OP0020 SEX DIFFERENCES IN EFFECTIVENESS OF FIRST-LINE TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR INHIBITORS IN AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS; RESULTS FROM FIFTEEN COUNTRIES IN THE EuroSpA RESEARCH COLLABORATION NETWORK

Background

Evidence reveals sex differences in physiology, disease presentation and response to treatment in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Pooled data from four randomized controlled trials demonstrated reduced treatment efficacy of a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) in females compared to males with ankylosing spondylitis1. However, real-life evidence confirming these data in large cohorts is scarce. We sought to validate prior studies using data from a large multinational cohort based on real-life clinical practice.

Objectives

To investigate sex differences in treatment response and drug retention rates in clinical practice among patients with axSpA, treated with their first TNFi.

Methods

Data from biologic-naïve axSpA patients initiating a TNFi in the EuroSpA registries were pooled. In the primary analysis, propensity-score weighting was applied to assess the causal effect of sex on clinically important improvement (CII) according to ASDAS-CRP at 6 months. A generalized linear regression model was used to estimate the causal risk difference (RD) and relative risk (RR) of sex on CII. Possible covariates influencing the outcome were determined a priori and selected based on availability in the database (<20% missing). The final covariates included in the model were country, age and TNFi start year. In the secondary analysis, drug retention was assessed over 24 months of follow-up by Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test.

Results

In total, 6,451 axSpA patients with available data on ASDAS-CRP at baseline and 6 months were assessed for treatment response. Baseline characteristics are shown in the Table 1. In the adjusted analysis, the probability for females to have CII was 15% (RR, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 0.89) lower compared to males and the difference in probability for having CII was 9.4 percentage points (RD, 0.094; 95% CI, 0.069 to 0.12). The survival analysis included 28,608 axSpA patients with available data on retention rates. The TNFi 6/12/24-month retention rates were significantly lower in females (81%/69%/58%) compared to males (89%/81%/72%), see Figure 1.

Table 1.FemaleMaleMean (SD), Median [IQR] or percentagesMean (SD), Median [IQR] or percentagesAge (years)42.0 (12.1)41.4 (12.3)Fulfilment of mNYC66%80%Disease duration (years)2.0 [1.0, 7.0]3.0 [1.0, 9.0]TNFi start year Start 1999-20097.2%9.8% Start 2010-201326%27% Start 2014-201637%36% Start 2017-202030%27%BASDAI, mm59 (20)54 (21)BASFI, mm48 (25)46 (24)ASDAS, units3.5 (0.9)3.5 (1.0)CRP (mg/L)6.7 [2.5, 16.0]11.9 [4.0, 25.0]SJC (0-28)0 [0, 0]0 [0, 0]TJC (0-28)0 [0, 2]0 [0, 1]VAS pain, mm63 (22)59 (24)VAS fatigue, mm65 (25)59 (26)

mNYC, modified New York criteria; TNFi, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor; BASDAI, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Indexf; BASFI, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index; ASDAS, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score; CRP, C-reactive protein; SJC, swollen joint count; TJC, tender joint count; VAS, visual analogue scale.

Conclusion

Treatment efficacy and retention rates are lower among female patients with axSpA initiating their first TNFi. Females presented with lower C-reactive protein levels and higher scores on patient reported outcomes at baseline, reflecting differences in disease expression. Recognizing these sex differences is of relevance for customized patient care and may improve patient education.

References

[1]van der Horst-Bruinsma et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013 Jul;72(7):1221-4.

Acknowledgements

Novartis Pharma AG and IQVIA for supporting the EuroSpA collaboration.

