Adherence to Treat-to-target Management in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Associated Factors: Data from the International RA BIODAM Cohort

Adding ultrasound to treat-to-target shows no benefit in achieving clinical remission nor in slowing radiographic progression in rheumatoid arthritis: results from a multicenter prospective cohort

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether using ultrasound (US) in addition to clinical information versus only clinical information in a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy leads to more clinical remission and to less radiographic progression in RA.

METHODS

Patients with RA from the 2-year prospective BIODAM cohort were included. Clinical and US data (US7-score) were collected every 3 months and hands and feet radiographs every 6 months. At each visit, it was decided whether patients were treated according to the clinical definition of T2T with DAS44 remission as benchmark (T2T-DAS44). T2T-DAS44 was correctly applied if: (i) DAS44 remission had been achieved or (ii) if not, treatment was intensified. A T2T strategy also considering US data (T2T-DAS44-US) was correctly applied if: (i) both DAS44 and US remission (synovitis-score < 2, Doppler-score = 0) were present; or (ii) if not, treatment was intensified. The effect of T2T-DAS44-US on attaining clinical remission and on change in Sharp-van der Heijde score compared to T2T-DAS44 was analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 1016 visits of 128 patients were included. T2T-DAS44 was correctly followed in 24% of visits and T2T-DAS44-US in 41%. DAS44 < 1.6 was achieved in 39% of visits. Compared to T2T-DAS44, using the T2T-DAS44-US strategy resulted in a 41% lower likelihood of DAS44 remission [OR (95% CI): 0.59 (0.40;0.87)] and had no effect on radiographic progression [β(95% CI): 0.11 (- 0.16;0.39)] assessed at various intervals up to 12 months later.

CONCLUSION

Our results do not suggest a benefit of using the US7-score in addition to clinical information as a T2T benchmark compared to clinical information alone. Key Points • Ultrasound has a valuable role in diagnostic evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis, but it is unclear whether adding ultrasound to the clinical assessment in a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy leads to more patients achieving remission and reduction in radiographic progression. • Our data from a real-world study demonstrated that adding information from ultrasound to the clinical assessment in a T2T strategy led to a lower rather than a higher likelihood of obtaining clinical remission as compared to using only clinical assessment. • Our data demonstrated that adding ultrasound data to a T2T strategy based only on clinical assessment did not offer additional protection against radiographic progression in patients with RA. • Adding US to a T2T strategy based on clinical assessment led to far more treatment intensifications (with consequences for costs and exposure to adverse events) without yielding a meaningful clinical benefit.

Impact of csDMARDs adherence on clinical remission in patients with new-onset inflammatory arthritis: a prospective cohort study from the ELECTRA database

Background

Major improvements in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have made clinical remission an achievable and desirable goal but, despite the relevance gained by a profound disease suppression, many patients with RA still miss clinical remission due to several factors influencing disease activity, including treatment adherence.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of adherence to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) on the achievement of clinical remission in a cohort of patients with new-onset inflammatory arthritis.

Study design

A prospective cohort study was conducted using the ELECTRA database, which consists of clinical data from patients followed at the IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Foundation (Pavia, Italy), linked to regional administrative healthcare databases.

Methods

We enrolled patients with new-onset active disease between January 2006 and December 2013 and followed them until their first clinical remission or end of follow-up (December 2015). To assess the association of csDMARD adherence with clinical remission, we estimated the csDMARD proportion of days covered (PDC) during follow-up. PDC was added to the main clinical adjustment covariates as a time-dependent variable in a proportional hazard Cox regression model.

Results

The cohort included 324 patients with a mean (SD) age of 58 (13.9) and predominantly female (74.5%). A total of 219 patients (67.6%) achieved clinical remission during follow-up and 85 (26.2%) in the first 6 months (early clinical remission). Cox regression models showed that a 10% increment of PDC increased the probability of achieving clinical remission by 10% (p < 0.001) and the probability of early clinical remission by 21% (p = 0.03).

Conclusion

Patients at disease onset with higher adherence to csDMARDs were more likely to achieve clinical remission and early clinical remission. Our study highlighted the importance of close monitoring of patients to increase their likelihood of following therapeutic indications and achieving favorable disease outcomes, such as lower disability.

Stricter treat-to-target in RA does not result in less radiographic progression: a longitudinal analysis in RA BIODAM

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether meticulously following a treat-to-target (T2T)-strategy in daily clinical practice will lead to less radiographic progression in patients with active RA who start (new) DMARD-therapy.

