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

Rheumatoid Arthritis: The Continuum of Disease and Strategies for Prediction, Early Intervention, and Prevention

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is known to include a pre-RA stage that can be defined as the presence of familial or genetic risk factors, biomarker abnormalities (eg, anticitrullinated protein antibodies [ACPA]), symptoms, and even abnormal imaging findings prior to the development of the onset of clinical RA with inflammatory arthritis that is apparent on physical examination. Indeed, there are multiple completed or ongoing retrospective case-control as well as prospective observational studies to identify the key biologic drivers of disease. Further, building on the predictive ability of combinations of biomarkers, symptoms, and imaging for future RA, there are multiple clinical trials completed, underway, or in development to identify approaches that may prevent, delay, or ameliorate future clinical RA in at-risk individuals. Importantly, however, although an effective preventive intervention has not yet been identified, at-risk individuals are being increasingly identified in clinical care; this presents a challenge of how to manage these individuals in clinical practice. This review will discuss the current understanding of the biology and natural history of RA development, nomenclature, and current models for prediction of future RA, as well as evaluate the current and ongoing clinical prevention trials with the overall goal to provide insights into the challenges and opportunities in the field of RA prevention. Moreover, this review will provide up-to-date options for clinical management of individuals at risk for RA.

Real-World Effectiveness of Upadacitinib for Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Canadian Patients: Interim Results from the Prospective Observational CLOSE-UP Study

INTRODUCTION

Upadacitinib (UPA), a selective, reversible, oral Janus kinase (JAK)-1 inhibitor, was approved in 2019 in Canada for the treatment of adults with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This phase 4 prospective study aimed to characterise the effectiveness of UPA in the real-world population of patients with RA.

METHODS

Adults with RA who initiated treatment with once daily UPA (15 mg) and enrolled in the Canadian Real-Life post-marketing Observational Study assessing the Effectiveness of UPadacitinib for treating rheumatoid arthritis (CLOSE-UP) and who completed a 6-month assessment as of 28 February 2023 were included. The primary endpoint of the CLOSE-UP study is the proportion of patients achieving a Disease Activity Score-28 Joint Count C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) < 2.6 at 6 months. Data was collected at routine visits. Data analysed and summarised descriptively for the overall interim population and for subgroups based on prior therapy included remission or low disease activity, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 392 patients were included in the interim analysis. Overall, 63.5% (191/301) of patients achieved a DAS28-CRP score < 2.6 at month 6, with similar rates observed for all subgroups analysed according to prior therapy including those with prior JAK inhibitor exposure (range 57.4-71.0%), and in patients who received UPA monotherapy (71.6% [48/67]). Early (month 3) and sustained improvements up to 6 months were observed for all PROs. The safety profile was consistent with previous reports.

CONCLUSION

Real-world improvements in disease activity and PROs in response to UPA treatment were consistent with clinical trial data across a range of Canadian patients with prior therapy exposure and with UPA monotherapy, with an overall favourable benefit-risk profile.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04574492.

Patient-reported outcomes and radiographic progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in sustained remission versus low disease activity

OBJECTIVE

To compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) over 5 years between patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in sustained remission (sREM), sustained low disease activity (sLDA) or active disease (AD) in the first year after diagnosis.

METHODS

All patients with RA from the treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis CoHort trial, a multicentre, stratified, single-blinded trial with a treat-to-target approach, aiming for LDA (Disease Activity Score (DAS) ≤2.4), were studied. Patients were categorised into: (1) sREM (mean DAS from 6 to 12 months <1.6) (n=173); (2) sLDA (mean DAS from 6 to 12 months 1.6-2.4) (n=142); and (3) AD (mean DAS from 6 to 12 months >2.4) (n=59). Pain, fatigue, functional impairment, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), health status and productivity loss during 5 years were compared between groups. Radiographic progression (modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS)) was compared over 2 years.

RESULTS

Patients in sLDA in the first year had worse PROs during follow-up, compared with patients in sREM: pain (0-10 Likert) was 0.90 units higher (95% CI 0.52 to 1.27), fatigue (Visual Analogue Scale) was 12.10 units higher (95% CI 7.27 to 16.92), functional impairment (Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index) was 0.28 units higher (95% CI 0.17 to 0.39), physical HRQoL (36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary score) was 4.42 units lower (95% CI -6.39 to -2.45), mental HRQoL (SF-36 Mental Component Summary score (MCS)) was 2.95 units lower (95% CI -4.83 to -1.07), health status (European Quality of life 5-Dimensions 3-Levels (EQ-5D-3L)) was 0.06 units lower (95% CI -0.09 to -0.03) and productivity loss (0%-100%) was 7.76% higher (95% CI 2.76 to 12.75). Differences between the AD and sREM group were even larger, except for the SF-36 MCS and EQ-5D-3L. No differences in mTSS were found between groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with RA who reach sREM in the first year have better HRQoL and function, and less pain, fatigue and productivity loss in the years thereafter, compared with patients with RA who are in sLDA or AD in the first year.