Disclosure of Interests

Pasoon Hellamand Grant/research support from: Novartis, Marleen G.H. van de Sande Speakers bureau: UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Eli Lily, Novartis and UCB, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Janssen, UCB and Eli Lilly, Lykke Midtbøll Ørnbjerg Grant/research support from: Novartis, Thomas Klausch: None declared, Michael Nurmohamed Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Janssen and Celgene, Consultant of: Abbvie, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Pfizer, Galapagos, BMS, Ronald van Vollenhoven Consultant of: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biogen, BMS, Galapagos, Janssen, Miltenyi, Pfizer, UCB and speaker fees from Abbvie, Galapagos, GSK, Janssen, Pfizer, R-Pharma and UCB, Grant/research support from: BMS, GSK and UCB, Dan Nordström Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Anna-Mari Hokkanen Grant/research support from: MSD, Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Elsa Vieira-Sousa Speakers bureau: MSD, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Abbvie and Pfizer, Consultant of: MSD, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Abbvie and Pfizer, Grant/research support from: MSD, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Abbvie and Pfizer, Anne Gitte Loft Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Abbvie and BMS, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, BMS, Merck, Celgene and Novartis, Ulf Lindström: None declared, Johan K Wallman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Novartis, Brigitte Michelsen Grant/research support from: Novartis, Adrian Ciurea Speakers bureau: AbbVie and Novartis, Michael J. Nissen Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssens, Novartis and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssens, Novartis and Pfizer, Catalin Codreanu Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Corina Mogosan Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Gary Macfarlane Grant/research support from: GSK, Gareth T. Jones Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, UCB, Amgen and GSK, Karin Laas Speakers bureau: Amgen, Janssen, Novartis and Abbvie, Ziga Rotar Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Novartis, MSD, Medis, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, Lek and Janssen, Consultant of: Abbvie, Novartis, MSD, Medis, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, Lek and Janssen, Matija Tomsic Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and Sandoz-Lek, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and Sandoz-Lek, Isabel Castrejon Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly, BMS, Janssen, MSD and Abbvie, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, BMS, Janssen, MSD and Abbvie, Manuel Pombo-Suarez Consultant of: Abbvie, MSD and Roche, Björn Gudbjornsson Speakers bureau: Amgen and Novartis, Consultant of: Amgen and Novartis, Arni Jon Geirsson: None declared, Eirik kristianslund: None declared, Jiří Vencovský Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Argenx, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli-Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Octapharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Argenx, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli-Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Octapharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and UCB, Lucie Nekvindova: None declared, Semih Gulle: None declared, Berrin Zengin: None declared, Merete Lund Hetland Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Medac, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopies, Sandoz and Novartis, Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma Speakers bureau: BMS, AbbVie, Pfizer and MSD, Consultant of: Abbvie, UCB, MSD, Novartis and Lilly, Grant/research support from: MSD, Pfizer, AbbVie and UCB.

POS0001 CAN SINGLE IMPUTATION TECHNIQUES FOR BASDAI COMPONENTS RELIABLY CALCULATE THE COMPOSITE SCORE IN AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS PATIENTS?

Background

In axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) is a key patient-reported outcome. However, one or more of its components may be missing when recorded in clinical practice.

Objectives

To determine whether an individual patient’s BASDAI at a given timepoint can be reliably calculated with different single imputation techniques and to explore the impact of the number of missing components and/or differences between missingness of individual components.

Methods

Real-life data from axSpA patients receiving tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) from 13 countries in the European Spondyloarthritis (EuroSpA) Research Collaboration Network were utilized [1]. We studied missingness in BASDAI components based on simulations in a complete dataset, where we applied and expanded the approach of Ramiro et al. [2]. After introducing one or more missing components completely at random, BASDAI was calculated from the available components and with three different single imputation techniques: possible middle value (i.e. 50) of the component and mean and median of the available components. Differences between the observed (original) and calculated scores were assessed and correct classification of patients as having BASDAI<40 mm was additionally evaluated. For the setting with one missing component, differences arising between missing one of components 1-4 versus 5-6 were explored. Finally, the performance of imputations in relation to the values of the original score was investigated.