METHODS

Patients with RA from 10 countries starting/changing conventional synthetic or biologic DMARDs because of active RA, and in whom treatment intensification according to the T2T principle was pursued, were assessed for disease activity every 3 months for 2 years (RA-BIODAM cohort). The primary outcome was the change in Sharp-van der Heijde (SvdH) score, assessed every 6 months. Per 3-month interval DAS44-T2T could be followed zero, one or two times (in a total of two visits). The relation between T2T intensity and change in SvdH-score was modelled by generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

In total, 511 patients were included [mean (s.d.) age: 56 (13) years; 76% female]. Mean 2-year SvdH progression was 2.2 (4.1) units (median: 1 unit). A stricter application of T2T in a 3-month interval did not reduce progression in the same 6-month interval [parameter estimates (for yes vs no): +0.15 units (95% CI: -0.04, 0.33) for 2 vs 0 visits; and +0.08 units (-0.06; 0.22) for 1 vs 0 visits] nor did it reduce progression in the subsequent 6-month interval.

CONCLUSIONS

In this daily practice cohort, following T2T principles more meticulously did not result in less radiographic progression than a somewhat more lenient attitude towards T2T. One possible interpretation of these results is that the intention to apply T2T already suffices and that a more stringent approach does not further improve outcome.

Specific Cellular and Humoral Response after the Third Dose of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 RNA Vaccine in Patients with Immune-Mediated Rheumatic Diseases on Immunosuppressive Therapy

OBJECTIVE

Data on cellular and humoral immunogenicity after the third dose of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases (IMRDs) are scarce. Herein, we evaluated the adaptive immune response in IMRD patients treated with different immunosuppressive therapies (conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [csDMARDs], biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [bDMARDs], and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [tsDMARDs]) after the booster of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine to determine whether any drug reduced the vaccine's response.

METHODS

A single-center prospective study was conducted, including patients presenting with IMRD and healthy controls (HC). Specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) production was evaluated between 8-12 weeks after the third dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. In addition, anti-Spike IgG antibody titers were also measured.

RESULTS

Samples were obtained from 79 IMRD patients (51 women, 28 men; mean age 57 ± 11.3 years old): 43 rheumatoid arthritis, 10 psoriatic arthritis, 14 ankylosing spondylitis, 10 undifferentiated spondyloarthritis, and 2 inflammatory bowel disease-associated spondyloarthritis (IBD-SpA). In total, 31 HC (mean age 50.9 ± 13.1 years old, 67.7% women) were included in the study. Post-vaccine results displayed positive T-cell immune responses in 68 out of 79 (86.1%) IMRD patients (82.3% of those without prior COVID-19). All HC and IMRDs patients had an antibody response against the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain; however, the HC response was significantly higher (median of 18,048 AU/mL) than in IMRDs patients (median of 6590.3 AU/mL, p < 0.001). MTX and leflunomide were associated with lower titers of IgG and IFN-γ responses. Among bDMARDs, adalimumab, etanercept, and guselkumab are associated with reduced cellular responses.

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary data show that the majority of our IMRD patients develop cellular and humoral responses after the SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination, emphasizing the relevance of vaccination in this group. However, the magnitude of specific responses was dependent on the immunosuppressive therapy administered. Specific vaccination protocols and personalized decisions about boosters are essential for these patients.

Smoking, but not use of complementary and alternative medicine predicts residual functional disability in patients with inflammatory arthritis on biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs: Results from the Singapore National Biologics Register

AIMS

To describe inflammatory arthritis (IA) patients initiating biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) who use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), and determine the impact of CAM on predicting modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ) at 6 months.

METHODS

This was a prospective inception cohort study of patients ≥21 years old initiating a bDMARD for IA after July 2016. Data were obtained via questionnaires and abstraction from medical records. Baseline characteristics between ever-CAM and CAM non-users were compared. CAM as a predictor of mHAQ ≥1 at 6 months after bDMARD initiation was analyzed using multivariate logistic regression, adjusting for other baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

We recruited 299 patients (36.2% male, mean age 49.0 years). There were 45.8% who had rheumatoid arthritis, 54.2% had a spondyloarthropathy, median disease duration of 1.1 years and median mHAQ of 0.4. Compared to CAM non-users, ever-CAM users had a lower mean body mass index, were less likely to speak English, and more likely to smoke and drink alcohol. There was no association of CAM use with high mHAQ and no interaction with smoking. Smoking (odds ratio [OR] 938.9; 95% CI 3.20-275 884.1), baseline mHAQ (OR 252.2; 95% CI 5.34-11 899.2) and Charlson's Comorbidity Index score ≥4 (OR 237.4; 95% CI 1.22-46 184.4) independently predicted high mHAQ at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

CAM use was not associated with high mHAQ at 6 months. Smoking was an independent predictor of residual functional disability at 6 months, even after adjusting for age, comorbidity and baseline mHAQ. Greater emphasis on smoking cessation may improve long-term functional outcomes in IA patients on bDMARDs.