Efficacy and safety of curcumin in maintaining remission during disease-modifying antirheumatic drug withdrawal in rheumatoid arthritis at 52 weeks: a phase III double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial

Curcumin has anti-inflammatory properties but current evidence is limited to advocate its use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We explored whether curcumin could maintain remission in patients with RA while tapering conventional synthetic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (csDMARD). In this patient-and investigator-blinded trial, adults with RA in sustained remission for more than six months were randomized to oral curcumin (1 g) with piperine (5 mg) twice daily or matching placebo. Patients who had received biological DMARDs or curcumin supplements in the last 6 months were excluded. csDMARD were tapered and stopped sequentially as per a fixed protocol. The primary outcome was flare-free survival at 52 weeks. The secondary outcomes were flare rate, correlation of serum curcuminoid levels with flares and safety. 200 patients (100 per arm) entered the trial with comparable baseline characteristics. Per protocol analysis included 92 and 93 participants in the curcumin and the placebo group, respectively. Flare-free survival at week 52 was similar between both groups (60% versus 64%; p = 0.76). The median time to flare was similar [Curcumin: 219 days (IQR: 123) versus placebo: 214 days (95.8); p = 0.067]. Cox proportionate regression modelling showed that the flare-free survival was independent of serum curcuminoid levels [adjusted HR = 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97-1.0)]. The model showed that flare-free survival was not associated with age, gender, seropositivity, or csDMARD used at baseline. No serious adverse effects were noted. Curcumin did not impact the flare-free survival in patients with RA in remission during the tapering of csDMARDs despite achieving adequate serum levels.Trial registration: CTRI/2018/04/013279.

Efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for TNF inhibitor therapy in rheumatic disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The benefits of TDM-guided TNFi therapy in patients with rheumatic disease was still controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to explore if the TDM-guided TNFi therapy is superior to empirical-guided therapy.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases for articles published between database inception and October 05, 2023. Studies reporting endpoints in TDM-guided TNFi therapy and empirical therapy were included. Results would be presented in risk ratio (RR) and mean difference, with 95 % confidence interval (CI) reported. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022353956).

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies (eight RCTs and six cohort studies) involving 2427 patients were included in this meta-analysis. In the scenario of response prediction, compared with empirical-guided therapy, TDM-guided TNFi therapy had association with higher treat-to-target rates (RR 1.30, 95 % CI 1.02-1.65, P=0.03, I2=79 %), more specifically, higher low disease activity rates (RR 2.11, 95 % CI 1.22-3.66, P=0.007, I2=61 %), but no difference in clinical remission rates (RR 0.98,95 % CI 0.87-1.11, P=0.75, I2=0 %). In the scenario of dose reduction prediction, lower relapse rates (RR 0.73, 95 % CI 0.65-0.82, P <0.00001, I2=0 %) were observed compared with empirical-guided dose reduction strategy, but no difference (RR 1.24, 95 % CI 0.85-1.80, P=0.27, I2=57 %) between TDM-guided dose reduction and standard-dosing therapy. No significant difference was observed in change of disease activity score, mean disease activity score, radiographic progression, and safety. And TDM-guided therapy was associated with reduced cost per patient per year calculated as the total accumulated sum of therapy cost.

CONCLUSION

TDM-guided TNFi therapy was associated with increased rates of low disease activity and decreased risks of relapse, and may save cost compared with empirical-guided therapy in patients with rheumatic disease. But this does not mean that the use of TDM-guided TNFi therapy can be advocated, because there is no difference in clinical remission rates and many other outcomes. More researches, especially randomized clinical trials are needed to verify this conclusion in the future.

Ten-year radiographic and functional outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis patients in remission compared to patients in low disease activity

BACKGROUND

To compare the 10-year structural and functional prognosis between patients in sustained remission versus patients in sustained low disease activity (LDA) in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

We included 256 patients from the ESPOIR cohort who fulfilled the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria for RA and who were in sustained remission using the Simple Disease Activity Index (SDAI) score (n = 48), in sustained LDA (n = 139) or in sustained moderate to high disease activity (MDA or HDA, n = 69) over 10 years. The mTSSs progression over 10 years and the 10-year HAQ-DI scores were compared between the 3 groups. A longitudinal latent process mixed model was used to assess the independent effect of SDAI status over time on 10-year mTSS progression and HAQ-DI at 10 years.