Results

A total of 19,894 axSpA patients with at least one complete BASDAI registration at any timepoint were included. 59,126 complete BASDAI registrations were utilized for the analyses with a mean BASDAI of 38.5 (standard deviation 25.9). Calculating BASDAI from the available components and imputing with mean or median showed similar levels of agreement (Table 1). When allowing one missing component, >90% had a difference of ≤6.9 mm between the original and calculated scores and >95% were correctly classified as BASDAI<40 (Table 1). However, separate analyses of components 1-4 and 5-6 as a function of the BASDAI score suggested that imputing any one of the first four BASDAI components resulted in a level of agreement <90% for specific BASDAI values while imputing one of the stiffness components 5-6 always reached a level of agreement >90% (Figure 1, upper panels). As expected, it was observed that regardless of the BASDAI component set to missing and the imputation technique used, correct classification of patients as BASDAI<40 was less than 95% for values around the cutoff (Figure 1, lower panels).

Table 1.

Level of agreement between the original and calculated BASDAI and correct classification for BASDAI<40 mm

Level of agreement with Dif≤6.9 mm* (%)Correct classification for BASDAI<40 mm** (%)1 missing componentAvailable93.996.9Value 5073.996.3Mean94.296.8Median93.196.82 missing componentsAvailable83.794.8Value 5040.792.8Mean83.594.8Median82.894.73 missing componentsAvailable71.992.6Value 5028.187.3Mean72.292.6Median69.792.2

* The levels of agreement with a difference (Dif) of ≤6.9 mm between the original and calculated scores were based on the half of the smallest detectable change. Agreement of >90% was considered as acceptable. ** Correct classification of >95% was considered as acceptable.

Figure 1.

Level of agreement between the original and calculated BASDAI and correct classification for BASDAI<40 mm as a function of the original score

Conclusion

BASDAI calculation with available components gave similar results to single imputation of missing components with mean or median. Only when missing one of BASDAI components 5 or 6, single imputation techniques can reliably calculate individual BASDAI scores. However, missing any single component value results in misclassification of patients with original BASDAI scores close to 40.

References

[1]Ørnbjerg et al. (2019). Ann Rheum Dis, 78(11), 1536-1544.

[2]Ramiro et al. (2014). Rheumatology, 53(2), 374-376.

Acknowledgements

Novartis Pharma AG and IQVIA for supporting the EuroSpA collaboration.

Disclosure of Interests

Stylianos Georgiadis Grant/research support from: Novartis, Myriam Riek Grant/research support from: Novartis, Christos Polysopoulos Grant/research support from: Novartis, Almut Scherer Grant/research support from: Novartis, Daniela Di Giuseppe: None declared, Gareth T. Jones Speakers bureau: Janssen, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, UCB, Amgen, GSK, Merete Lund Hetland Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Medac, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopies, Sandoz, Novartis, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, BMS, Merck, Celgene, Novartis, Simon Horskjær Rasmussen Grant/research support from: Novartis, Johan K Wallman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Abbvie, BMS, Anne Gitte Loft Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Karel Pavelka Speakers bureau: Pfizer, MSD, BMS, UCB, Amgen, Egis, Roche, AbbVie, Consultant of: Pfizer, MSD, BMS, UCB, Amgen, Egis, Roche, AbbVie, Jakub Zavada Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Elli-Lilly, Sandoz, Novartis, Egis, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Elli-Lilly, Sandoz, Novartis, Egis, UCB, Merih Birlik: None declared, Ayten Yazici Grant/research support from: Roche, Brigitte Michelsen Grant/research support from: Novartis, Eirik kristianslund: None declared, Adrian Ciurea Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Michael J. Nissen Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssens, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssens, Novartis, Pfizer, Ana Maria Rodrigues Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer, Amgen, Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Gary Macfarlane Grant/research support from: GSK, Anna-Mari Hokkanen Grant/research support from: MSD, Heikki Relas Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Pfizer, UCB, Viatris, Consultant of: Abbvie, Celgene, Pfizer, UCB, Viatris, Catalin Codreanu Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Corina Mogosan: None declared, Ziga Rotar Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Novartis, MSD, Medis, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, Lek, Janssen, Consultant of: Abbvie, Novartis, MSD, Medis, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, Lek, Janssen, Matija Tomsic Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sandoz-Lek, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sandoz-Lek, Björn Gudbjornsson Speakers bureau: Amgen, Novartis, Consultant of: Amgen, Novartis, Arni Jon Geirsson: None declared, Pasoon Hellamand Grant/research support from: Novartis, Marleen G.H. van de Sande Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB, Janssen, Abbvie, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB, Janssen, Abbvie, Grant/research support from: Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB, Janssen, Abbvie, Isabel Castrejon: None declared, Manuel Pombo-Suarez Consultant of: Abbvie, MSD, Roche, Bruno Frediani: None declared, Florenzo Iannone Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Lykke Midtbøll Ørnbjerg Grant/research support from: Novartis