Influence of Multimorbidity on New Treatment Initiation and Achieving Target Disease Activity Thresholds in Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Cohort Study Using the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness Registry

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether multimorbidity is associated with treatment changes and achieving target disease activity thresholds in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with active RA within the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) registry. Multimorbidity was measured using RxRisk, a medication-based index of chronic disease. We used multivariable logistic regression models to assess the associations of multimorbidity with the odds of initiating a new disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) in active RA, and among those initiating a new DMARD, the odds of achieving low disease activity or remission.

RESULTS

We identified 15,626 patients using the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) cohort and 5,733 patients using the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) cohort. All patients had active RA, of which 1,558 (RAPID3) and 834 (CDAI) initiated a new DMARD and had follow-up disease activity measures. Patients were middle aged, female, and predominantly White, and on average received medications from 6 to 7 RxRisk categories. Multimorbidity was not associated with new DMARD initiation in active RA. However, a greater burden of multimorbidity was associated with lower odds of achieving treatment targets (per 1-unit RxRisk: RAPID3 cohort odds ratio [OR] 0.95 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.91, 0.98]; CDAI cohort OR 0.94 [95% CI 0.90, 0.99]). Those with the highest burden of multimorbidity had the lowest odds of achieving target RA disease activity (RAPID3 cohort OR 0.54 [95% CI 0.34, 0.85]; CDAI cohort OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.37, 1.15]).

CONCLUSION

These findings from a large, real-world registry illustrate the potential impact of multimorbidity on treatment response and indicate that a more holistic management approach targeting multimorbidity may be needed to optimize RA disease control in these patients.

Implementation of the treat-to-target approach and treatment satisfaction in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: perspectives of Chinese rheumatologists

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the implementation of treat-to-target (T2T) and treatment satisfaction from Chinese rheumatologists' perspectives.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis of a cross-sectional database collected from rheumatologists and their adult patients with RA in China using Adelphi Real World Disease Specific Programme™ methodology. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate factors associated with T2T use, achievement of T2T goals, and physician treatment satisfaction.

RESULTS

Sixty physicians provided data for 600 patients, of whom 39.0% (234/600) were being treated using T2T, and 64.9% (366/564) had achieved their T2T goal. Physicians were satisfied with treatment in 74.3% (445/599) of patients. Patients with a higher pain score were more likely to be managed using T2T (odds ratio (OR) 1.25; p = 0.017), but less likely to have achieved the T2T goal (OR 0.76; p = 0.004). T2T use was more likely if patients had a longer time since diagnosis (> 2 vs ≤ 2 years; OR 1.61; p = 0.031) or received targeted synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tsDMARDs or bDMARDs; OR 6.90; p < 0.001). T2T goal achievement was more likely for patients with higher body mass index (≥ 24 vs < 24 kg/m²; OR 2.73; p = 0.001) or full-time employment (OR 2.11; p = 0.005). Physician treatment satisfaction was more likely if the T2T goal was achieved (OR 4.78; p < 0.001) or tsDMARDs or bDMARDs were used (OR 2.58; p = 0.017), and less likely if pain scores were higher (OR 0.79; p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

T2T implementation in China is suboptimal. Our findings provide insight into T2T implementation and physician treatment satisfaction, supporting T2T use in Chinese RA clinical practice. Key Points • T2T implementation in China is currently suboptimal. • Patients with greater pain were more likely to be managed using T2T but were less likely to have achieved their T2T goals. • Physician treatment satisfaction was associated with T2T goal achievement.

Towards a Better Implementation of Treat-to-Target Strategy in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Comparison of Two Real-World Cohorts

Introduction

Treat-to-target (T2T) strategy has been the core of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management for over a decade, although it implementation has varied distinctly in real practices. We report here our investigation of the differences in disease activity and target achievement of two patient cohorts with different T2T implementations.

Methods

Data of the CENTRA (Collaboratively intENsive Treat-to-target in RA) and TARRA (Treat-to-TARget in RA) cohorts were used. The CENTRA cohort is a RA cohort prospectively followed up by a fixed team with tight control, while the TARRA is a longitudinal observational cohort followed up by a rheumatologist with casual control. Patients from the two cohorts were matched 1:3 by propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at the 1-year follow-up.