RESULTS

Patients in sustained remission group were younger, had lower baseline HAQ-DI and mTSS scores and were less exposed to glucocorticoids, methotrexate or biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs over 10 years. Patients in sustained remission had lower 10-year structural progression (variation of mTSS in the remission group: 4.06 (± 4.75) versus 14.59 (± 19.76) in the LDA group and 21.04 (± 24.08), p < 0.001 in the MDA or HDA groups) and lower 10-year HAQ-DI scores (10-year HAQ-DI in the remission group: 0.14 (± 0.33) versus 0.53 (± 0.49) in the LDA group and 1.20 (± 0.62) in the MDA or HDA groups, p < 0.001). The incidence of serious adverse events over 10 years was low, about 3.34/100 patient years, without any difference between the three groups.

CONCLUSION

RA patients in sustained SDAI remission have better long-term structural and functional outcomes in comparison to patients in sustained LDA.

Defining the relationship between pain intensity and disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a secondary analysis of six studies

Background

Pain is the main concern of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) while reducing disease activity dominates specialist management. Disease activity assessments like the disease activity score for 28 joints with the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) omit pain creating an apparent paradox between patients’ concerns and specialists’ treatment goals. We evaluated the relationship of pain intensity and disease activity in RA with three aims: defining associations between pain intensity and disease activity and its components, evaluating discordance between pain intensity and disease activity, and assessing temporal changes in pain intensity and disease activity.

Methods

We undertook secondary analyses of five trials and one observational study of RA patients followed for 12 months. The patients had early and established active disease or sustained low disease activity or remission. Pain was measured using 100-mm visual analogue scales. Individual patient data was pooled across all studies and by types of patients (early active, established active and established remission). Associations of pain intensity and disease activity were evaluated by correlations (Spearman’s), linear regression methods and Bland-Altman plots. Discordance was assessed by Kappa statistics (for patients grouped into high and low pain intensity and disease activity). Temporal changes were assessed 6 monthly in different patient groups.

Results

A total of 1132 patients were studied: 490 had early active RA, 469 had established active RA and 173 were in remission/low disease activity. Our analyses showed, firstly, that pain intensity is associated with disease activity in general, and particularly with patient global assessments, across all patient groups. Patient global assessments were a reasonable proxy for pain intensity. Secondly, there was some discordance between pain intensity and disease activity across all disease activity levels, reflecting similar discrepancies in patient global assessments. Thirdly, there were strong temporal relationships between changes in disease activity and pain intensity. When mean disease activity fell, mean pain intensity scores also fell; when mean disease activity increased, there were comparable increases in pain intensity.

Conclusions

These findings show pain intensity is an integral part of disease activity, though it is not measured directly in DAS28-ESR. Reducing disease activity is crucial for reducing pain intensity in RA.

Potential role of HBV DNA-induced CD8high T cell apoptosis in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis

Objective

To investigate the potential role of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA-induced CD8^high T cell apoptosis in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

The activity and HBV seropositivity rates of patients with SLE and RA were determined. The proportions of T cell subgroups were detected by fluorescence-activated cell sorting. The apoptosis of T cell subgroups was detected after peripheral blood mononuclear cells were stimulated with HBV DNA.

Results

The HBV infection rate was higher in patients with RA than in patients with SLE. Current or previous HBV infection was more common among patients with inactive SLE than among those with active SLE. Conversely, previous or current HBV infection was more common among patients with active RA than among those with inactive RA. CD4⁻CD8^high T cell counts were higher among patients with active SLE than in those with inactive SLE. However, CD4⁻CD8^high T cell counts were lower in patients with active RA patients than in those with inactive RA. HBV DNA increased the apoptosis of CD4⁻CD8^high T cells.

Conclusion

HBV DNA-induced CD8^high T cell apoptosis appears to play different roles in SLE and RA.