OP0220 SECULAR TRENDS IN BASELINE CHARACTERISTICS, TREATMENT RETENTION AND RESPONSE RATES IN 17453 BIONAÏVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS PATIENTS INITIATING TNFI – RESULTS FROM THE EUROSPA COLLABORATION

Background:

Knowledge of changes over time in baseline characteristics and tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) response in bionaïve psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients treated in routine care is limited.

Objectives:

To investigate secular trends in baseline characteristics and retention, remission and response rates in PsA patients initiating a first TNFi.

Methods:

Prospectively collected data on bionaïve PsA patients starting TNFi in routine care from 15 European countries were pooled. According to year of TNFi initiation, three groups were defined a priori based on bDMARD availability: Group A (1999–2008), Group B (2009–2014) and Group C (2015–2018).

Retention rates (Kaplan-Meier), crude and LUNDEX adjusted1 remission (Disease Activity Score (DAS28) <2.6, 28-joint Disease Activity index for PsA (DAPSA28) ≤4, Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ≤2.8) and ACR50 response rates were assessed at 6, 12 and 24 months. No statistical comparisons were made.

Results:

A total of 17453 PsA patients were included (4069, 7551 and 5833 in groups A, B and C).

Patients in group A were older and had longer disease duration compared to B and C. Retention rates at 6, 12 and 24 months were highest in group A (88%/77%/64%) but differed little between B (83%/69%/55%) and C (84%/70%/56%).

Baseline disease activity was higher in group A than in B and C (DAS28: 4.6/4.3/4.0, DAPSA28: 29.9/25.7/24.0, CDAI: 21.8/20.0/18.6), and this persisted at 6 and 12 months. Crude and LUNDEX adjusted remission rates at 6 and 12 months tended to be lowest in group A, although crude/LUNDEX adjusted ACR50 response rates at all time points were highest in group A. At 24 months, disease activity and remission rates were similar in the three groups (Table).

Table 1.

Secular trends in baseline characteristics, treatment retention, remission and response rates in European PsA patients initiating a 1st TNFi

Baseline characteristicsGroup A(1999–2008)Group B(2009–2014)Group C(2015–2018)Age, median (IQR)62 (54–72)58 (49–67)54 (45–62)Male, %514847Years since diagnosis, median (IQR)5 (2–10)3 (1–9)3 (1–8)Smokers, %161717DAS28, median (IQR)4.6 (3.7–5.3)4.3 (3.4–5.1)4.0 (3.2–4.8)DAPSA28, median (IQR)29.9 (19.3–41.8)25.7 (17.2–38.1)24.0 (16.1–35.5)CDAI, median (IQR)21.8 (14.0–31.1)20.0 (13.0–29.0)18.6 (12.7–26.1)TNFi drug, % (Adalimumab / Etanercept / Infliximab / Certolizumab / Golimumab)27 / 43 / 30 / 0 / 036 / 31 / 14 / 5 / 1421 / 40 / 21 / 8 / 10Follow up6 months12 months24 monthsGr AGr BGr CGr AGr BGr CGr AGr BGr CRetention rates, % (95% CI)88 (87–89)83 (82–84)84 (83–85)79 (78–80)72 (71–73)72 (71–73)68 (67–69)60 (59–61)60 (59–62)DAS28, median (IQR)2.7 (1.9–3.6)2.4 (1.7–3.4)2.3 (1.7–3.2)2.5 (1.8–3.4)2.2 (1.6–3.1)2.1 (1.6–2.9)2.1 (1.6–3.1)2.0 (1.6–2.9)1.9 (1.5–2.6)DAPSA28, median (IQR)10.6 (4.8–20.0)9.5 (3.9–18.3)8.7 (3.6–15.9)9.1 (4.1–17.8)7.7 (3.1–15.4)7.6 (2.9–14.4)6.7 (2.7–13.7)6.6 (2.7–13.5)5.9 (2.4–11.8)CDAI, median (IQR)7.8 (3.0–15.2)8.0 (3.0–15.0)6.4 (2.6–12.2)6.4 (2.5–13.0)6.2 (2.5–12.1)5.8 (2.2–11.4)5.0 (2.0–11.0)5.5 (2.0–11.2)5.0 (2.0–9.0)DAS28 remission, %, c/L47 / 4255 / 4661 / 5153 / 4362 / 4566 / 4864 / 4268 / 3775 / 41DAPSA28 remission, %, c/L22 / 1926 / 2228 / 2325 / 2031 / 2232 / 2336 / 2334 / 1938 / 21CDAI remission, %, c/L23 / 2123 / 1926 / 2227 / 2127 / 2029 / 2134 / 2231 / 1735 / 19ACR50 response, %, c/L26 / 2322 / 1824 / 2027 / 2223 / 1721 / 1523 / 1518 / 1014 / 8

