuals, 211 (64.5%) were persistent at 12 months. Patients improved after the use of anti-TNF, with a reduction in the mean of CDAI and HAQ, in addition to an increase in the mean of EQ-5D (p < 0.05). The number of patients who achieved the clinical response was 114 (34.86%) by CDAI, 212 (64.83%) by HAQ, and 215 (65.75%) by EQ-5D at 12 months. There were no statistically significant differences among the drugs (p > 0.05). The anti-TNF was well tolerated. Conclusion: Anti-TNF reduced disease activity, in addition to improving patients' functionality and quality of life. Additional pharmacotherapeutic monitoring can be essential to achieve better results.

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.

Remission vs low disease activity: function, quality of life and structural outcomes in the Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Study and Network

Objectives

To examine associations between function, quality of life and structural outcomes in patients achieving remission vs low disease activity in early RA.

Methods

Demographic, clinical and radiographic variables were collected at baseline and then annually from the Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Study (ERAS) and Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Network (ERAN) inception cohorts in routine care from 1986 to 2012. Disease activity was categorized: mean DAS28 score between years 1 and 5: remission [mean remission DAS (mRDAS) <2.6] or low [mean low DAS (mLDAS) 2.6–3.2]; sustained low/remission DAS28 (sLDAS/sRDAS) at years 1 and 2; and sustained Boolean remission (sBR) at years 1 and 2. Changes in HAQ and Short Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire [SF-36; physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component score]) and total Sharp van der Heijde (SvdH) scores for each disease activity category were modelled using multi-level models. Covariates included year of onset, age, gender and DMARD use at first visit.

Results

Of 2701 patients, 562 (21%) were categorized mRDAS, 330 (12%) mLDAS, 279 (10%) sRDAS, 203 (7.5%) sLDAS and 93 (3%) sBR. Patients categorized as mRDAS had increasingly divergent improved HAQ, SF-36 PCS, MCS and total SvdH scores compared with mLDAS (P-values 0.001 to <0.0001, all time points). Patients categorized as sRDAS had better HAQ, SF-36 PCS and MCS scores (P-values 0.05 to <0.0001, all time points) and SvdH scores (P = 0.05, years 3–5) over sLDAS. sBR was associated with better HAQ, and SF-36 PCS and MCS scores over sLDAS (P-values 0.002 to <0.0001, all time points).

Conclusion

These findings from routine care support ACR/EULAR guidelines that remission is a preferable goal over low disease activity in early RA.

Mindfulness interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To explore the effect of mindfulness interventions in improving outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

Following the collective strategy of Cochrane Collaborative Group, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database were searched from the establishment of databases to September 2019. Reference lists were searched for additional studies. Risk of bias was assessed using Revman 5.3. Disagreement was resolved by discussion.

RESULTS

A total of 6 RCTs were included, including 337 patients. The results showed that the improvement of pain intensity in mindfulness group after intervention was better than that in the control group, and the difference was significant [WMD = 0.65, 95% CI (-1.11, - 0.18), P = 0.006]. There were significant differences in depression between the two groups [SMD = 0.47, 95% CI (- 0.86, - 0.07), P = 0.02]. The results showed that there were significant differences in DSA28 between the two groups [WMD = -0.29,95% CI (- 0.38, - 0.19), P ＜0.00001]. The results showed that there were no significant differences in anxiety and CPR between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

mindfulness interventions can significantly improve pain intensity, depression, and symptoms in patients with rheumatoid arthritis compared with conventional therapy. But the result still needs to be confirmed by more high-quality, large-sample randomized controlled trials.