Safety and efficacy of elsubrutinib or upadacitinib alone or in combination (ABBV-599) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response or intolerance to biological therapies: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

ABBV-599 is a novel fixed-dose combination of the Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor elsubrutinib and the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor upadacitinib under investigation for the treatment of autoimmune diseases. We aimed to determine whether ABBV-599 could increase the treatment response for patients with active rheumatoid arthritis compared with inhibiting either pathway alone, while maintaining an acceptable safety profile.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-exploratory, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial at 75 community sites in eight countries in Europe and North America. We enrolled patients who were 18 years or older with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response or intolerance to biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (3:2:2:2:2:1) via interactive response technology to receive daily, orally administered ABBV-599 (ie, upadacitinib 15 mg plus elsubrutinib 60 mg), elsubrutinib 60 mg, elsubrutinib 20 mg, elsubrutinib 5 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg, or placebo. Randomisation was stratified by the number of previous biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. The investigator, study site personnel, and patients were masked throughout the study. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in disease activity score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) at week 12 for all patients who received a study drug. Pharmacokinetics and safety were also assessed. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03682705.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 8, 2018, and March 26, 2020, 242 patients were randomly assigned to receive ABBV-599 (n=62), elsubrutinib 60 mg (n=41), elsubrutinib 20 mg (n=39), elsubrutinib 5 mg (n=41), upadacitinib 15 mg (n=40), or placebo (n=19). Of the 242 patients, 204 (84%) were female, 38 (16%) were male, and 220 (91%) were White; the mean age at baseline was 58·0 years (SD 11·3). Compared with placebo, the least squares mean changes from baseline in DAS28-CRP were -1·44 (90% CI -2·03 to -0·85; p<0·0001) for ABBV-599, -0·40 (-1·03 to 0·23; p=0·29) for elsubrutinib 60 mg, -0·20 (-0·85 to 0·44; p=0·61) for elsubrutinib 20 mg, -0·21 (-0·84 to 0·41; p=0·57) for elsubrutinib 5 mg, and -1·75 (-2·38 to -1·13; p<0·0001) for upadacitinib. No significant improvements in efficacy measures for elsubrutinib alone (any dose) versus placebo were detected, despite adequate plasma exposure and target engagement. Treatment-emergent adverse events were observed in 113 (47%) of 242 patients, with similar proportions for all groups.

INTERPRETATION

Significant improvements in disease activity metrics of rheumatoid arthritis with ABBV-599 were driven by the JAK inhibitor upadacitinib with no discernible effect by the BTK inhibitor elsubrutinib.

FUNDING

AbbVie.

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.

2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.

RESULTS

The guideline addresses treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high-risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional).

CONCLUSION

This clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision-making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision-making process based on patients' values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.

2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.

RESULTS

The guideline addresses treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high-risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional).

CONCLUSION

This clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision-making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision-making process based on patients' values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.

Healthcare Costs of Not Achieving Remission in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in the United States: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction

To compare all-cause and rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-related healthcare costs and resource use in patients with RA who do not achieve remission versus those who achieve remission, using clinical practice data.

Methods

Data were derived from Optum electronic health records linked to claims from commercial and Medicare Advantage health plans. Two cohorts were created: remission and non-remission. Remission was defined as Disease Activity Score 28-joint count with the C-reactive protein level or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-CRP/ESR) < 2.6 or Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3 ≤ 3.0). Outcomes were all-cause and RA-related costs and resource use during a 1-year follow-up period. A weighted generalized linear regression and negative binomial regression were used to estimate adjusted annual costs and resource use, respectively, controlling for confounding factors, including patient and socio-demographic characteristics.

Results

Data from 335 patients (remission: 125; non-remission: 210) were analyzed. Annual all-cause total costs were significantly less in the remission versus non-remission cohort ($30,427 vs. $38,645, respectively; cost ratio [CR] = 0.79; 95% CI 0.63, 0.99). All-cause resource use (mean number of visits) was less in the remission versus non-remission cohort: inpatient (0.23 vs. 0.63; visit ratio [VR] = 0.36; 95% CI 0.19, 0.70), emergency department (0.36 vs. 0.77; VR = 0.47; 95% CI 0.30, 0.74), and outpatient visits (20.7 vs. 28.5; VR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.62, 0.86). Annual RA-related total costs were similar in both cohorts; however, RA-related medical costs were numerically lower in the remission versus non-remission cohort ($8,594 vs. $10,002, respectively; CR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.59, 1.25). RA-related resource use was less in the remission versus non-remission cohort.

Conclusions

Significant economic burden was associated with patients who did not achieve remission compared with those who did achieve remission.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01730-w.