Gr, Group; c/L, crude/LUNDEX.

Conclusion:

Over the past 20 years, patient age, disease duration and disease activity level at the start of the first TNFi in PsA patients have decreased. Furthermore, TNFi retention rates have decreased while remission rates have increased, especially remission rates within the first year of treatment. These findings may reflect a greater awareness of early diagnosis in PsA patients, a lowered threshold for initiating TNFi and the possibility for earlier switching in patients with inadequate treatment response.

References:

[1]Arthritis Rheum 2006; 54: 600-6.

Acknowledgements:

Novartis Pharma AG and IQVIA for supporting the EuroSpA Research Collaboration Network.

Disclosure of Interests:

Sara Nysom Christiansen Speakers bureau: BMS and GE, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Lykke Midtbøll Ørnbjerg Grant/research support from: Novartis, Simon Horskjær Rasmussen: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Johan K Wallman Consultant of: Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Florenzo Iannone Speakers bureau: Abbvie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and BMS, Brigitte Michelsen Consultant of: Novartis, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Michael J. Nissen Speakers bureau: Novartis, Eli Lilly, Celgene, and Pfizer, Consultant of: Novartis, Eli Lilly, Celgene, and Pfizer, Jakub Zavada: None declared, Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Manuel Pombo-Suarez: None declared, Kari Eklund: None declared, Matija Tomsic Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Björn Gudbjornsson Speakers bureau: Amgen and Novartis, İsmail Sari: None declared, Catalin Codreanu Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Egis, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Egis, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Daniela Di Giuseppe: None declared, Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Biogen, AbbVie, Marco Sebastiani: None declared, Karen Minde Fagerli: None declared, Burkhard Moeller: None declared, Karel Pavelka Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Roche, MSD, UCB, Pfizer, Novartis, Egis, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Consultant of: AbbVie, Roche, MSD, UCB, Pfizer, Novartis, Egis, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Anabela Barcelos: None declared, Carlos Sánchez-Piedra: None declared, Heikki Relas: None declared, Ziga Rotar Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Thorvardur Love: None declared, Servet Akar: None declared, Ruxandra Ionescu Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Boehringer-Ingelheim Eli-Lilly,Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, UCB, Gary Macfarlane Grant/research support from: GlaxoSmithKline, Marleen G.H. van de Sande: None declared, Merete L. Hetland Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopies, Sandoz, Novartis., Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Centocor, GSK, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Mundipharma, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Schering-Plough, Roche, Takeda, UCB and Wyeth, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Centocor, GSK, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Mundipharma, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Schering-Plough, Roche, Takeda, UCB and Wyeth

POS0027 SECULAR TRENDS IN BASELINE CHARACTERISTICS, TREATMENT RETENTION AND RESPONSE RATES IN 27189 BIO-NAÏVE AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS PATIENTS INITIATING TNFI – RESULTS FROM THE EUROSPA COLLABORATION

Background:

Knowledge of changes over time in baseline characteristics and tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) response in bio-naïve axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) patients treated in routine care is limited.