A modeling framework for the economic evaluation of baricitinib in moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis

Objectives: The approval in more than 50 countries of baricitinib, an oral Janus Kinase inhibitor for the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), warrants a framework for corresponding economic evaluations. To develop a comprehensive economic model assessing the cost-effectiveness of baricitinib for the treatment of moderately-to-severely active RA patients in comparison to other relevant treatments, considering the natural history of the disease, real world treatment patterns, and clinical evidence from the baricitinib trials.Methods: A systematic literature review of previously developed models in RA was conducted to inform the model structure, key modeling assumptions and data inputs. Consultations with rheumatologists were undertaken to validate the modeling approach and underlying assumptions.Results: A discrete event simulation model was developed to international best practices with flexibility to assess the cost-effectiveness of baricitinib over a lifetime in a variety of markets. The model incorporates treatment sequencing to adequately reflect treatment pathways in clinical practice. Outcomes assessed include cost and quality-adjusted life years, allowing for a full incremental analysis of cost-effectiveness of competing treatments and treatment sequences.Conclusion: The economic model developed provides a robust framework for future analyses assessing the cost-effectiveness of baricitinib for the treatment of RA in specific country settings.

Association among anti-citrullinated protein antibody status, erosive disease and healthcare resource utilization in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Objective: To characterize the rate of healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) between anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP; a surrogate for anti-citrullinated protein antibodies [ACPAs]) positive (+) patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), either with or without erosions, who initiated biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) treatment.Methods: Data from the Corrona RA registry, a prospective registry of adult patients with RA from 177 sites across 42 states in the US, were analyzed. Annual rates of HCRU (measured based on rates of all-cause hospitalization, joint surgery, imaging procedures and use of assistive devices) were estimated in anti-CCP + patients with and without erosions following bDMARD initiation using a Poisson regression model.Results: Among the 3333 patients with known anti-CCP and erosion status and 12-month post-bDMARD follow-up information in the Corrona registry, 2047 were anti-CCP + and included in this analysis; 868 with and 1179 without erosions. Baseline characteristics were generally well balanced between patients with and without erosions; however, those with erosions had a longer mean RA duration and a higher prior DMARD use. Over 12 months, among anti-CCP + patients, those with erosions had significantly higher rates of all HCRU, except joint surgery, than those without erosions. Age-adjusted risk ratios (95% confidence interval) were as follows: all-cause hospitalization, 1.47 (1.14, 1.90); all-cause imaging, 1.25 (1.03, 1.53); and assistive device use 1.12 (1.00, 1.25). The rate of joint surgery visits was also numerically higher in patients with versus without erosion.Conclusions: ACPA seropositivity with erosive disease was associated with higher rates of HCRU compared with seropositivity without erosions. These findings suggest that providers may want to manage anti-CCP + patients aggressively to achieve better disease control to prevent the development of erosions and the associated increase in HCRU.

Time of Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Start in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis and the Likelihood of a Drug-Free Remission in Young Adulthood

OBJECTIVE

To study juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) long-term outcomes in relation to the time of initiation of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD).

METHODS

Outcomes of JIA patients prospectively followed by the Biologika in der Kinderrheumatologie (BiKeR) and Juvenile Arthritis Methotrexate/Biologics Long-Term Observation (JuMBO) registers were analyzed with regard to drug-free remission and inactive disease, functional status and quality of life, and surgery. To analyze the influence of early bDMARD therapy on outcomes, patients were assigned to 3 groups based on the time from symptom onset to bDMARD start (G1: ≤2 years, G2: >2 to ≤5 years, and G3: >5 years). Propensity score-adjusted outcome differences were analyzed by multinomial logistic regression analyses among the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 701 JIA patients were observed for mean ± SD 9.1 ± 3.7 years. At the last follow-up (disease duration mean ± SD 14.3 ± 6.1 years), 11.7% of patients were in drug-free remission, and 40.0% had inactive disease. More than half of the patients reported no functional limitation, while 5% had undergone arthroplasty, and 3% had eye surgery. At the 10-year time point, patients in G1 (n = 108) were significantly more likely to be in drug-free remission than those patients who began treatment later (G2, n = 199; G3, n = 259), with 18.5%, 10.1%, and 4.9%, respectively. Patients in G1 had significantly lower disease activity (clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score in 10 joints = 4.9), a better overall well-being (18.2% patient global assessment score = 0), and higher functional status (59.2% Health Assessment Questionnaire score = 0), compared to patients in G3 (7.1, 8.4%, and 43.7%, respectively). G1 patients required arthroplasty significantly less frequently than G3 patients and had significantly lower disease activity over time than patients in both G2 and G3.