Perceptions of patients with rheumatoid arthritis about self-assessment of disease activity after watching an educational video: a qualitative pilot study from the AUTO-DAS in Middle Eastern Arab countries project

To evaluate the perceptions of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) about self-assessment of their disease activity after watching an educational video. Consecutive patients with RA consulting their rheumatologist in six Middle Eastern Countries were invited to watch an educational video developed to teach self-assessment using Disease Activity Score (DAS-28). Then, a rheumatology nurse conducted a semi-structured interview and collected the patients’ perception about the understanding of the video, feasibility, capability and confidence in performing self-assessment using Likert-type items. The degree of confidence with self-assessment was correlated to the patients’ socio-demographic characteristics. Sixty-two patients were included and had an overall positive reaction to the video. It was easy to understand in 96% and helped facilitate self-assessment in 92% of cases. Self-assessment was considered totally feasible in 74%, and 66% of patients were capable of always doing it, with a confidence of 60% (always) to 34% (sometimes). Confidence was associated with a higher educational level. Nevertheless, 77% of patients felt that the self-assessment would not fully replace the physician’s visit. Open-ended questions identified five themes: better understanding of the disease, easier communication with the rheumatologist, less consultation time, difficulty with the scoring part and importance of practice. Patients with RA felt that self-assessment was feasible and helpful in understanding RA, improving communication with the rheumatologist and shortening the visit time.

Factors associated with disability in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with persistent moderate disease activity: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Many patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) do not attain remission/low disease activity, remaining in a moderate disease activity state (MDAS) with ongoing disability and impaired quality of life (QoL). If patients in persistent MDAS with poor future outcomes could be prospectively identified, they could arguably be treated more intensively. We evaluated baseline factors predicting function (Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index [HAQ-DI] scores) and QoL (3-level EuroQol-5 dimensions questionnaire [EQ-5D-3L] index scores) at 12 months in patients with RA in persistent MDAS in a real-world setting.

Methods

Patients with persistent MDAS (Disease Activity Score for 28-joint count based on erythrocyte sedimentation rate [DAS28-ESR] 3.2–5.1 on at least two consecutive outpatient appointments over 12 months) were identified retrospectively from Guy’s Hospital RA Centre and analysed in two groups: (1) biologic naïve at baseline or (2) receiving/ever received biologics. The baseline timepoint was the second-visit MDAS DAS28-ESR score; the endpoint was the closest visit to 12 months. Linear regression analyses evaluated relationships between baseline variables and (1) 12-month HAQ-DI scores, (2) 12-month rank-transformed EQ-5D-3L index scores, (3) 12-month changes in HAQ-DI scores, and (4) 12-month changes in EQ-5D-3L index scores.

Results

The analysis included 207 biologic-naïve and 188 biologic-experienced patients. All patients had moderate disability (mean HAQ-DI 1.21 and 1.46) and impaired QoL (mean EQ-5D-3L index scores 0.52 and 0.50). Many reported moderate/severe pain (93 and 96%) and showed little change in HAQ-DI and EQ-5D-3L index scores over 12 months. In both biologic-naïve and biologic-experienced groups, multivariate analysis revealed a significant association between baseline HAQ-DI scores and endpoint HAQ-DI scores (β = 0.67, P < 0.001 and β = 0.76, P < 0.001, respectively), 12-month changes in HAQ-DI scores (both β = − 0.21, P < 0.001), and 12-month EQ-5D-3L index scores (β = − 0.57, P < 0.001 and β = − 0.29, P = 0.004, respectively). Baseline EQ-5D-3L index scores were significantly associated with 12-month changes in EQ-5D-3L index scores in both groups (β = − 0.73, P < 0.001 and β = − 0.40, P = 0.003, respectively).

Conclusions

Patients with RA in persistent MDAS experience substantial ongoing physical disability, poor QoL, and pain. HAQ-DI is an important predictor of future disability and reduced QoL, supporting current national recommendations to measure HAQ-DI in routine care.

Clinical conditions needed to acquire sustained functional remission in rheumatoid arthritis patients

OBJECTIVES

Treatments aimed at maintaining sustained clinical remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients have been recommended by several groups. Improvement and maintenance of functional status are also important for RA patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the factors for maintaining long-term functional remission.

METHODS

RA patients with usual care without specific protocols were included. Disease activity score using 28-joint count C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), simplified disease activity index (SDAI) score, and Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score was calculated every 3 months for 1 year. Patients were divided into the HAQ-DI remission (REM) group and the HAQ-DI non-remission (NO-REM) group; time-averaged values of these parameters were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Of the 205 patients, 154 fulfilled the remission criteria. Time-averaged DAS28-CRP and SDAI score were significantly lower in the REM group than in the NO-REM group (1.66 vs 2.59, 3.54 vs 10.68, respectively; p < 0.001). Subsequent receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis for estimation of remission indicated a cut-off value of 1.65 for time-averaged DAS28-CRP and 2.85 for time-averaged SDAI score.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous reports showed that fulfillment of clinical remission increases the possibility of functional remission; the probability of which is higher in patients with sustained clinical remission. Sustained clinical remission is required to achieve sustained functional remission; the criteria for clinical remission may be more stringent. Key Points • Sustained deep clinical remission was required to achieve sustained functional remission.