Results

Included in this analysis were 102 patients from the CENTRA cohort and 271 patients from the TARRA cohort. Both groups were comparable in terms of age, gender, disease course, and seropositivity. At the end of the 1-year follow-up, the SDAI of patients in the CENTRA cohort was significantly lower than that of patients in the TARRA cohort (2.1 vs. 3.4; p < 0.001). A similar result was obtained based on the generalized estimating equation (GEE) model (p = 0.009). In addition, more patients in the CENTRA cohort achieved SDAI-defined remission compared to the TARRA cohort [72 (70.6%) vs. 134 (49.4%); p < 0.001].

Conclusion

Patients with RA may benefit more from a tight control T2T strategy with closer follow-up and appropriate education compared with those with a casual T2T strategy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-022-00441-0.

Patterns of Response to Different Treatment Strategies in Seropositive Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients in a Tertiary Hospital in South-Western Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Study

Purpose

To study the pattern of response to different treatment strategies in seropositive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and to describe our clinical practice in RA management.

Patients and Methods

Over a period of two years from April 2018 to April 2020, we conducted a retrospective analysis of data for 288 consecutive seropositive RA patients attending rheumatology clinics and the daycare unit at Aseer Central Hospital. Data were collected on patient demographics, disease duration, extraarticular manifestations, comorbidities and treatment. Disease activity was assessed using the clinical disease activity index (CDAI).

Results

Out of the total 288 patients, 42% (120) are on csDMRADs, while 54% (162) are on bDMRADs and 4% (6) are on tsDMARDs. Of the patients on csDMARDS, 51%, 43% and 7% of them were on remission, low and moderate disease activity, respectively. However, of the patients on non-csDMARDS, 36.3%, 49.4% and 14.3% of them were on remission, low and moderate disease activity, respectively. Failure of csDMARDs was affected by the presence of high disease activity at baseline, extraarticular lung manifestations and coexistent fibromyalgia, with a significant effect of the latter on remission rate. Among patients on non-csDMARDs, 42 (25%) showed one or more therapy changes. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were the predominant first-line agents in biologically naive patients (65%) followed by abatacept (18%). Abatacept was the most frequently prescribed second biologic in 52% of cases followed by tocilizumab in 19%.

Conclusion

The current clinical practice in our hospital is consistent with the latest American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) guidelines. Treat-to-target strategy was achieved in the vast majority of our patients, while remission was observed in almost half of the patients.

The Development of the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness Learning Collaborative for Improving Patient-Reported Outcome Collection and Patient-Centered Communication in Adult Rheumatology

Objective

Patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) are an integral part of treat‐to‐target approaches in managing rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In clinical practice, however, routine collection, documentation, and discussion of PROs with patients are highly variable. The RISE LC (Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness Learning Collaborative) was established to develop and share best practices in PRO collection and use across adult rheumatology practices in the United States

Methods

The goals of the RISE LC were developed through site surveys and in‐person meetings. Participants completed a baseline survey on PRO collection and use in their practices. RISE LC learning sessions focused on improving communication around PROs with patients and enhancing shared decision‐making in treatment plans. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, the RISE LC pivoted to adapt PRO tools for telehealth.

Results

At baseline, all responding sites (n = 15) had established workflows for collecting PROs. Most sites used paper forms alone. PRO documentation in electronic health records was variable, with only half of the sites using structured data fields. To standardize and improve the use of PROs, participants iteratively developed a Clinical Disease Activity Index–based RA Disease Activity Communication Tool to solicit treatment goals and improve shared decision‐making across sites. The COVID‐19 pandemic necessitated developing a tool to gauge PROs via telehealth.

Conclusion

The RISE LC is a continuous, structured method for implementing strategies to improve PRO collection and use in rheumatological care, initially adapting from the Learning Collaborative model and extending to include features of a learning network. Future directions include measuring the impact of standardized PRO collection and discussion on shared decision‐making and RA outcomes.