CONCLUSION

Early DMARD treatment is associated with better disease control and outcomes, which supports the concept of a "window of opportunity" for JIA.

Treat-To-Target and Treat-To-Budget in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Measuring the Value of Individual Therapeutic Interventions

Treat-to-target (T2T) and dose tapering after obtaining the therapeutic objective (called "treat-to-budget"-T2B-in this Commentary) are the two most commonly used therapeutic strategies in rheumatoid arthritis. In theory, both strategies could add value to the healthcare system, although they are focused on different objectives: T2T strategy improves outcomes but increases short-term costs, while the cost savings obtained through T2B are associated with higher relapse rates. The systematic implementation of both strategies must be founded on solid evidence of their effectiveness and efficiency. However, the level of evidence between guidelines and individual studies is inconsistent for both strategies and the number and the quality of cost-effectiveness analyses is scarce. Raising the level of evidence requires a move from generalization to individualization by conducting randomized clinical trials that assess each of the many strategies that fall under the umbrella of the overall T2T and T2B concepts. In addition, such studies should consider the therapeutic goals and impact of the disease from the perspective of individual patients, which is only possible by promoting shared decision-making. FUNDING: Lilly Spain.

Symptoms associated with inflammatory arthritis are common in the primary care population: results from the joint symptoms survey

OBJECTIVES

To describe the prevalence of self-reported inflammatory joint symptoms, such as joint pain, stiffness and swelling, in UK primary care patients consulting for both musculoskeletal (MSK) and non-musculoskeletal (non-MSK) complaints.

METHODS

A joint symptoms questionnaire survey was sent to 10 161 individuals, of whom 5050 had consulted for MSK problems. These were matched by age, gender and general practice to non-MSK consulters. Participants provided data on relevant symptoms such as joint pain, stiffness and swelling. The prevalence of these symptoms, their severity and impact were compared between MSK and non-MSK consulters.

RESULTS

A total of 4549 adults responded to the survey (adjusted response 45.8%) of whom 52.3% consulted for a MSK problem. The mean (s.d.) age was 61.6 (14.8) years and 58.9% were female. Persistent (on at least half of the days in the last month) inflammatory symptoms were common even in non-MSK consulters, with 42% reporting joint pain, 36% reporting joint stiffness and 18% reporting joint swelling. This is in comparison with 62% reporting joint pain, 50% stiffness and 24% swelling among MSK consulters.

CONCLUSIONS

Although symptoms such as persistent joint pain, swelling and stiffness are predictive of inflammatory arthritis, large numbers of people consulting primary care for non-MSK reasons report these symptoms when asked by questionnaire. This compounds the challenges of diagnosing inflammatory arthritis in a non-specialist setting where new approaches are needed to ensure accurate, early diagnosis, facilitating a treat-to-target approach.

[S2e guideline: treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with disease-modifying drugs]

BACKGROUND

Medication-based strategies to treat rheumatoid arthritis are crucial in terms of outcome. They aim at preventing joint destruction, loss of function and disability by early and consistent inhibition of inflammatory processes.

OBJECTIVE

Achieving consensus about evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in Germany.

METHODS

Following a systematic literature research, a structured process among expert rheumatologists was used to reach consensus.

RESULTS

The results of the consensus process can be summed up in 6 overarching principles and 10 recommendations. There are several new issues compared to the version of 2012, such as differentiated adjustments to the therapeutic regime according to time point and extent of treatment response, the therapeutic goal of achieving remission as assessed by means of the simplified disease activity index (SDAI) as well as the potential use of targeted synthetic DMARDs (JAK inhibitors) and suggestions for a deescalating in case of achieving a sustained remission. Methotrexate still plays the central role at the beginning of the treatment and as a combination partner in the further treatment course. When treatment response to methotrexate is inadequate, either switching to or combining with another conventional synthetic DMARD is an option in the absence of unfavourable prognostic factors. Otherwise biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs are recommended according to the algorithm. Rules for deescalating treatment with glucocorticoids and-where applicable-DMARDs give support for the management of patients who have reached a sustained remission.