Objectives:

To investigate secular trends in baseline characteristics and retention, remission and response rates in axSpA patients initiating a first TNFi.

Methods:

Prospectively collected data on bio-naïve axSpA patients starting TNFi in routine care from 15 European countries were pooled. According to year of TNFi initiation, three groups were defined a priori based on bDMARD availability: Group A (1999–2008), Group B (2009–2014) and Group C (2015–2018). Retention rates (Kaplan-Meier), crude and LUNDEX adjusted1 remission (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) <1.3, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) <20) and response (ASDAS Major and Clinically Important Improvement (MI/CII), BASDAI 50) rates were assessed at 6, 12 and 24 months. No statistical comparisons were made.

Results:

In total, 27189 axSpA patients were included (5945, 11255 and 9989 in groups A, B and C).

At baseline, patients in group A were older, had longer disease duration and a larger proportion of male and HLA-B27 positive patients compared to B and C, whereas disease activity was similar across groups.

Retention rates at 6, 12 and 24 months were highest in group A (88%/81%/71%) but differed little between B (84%/74%/64%) and C (85%/76%/67%).

In all groups, median ASDAS and BASDAI had decreased markedly at 6 months (Table 1). The ASDAS values at 12 and 24 months and BASDAI at 24 months were higher in group A compared with groups B and C. Similarly, crude remission and response rates were lowest in group A. After adjustments for drug retention (LUNDEX), remission and response rates showed less pronounced between-group differences regarding ASDAS measures and no relevant differences regarding BASDAI measures.

Conclusion:

Nowadays, axSpA patients initiating TNFi are younger with shorter disease duration and more frequently female and HLA-B27 negative than previously, while baseline disease activity is unchanged. Drug retention rates have decreased, whereas crude remission and response rates have increased. This may indicate expanded indication but also a stable disease activity threshold for TNFi initiation over time, an increased focus on targeting disease remission and more available treatment options.

References:

[1]Arthritis Rheum 2006; 54: 600-6.

Table 1.

Secular trends in baseline characteristics, treatment retention, remission and response rates in European axSpA patients initiating a 1st TNFi

Baseline characteristicsGroup A(1999–2008)Group B(2009–2014)Group C(2015–2018)Age, years, median (IQR)57 (49–66)51 (42–60)46 (37–56)Male, %666057HLA-B27, %877772Years since diagnosis, median (IQR)5 (1–12)2 (0–8)2 (0–7)Smokers, %232425ASDAS, median (IQR)3.5 (2.8–4.1)3.4 (2.8–4.1)3.5 (2.8–4.1)BASDAI, median, (IQR)57 (42–71)59 (43–72)57 (41–71)TNFi drug, % (Adalimumab /Etanercept / Infliximab /Certolizumab / Golimumab)22 / 35 / 43 / 0 / 037 / 21 / 20 / 4 / 1827 / 28 / 24 / 8 / 13Follow up6 months12 months24 monthsGr AGr BGr CGr AGr BGr CGr AGr BGr CRetention rates, %, (95% CI)88 (88–89)84 (83–85)85 (84–86)81 (80–82)74 (74–75)76 (75–76)71 (70–72)64 (63–65)67 (66–68)ASDAS, median, (IQR)1.8 (1.2–2.8)1.9 (1.2–2.8)1.8 (1.2–2.6)1.9 (1.3–2.6)1.7 (1.2–2.5)1.6 (1.1–2.4)1.9 (1.4–2.6)1.7 (1.1–2.4)1.5 (1.1–2.2)ASDAS inactive disease, %, c/L28 / 2528 / 2430 / 2624 / 1932 / 2434 / 2623 / 1634 / 2039 / 23ASDAS CII, %, c/L57 / 5159 / 5063 / 5461 / 5063 / 4767 / 5159 / 4168 / 4074 / 45ASDAS MI, %, c/L31 / 2732 / 2737 / 3232 / 2637 / 2741 / 3130 / 2042 / 2546 / 28BASDAI, median, (IQR)23 (10–40)26 (11–48)24 (10–44)21 (10–38)23 (10–42)20 (8–39)22 (9–40)20 (8–39)16 (6–35)BASDAI remission, %, c/L44 / 4040 / 3443 / 3645 / 3645 / 3450 / 3844 / 3048 / 2956 / 34BASDAI 50 response, %, c/L53 / 4750 / 4253 / 4557 / 4656 / 4258 / 4457 / 3960 / 3563 / 38

Gr, Group; c/L, crude/LUNDEX adjusted.