Prevalence and pattern of comorbidities in chronic rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: the COMORD study

Increased risk of comorbidities has been reported in Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases (RMD). We aimed to evaluate the prevalence and pattern of comorbidities in RMD patients nationwide, to identify multimorbidity clusters and to evaluate the gap between recommendations and real screening. Cross-sectional, multicentric nationwide study. Prevalence of comorbidities was calculated according to six EULAR axes. Latent Class Analysis identified multimorbidity clusters. Comorbidities' screening was compared to international and local recommendations. In 769 patients (307 RA, 213 OA, 63 SLE, 103 axSpA, and 83 pSA), the most frequent comorbidities were cardiovascular risk factors and diseases (CVRFD) (hypertension 36.5%, hypercholesterolemia 30.7%, obesity 22.7%, smoking 22.1%, diabetes 10.4%, myocardial infarction 6.6%), osteoporosis (20.7%) and depression (18.1%). Three clusters of multimorbidity were identified: OA, RA and axSpA. The most optimal screening was found for CVRF (> = 93%) and osteoporosis (53%). For malignancies, mammograms were the most optimally prescribed (56%) followed by pap smears (32%) and colonoscopy (21%). Optimal influenza and pneumococcus vaccination were found in 22% and 17%, respectively. Comorbidities were prevalent in RMD and followed specific multimorbidity patterns. Optimal screening was adequate for CVRFD but suboptimal for malignant neoplasms, osteoporosis, and vaccination. The current study identified health priorities, serving as a framework for the implementation of future comorbidity management standardized programs, led by the rheumatologist and coordinated by specialized health care professionals.

Is treat-to-target really working in rheumatoid arthritis? a longitudinal analysis of a cohort of patients treated in daily practice (RA BIODAM)

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether following a treat-to-target (T2T)-strategy in daily clinical practice leads to more patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) meeting the remission target.

METHODS

RA patients from 10 countries starting/changing conventional synthetic or biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs were assessed for disease activity every 3 months for 2 years (RA BIODAM (BIOmarkers of joint DAMage) cohort). Per visit was decided whether a patient was treated according to a T2T-strategy with 44-joint disease activity score (DAS44) remission (DAS44 <1.6) as the target. Sustained T2T was defined as T2T followed in ≥2 consecutive visits. The main outcome was the achievement of DAS44 remission at the subsequent 3-month visit. Other outcomes were remission according to 28-joint disease activity score-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) and American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean definitions. The association between T2T and remission was tested in generalised estimating equations models.

RESULTS

In total 4356 visits of 571 patients (mean (SD) age: 56 (13) years, 78% female) were included. Appropriate application of T2T was found in 59% of the visits. T2T (vs no T2T) did not yield a higher likelihood of DAS44 remission 3 months later (OR (95% CI): 1.03 (0.92 to 1.16)), but sustained T2T resulted in an increased likelihood of achieving DAS44 remission (OR: 1.19 (1.03 to 1.39)). Similar results were seen with DAS28-ESR remission. For more stringent definitions (CDAI, SDAI and ACR/EULAR Boolean remission), T2T was consistently positively associated with remission (OR range: 1.16 to 1.29), and sustained T2T had a more pronounced effect on remission (OR range: 1.49 to 1.52).

CONCLUSION

In daily clinical practice, the correct application of a T2T-strategy (especially sustained T2T) in patients with RA leads to higher rates of remission.

Achievement of remission in two early rheumatoid arthritis cohorts implementing different treat-to-target strategies

OBJECTIVE

To compare achievement of remission in two early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treat-to-target (TTT) cohorts, one tight control cohort targeting stringent remission in a randomized controlled strategy trial and one observational cohort targeting a looser definition of remission in clinical practice.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the ARCTIC trial and the NOR-VEAC observational study. Both were Norwegian multicenter studies including disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve RA-patients and implementing TTT. The target in ARCTIC was remission defined as a Disease Activity Score (DAS44) <1.6 plus 0 of 44 swollen joint count, while the target in NOR-VEAC was the less stringent remission of DAS28<2.6. We assessed achievement of the study-specific targets and compared achievement of the ACR/ EULAR Boolean remission during two years of follow-up.

RESULTS

We included 189 patients from ARCTIC and 330 patients from NOR-VEAC. More than half in each cohort had reached the study-specific target at 6 months, increasing to more than 60% at 12 and 24 months. The odds of reaching ACR/EULAR Boolean remission during follow-up were higher in ARCTIC than in NOR-VEAC, with statistically significant differences at 3 months (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.03-2.89), 12 months (OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.21-3.20) and 24 months (OR 1.82; 95% CI 1.05 - 3.16).

CONCLUSION

A majority of patients in both cohorts reached the study-specific treatment targets. More patients in ARCTIC than in NOR-VEAC achieved ACR/EULAR Boolean remission during follow-up, suggesting that targeting a more stringent definition of remission provide further potential for favorable outcomes of a TTT strategy.