DISCUSSION

The new guidelines set up recommendations for RA treatment in accordance with the treat-to-target principle. Modern disease-modifying drugs, now including also JAK inhibitors, are available in an algorithm.

Treat-to-target concept implementation for evaluating rheumatoid arthritis patients in daily practice

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the implementation of the treat-to-target (T2T) concept in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in daily practice.

METHODS

All RA patients visiting one of the 7 academic medical centers in Israel in June 2015 with at least 3 previous clinic visits were included in this study. A common questionnaire was used to collect data from patients' medical records, and two independent rheumatologists evaluated the collected data for the implementation of the T2T concept. The associations between T2T implementation and the categorical and continuous variables were assessed.

RESULTS

The study included 724 patients with a mean (standard deviation) age of 62.6 (13.97) years and 575 (80.4%) of them were women. Four centers used more than one scoring method, with Disease Activity Score-28 and Clinical Disease Activity Index) being most commonly used. Only 276 (38.1%) patients had disease score results in ≥3 visits, and the T2T recommendations were implemented for 245 (33.8%) of the 724 patients. The rate of implementation was higher in younger (p=0.028) rheumatoid factor-positive patients (p=0.011) and varied between centers (11.1%-87% p<0.0001). T2T implementation did not correlate to gender, place of residence, education, tobacco use, treatment regimens, and presence of erosions or comorbidities.

CONCLUSION

The T2T concept was implemented on only 33.8% of patients and was not affected by RA disease severity. Further studies are needed to determine the reasons for this deviation from the T2T standard of care for RA as well as its consequences.

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

Background

The emphasis on treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA) intensively reduces disease activity but its impact in routine care is uncertain. We evaluated temporal changes in disease activities and outcomes in a 10-year prospective observational cohort study of patients in routine care at one unit.

Methods

The Guy’s and St Thomas’ RA cohort was established in 2005. It involved most RA patients managed in this hospital. Clinical diagnoses of RA were made by rheumatologists. Patients were seen regularly in routine care. Each visit included measurement of disease activity scores for 28 joints (DAS28), health assessment questionnaire scores (HAQ) and EuroQol scores. Patients received intensive treatments targeting DAS28 remission.

Results

In 1693 RA patients mean DAS28 scores fell from 2005 to 15 by 11% from 4.08 (95% CI: 3.91, 4.25) in 2005 to 3.64 (3.34, 3.78); these falls were highly significant (p < 0.001). DAS28 components: swollen joint counts fell by 32% and ESR by 24%; in contrast tender joint counts and patient global assessments showed minimal or no reductions. The reduction in DAS28 scores was predominantly between 2005 and 2010, with no falls from 2011 onwards. Associated with falls in mean DAS28s, patients achieving remission increased (18% in 2005; 27% in 2015) and the number with active disease (DAS28 > 5.1) decreased (25% in 2005; 16% in 2015). In 752 patients seen at least annually for 3 years, persisting remission (68 patients) and intermittent remission (376 patients) were associated with less disability and better health related quality of life. Over time biologic use increased, but they were used infrequently in patients in persistent remission.

Conclusions

Over 10 years an intensive management strategy in a routine practice setting increased combination DMARD and biologic use: disease activity levels declined; this association is in keeping with a causal relationship. Patients who achieved remission, even transiently, had better functional outcomes than patients never achieving remission.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s41927-019-0054-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Treating to Target(s) With Interleukin-17 Inhibitors

Background:

The treat-to-target (T2T) strategy has become established in several medical specialties as a key guidance to optimal therapeutic decision making. T2T may be effective in the assessment of the biologic class of agents called interleukin (IL)-17 inhibitors, which are emerging as a safe and effective treatment option for autoimmune inflammatory conditions such as plaque psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

Objective:

The objective of this article is to use a T2T approach for the evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of IL-17 inhibitors in the management of patients with plaque psoriasis, PsA, and AS.

