Can Ultrasound Be Used to Predict Loss of Remission in Patients with RA in a Real-life Setting? A Multicenter Cohort Study

Does tenosynovitis of the hand detected by B-mode ultrasound predict loss of clinical remission in rheumatoid arthritis? Results from a real-life cohort

Objective

The role of US-detected tenosynovitis (USTS) in the management of rheumatoid arthritis remains controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate whether tenosynovitis can predict a flare in rheumatoid arthritis patients in remission in a real-life cohort.

Methods

Rheumatoid arthritis patients from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort were included in this study if they were in clinical remission, defined by 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28-ESR) <2.6, and had an available B-mode tenosynovitis score. The patients were stratified according to the presence or absence of tenosynovitis (USTS+ vs. USTS–). Cox proportional hazard models were used for time-to-event analysis until the loss of remission, after adjustment for multiple confounders. The impact of baseline US performed early in remission and the advent of flares at different fixed time periods after baseline were investigated in sensitivity analysis.

Results

Tenosynovitis was detected in 10% of 402 rheumatoid arthritis patients in remission. At baseline, USTS+ patients in remission had significantly higher DAS28-ESR (mean (SD): USTS– 1.8 (0.5) versus USTS+ 2.0 (0.5); p = 0.0019) and higher additional disease activity parameters, such as physician global assessment, and simplified- and clinical-disease activity index. Joint synovitis detected by B-mode US was associated with tenosynovitis (mean (SD) 7.2 (6.3) in USTS– versus 9.0 (5.4) in USTS+, respectively; p = 0.02). A disease flare was observed in 69% of remission phases, with no differences in the time to loss of remission between USTS+ and USTS– groups.

Conclusion

While US-detected tenosynovitis was associated with higher disease activity parameters in rheumatoid arthritis patients in clinical remission, it was not able to predict a flare.

Rheumatoid Arthritis: Defining Clinical and Ultrasound Deep Remission

The prognosis of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has improved substantially in the last two decades due to the appearance of biological therapies, but above all, due to the improvement in the strategy and management of the disease. Our goal in RA should be to achieve remission, or in its absence, the lowest inflammatory activity. Achieving remission will prevent from structural and functional damage highly associated with RA itself. Clinical remission is defined as the absence of significant signs and symptoms of inflammatory disease activity, as well as the abrogation of any signs of systemic inflammation. Currently, there are some controversies about remission. Which is the real remission? Which remission criteria should be used and when? Does clinical remission mean ultrasound remission? In the present review, we try to answer and put some light into it, focusing on clinical and ultrasound deep remission.

Contemporary imaging of rheumatoid arthritis: Clinical role of ultrasound and MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) are sensitive imaging modalities used by clinicians to assist in decision-making in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This review will examine the utility of MRI and MSUS in diagnosing RA, predicting RA flares, tapering therapy, assessing remission, and examining difficult periarticular features. We will also outline the strengths and weaknesses of utilizing MRI and MSUS as outcome measures in the management of RA.

Discordances between clinical and ultrasound measurements of disease activity among RA patients followed in real life

OBJECTIVE

Measurements of disease activity, such as the clinical disease activity score (DAS28) or ultrasound (US) scores, often yield discordant results. This study's objectives were to determine the proportion of disagreements between the two assessment methods in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to describe factors associated with discrepancy in assessment.

METHODS

All RA patients in the Swiss registry for inflammatory arthritides (SCQM) with at least one concomitant DAS28 and US score, were included. Disease activity was categorized as remission, low-to-moderate, and high, based on previously established cut-offs, for both the DAS28 and the US score. A longitudinal analysis was performed among patients who underwent at least two assessments.

RESULTS

Of 2369 assessments included (1091 patients), 1196 (50.4%) were discordant. The US score both over- and under-estimated disease activity compared to the DAS28 score (23.5% and 26.8% respectively). Clinical and demographic factors significantly associated with discordant results were the individual components of the DAS28 score when US was used as the reference and age, disease duration, and the swollen joint count when the DAS28 was used as the reference. The main US-related factor associated with discordance was the presence of US tenosynovitis. In the longitudinal analysis of 1081 patients, the proportion of disagreements remained essentially unchanged.

CONCLUSION

Rates of disagreement between clinical and US assessments of disease activity among RA patients are high and remain high during follow-up, even when the US assessors were aware of the clinical examination findings. Both clinical- and ultrasound- related factors were associated with discordances.

Real-world evidence in rheumatic diseases: relevance and lessons learnt

An emerging trend in the medical literature, including the Rheumatology literature, is that of accumulating large, multicentric, multi-national data based on registries of patients seen in real life situations. Such real-world evidence (RWE) may help provide valuable insights into the long-term outcomes of disease in unselected patients seen in daily practice, including patients belonging to vulnerable populations such as extremes of age, during pregnancy and lactation. Evidences gathered from real life practice settings can help understand drug prescription patterns, including adherence to treatment guidelines, cost-effectiveness of therapy, and real-life long-term outcomes, and adverse effects of treatment with particular medications. Registry-based data also helps analyze comorbidities in patients with rheumatic diseases, and their impact on quality of life, morbidity and mortality. Traditionally, a randomized controlled trial (RCT), or systematic reviews of multiple, homogenous RCTs, have been considered the cornerstone of evidence-based medicine, and RWE does, at times, provide differing viewpoints from the results of particular drugs in clinical trial settings. Therefore, in the present day, it is prudent to consider the complementary nature of information derived from RWE to that obtained from rigorous, clinical trial settings. Future guidelines for disease management may consider it relevant to include information from RWE in addition to that available from clinical trials, to help devise management guidelines that are harmonious with routine practice settings.