Acknowledgements:

Novartis Pharma AG and IQVIA for supporting the EuroSpA Research Collaboration Network.

Disclosure of Interests:

Lykke Midtbøll Ørnbjerg Grant/research support from: Novartis, Sara Nysom Christiansen Speakers bureau: BMS and GE, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Simon Horskjær Rasmussen: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Ulf Lindström: None declared, Jakub Zavada: None declared, Florenzo Iannone: None declared, Fatos Onen: None declared, Michael J. Nissen Speakers bureau: Novartis, Eli Lilly, Celgene, and Pfizer, Consultant of: Novartis, Eli Lilly, Celgene, and Pfizer, Brigitte Michelsen Consultant of: Novartis, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Gary Macfarlane Grant/research support from: GlaxoSmithKline, Dan Nordström Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Manuel Pombo-Suarez: None declared, Catalin Codreanu Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Egis, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Egis, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Matija Tomsic Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Lilly, UCB, Björn Gudbjornsson Speakers bureau: Amgen and Novartis, Johan Askling: None declared, Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Biogen, AbbVie, Karel Pavelka Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Roche, MSD, UCB, Pfizer, Novartis, Egis, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Consultant of: AbbVie, Roche, MSD, UCB, Pfizer, Novartis, Egis, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Elisa Gremese: None declared, Nurullah Akkoc: None declared, Adrian Ciurea Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Eirik kristianslund: None declared, Anabela Barcelos: None declared, Gareth T. Jones Grant/research support from: Pfizer, AbbVie, UCB, Celgene, Amgen, GSK, Anna-Mari Hokkanen Grant/research support from: MSD, Carlos Sánchez-Piedra: None declared, Ruxandra Ionescu Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Boehringer-Ingelheim Eli-Lilly,Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, UCB, Ziga Rotar Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Marleen G.H. van de Sande: None declared, Arni Jon Geirsson: None declared, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Centocor, GSK, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Mundipharma, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Schering-Plough, Roche, Takeda, UCB and Wyeth, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Centocor, GSK, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Mundipharma, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Schering-Plough, Roche, Takeda, UCB and Wyeth, Merete L. Hetland Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopies, Sandoz, Novartis.

OP0284 AN AGENT-BASED SIMULATION OF THE EFFECTS OF VARYING TIME TO TREATMENT WITH BIOLOGICAL AGENTS ON PATIENT HEALTH AND COST IN AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS USING NATIONAL REGISTER DATA

Background:

Evaluating the long-term impacts of healthcare policies on patient’s health and treatment costs for people with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is challenging due to its chronic nature, and the variation in individual patient journeys post-diagnosis. Agent-based simulations are a novel approach to interrogating this complexity, and allow the consequences of different policy scenarios on outcomes to be explored.

Objectives:

Develop and validate an agent-based simulation of the UK axial spondyloarthritis healthcare system, using real-world data.

Interrogate the effects of earlier biologic treatment on costs and patient outcomes.

Methods:

Anonymised data were obtained from the UK National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit, and BSR Biologics Register (BSRBR-AS). This provided data on 162 units, and 702 patients with 1,631 patient-years of follow-up. An agent-based model was designed and programmed on the Netlogo platform to simulate patients and units individually over time. New patients were created based on national disease prevalence statistics. Patients’ disease journeys were modelled with a Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score. The model included hospital outpatient attendances, treatment histories, drug costs, and key patient demographics. The baseline simulation was run for two simulated years, repeated 10 times, and assessed against the BSRBR-AS dataset for validation. The model was subsequently used to explore five experimental scenarios in which the time between the date of diagnosis, to first introduction to biologics (d-b) was varied by increasing the number of appointments. The experiment was run 10 times for each parameter setting.