Methods:

Following a comprehensive literature search, a full-day meeting was convened to discuss and identify the T2T targets for psoriasis, PsA, and AS. Clinical trial evidence was presented for the approved IL-17 inhibitors—secukinumab, ixekizumab, and brodalumab—to assess whether these data meet T2T safety and efficacy targets.

Results:

All 3 approved agents were significantly superior to placebo and active controls in the achievement of T2T targets for psoriasis. Secukinumab and ixekizumab were likewise associated with significantly better outcomes than controls in the PsA targets, and secukinumab resulted in significant AS target improvements vs placebo. The IL-17 inhibitors were also associated with low rates of serious adverse events and exacerbations of common comorbid conditions.

Conclusion:

Phase III trial results support the T2T benefit and safety of IL-17 inhibitors according to their specific indications for the management of patients with plaque psoriasis, PsA, and AS.

The frequency of remission and low disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and their ability to identify people with low disability and normal quality of life

OBJECTIVE

Treat-to-target in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) recommends targeting remission, with low disease activity (LDA) being an alternative goal. When deciding to target remission or LDA, important considerations are the likelihood of attaining them, and their impacts on function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We have addressed this by studying: (a) the frequency of remission and LDA/remission; (b) DAS28-ESR trends after remission; (c) ability of remission vs. LDA to identify patients with normal function (HAQ ≤ 0.5) and HRQoL (EQ-5D ≥ the normal population).

METHODS

We studied 571 patients in two clinical trials, and 1693 patients in a 10-year routine care cohort. We assessed the frequency and sustainability of remission and LDA/remission, variability in DAS28-ESR after remission, and sensitivity/specificity of remission and LDA/remission at identifying patients with low disability levels and normal HRQoL using Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

Point remission and remission/LDA were common (achieved by 35-58% and 49-74% of patients, respectively), but were rarely sustained (sustained remission and remission/LDA achieved by 5-9% and 9-16% of patients, respectively). Following attaining remission, DAS28-ESR levels varied substantially. Despite this, of those patients attaining point remission, the majority (53-61%) were in remission at study end-points. Whilst remission was highly specific at identifying patients with low disability (85-91%) it lacked sensitivity (51-57%); similar findings were seen for normal HRQoL (specificity 78-86%; sensitivity 52-59%). The optimal DAS28-cut-off to identify individuals with low disability and normal HRQoL was around the LDA threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support both the treat-to-target goals. Attaining remission is highly specific for attaining low disability and normal HRQoL, although many patients with more active disease also have good function and HRQoL. Attaining a DAS28-ESR ≤ 3.2 has a better balance of specificity and sensitivity for attaining these outcomes, with the benefit of being more readily achievable. Although sustaining these targets over time is rare, even attaining them on a one-off basis leads to better function and HRQoL outcomes for patients.

Barriers to treatment adjustment within a treat to target strategy in rheumatoid arthritis: a secondary analysis of the TRACTION trial

Objectives

Adherence to a treat to target (TTT) strategy is a recommended paradigm for RA; however, research shows there are many barriers to implementation. We conducted a trial to improve TTT implementation, and herein examine barriers to treatment adjustment within TTT among patient visits not in agreement with the TTT paradigm.

Methods

Chart review assessed TTT implementation based on documentation of four items: designation of a treatment target, recording a disease activity measure, shared-decision making when applicable and adjusting treatment when disease activity was not at target. A treatment decision not in agreement with the TTT paradigm was defined as lack of treatment adjustment when disease activity was not at the pre-determined treatment target. Providers were encouraged to report the barriers to treatment change; these were categorized and analysed by study staff. Multiple barriers were possible for one visit.

Results

Eighty-three visits not in agreement with the TTT strategy were observed in 74 patients, during which 90 reported barriers to treatment adjustment were noted. Common barriers to adjusting treatment included patient preference in 37.1% of visits and elevated disease activity measure despite no objective evidence of active RA in 38.6% of visits.

Conclusion

An elevated disease activity measure not reflective of RA disease activity and patient preference are the two leading barriers to treatment adjustment to TTT in RA. Understanding barriers to adherence should guide interventions aimed at using better markers of disease activity and improving alignment with patient preference, with the overarching goal of enhancing TTT adherence.