Results:

In the baseline model in a typical two year run, 13,631 new patients attended 5,167 baseline, and 6,966 follow-up appointments. Of these, 6,324 and 623 were prescribed ≥1NSAID, and biologics, respectively. The validation comparison tests showed a high-level of similarity between simulated output and target datasets. In the target data, d-b was 250 days. In the experimental scenarios, as might be expected, earlier biologic access improved outcomes but at higher-costs (Figure 1; Table 1). Reducing d-b to 150 days doubled the number of patients on biologics at 2 years from 623 to 1,286. It also led to 8% more patients achieving a BASDAI of 0 to 2.5 at 2 years, with 5%, 1%, and 2% less patients achieving 2.5 - 5, 5 to 7.5 and 7.5 to 10 BASDAI, respectively. Reducing d-b to 150 days increased drug costs from £3.2 million to £8.8 million. However, the total number of appointments (a proxy for staff costs) increased proportionality less from 16,000 to 20,000.

Table 1.

Influence of varying the time between diagnosis to biologic treatment (d-b) on drug-use and staffing costs

Diagnosis to Biologic (d-b)Drug Costs Unit (£k)Total AppointmentsNo. patients prescribed NSAIDsNo. patients prescribed Biologics1508,79620,3847,1541,2832205,70218,5926,7969712503,25916,2146,3246212602,05414,7005,9683822651,29713,4115,562233Figure 1.

Influence of varying the time between diagnosis to biologic treatment (d-b) on 2 year BASDAI outcome

Conclusion:

We have successfully developed, and validated an agent-based approach to model the effect of key policy changes on the whole healthcare system, providing output estimates of cost and patient outcomes, based on integrated real-world data. To our knowledge this is the first attempt to explore the patient journey in people with axSpA in this way. The model provides a useful tool for exploring the effects of changing the way healthcare is delivered to patients with this disease. Our experimental analysis lends support to the case for increasing staffing and drug expenditure to achieve current NICE standards of care in AS.

Acknowledgments:

Financial support National Axial Spondyloarthritis Society (NASS), data access BSR.

Disclosure of Interests:

Alan Roach Grant/research support from: I was awarded an I-CRP grant from Pfizer for a similar simulation in RA, this was for about £50k and ran from 1/9/15 28/2/17., Ian Scott: None declared, Gary Macfarlane: None declared, Gareth T. Jones Grant/research support from: Pfizer, AbbVie, UCB, Celgene and GSK., Alex MacGregor: None declared

OP0085 THE CHANGING STATES OF FIBROMYALGIA IN A LONGITUDINAL COHORT OF PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS

Background:

The identification of predictors for longitudinal fibromyalgia (FM) development has been identified as a research priority in a recent systematic review and meta-analyses (1). This paper examines the longitudinal development of, or recovery from, FM in patients with axial Spondyloarthritis(axSpA).

Objectives:

To identify predictors for FM development and recovery in patients with axSpA.

Methods:

The British Society of Rheumatology Biologics Register (BSRBR-AS) recruited patients with axSpA from 83 centres in a prospective study. Fibromyalgia was diagnosed using the self-reported Fibromyalgia Survey Diagnostic Criteria (FSDC). Measures of axSpA disease activity and clinical findings were recorded at regular intervals. We identified predictors for developing FM, and for recovering from FM, between yearly visits using uni- and multivariate logistical regression models.

Results:

Eight hundred and one patients had two or more visits and were eligible for inclusion. 686 patients did not have FM at baseline, of whom 45 had developed FM by follow-up. 115 patients had FM at baseline, of whom 77 had recovered by follow-up. The uni- and multivariate models are presented in table 1.

Table 1.Models of FM developmentModels of FM recoveryVariableAdjusted univariateOR (95% CI)Multivariate modelOR (95% CI)Adjusted univariateOR (95% CI)Multivariate modelOR (95% CI)Age years1.01 (0.98-1.03)1.00 (0.98-1.03)1.00 (0.97-1.02)1.02 (0.99-1.06)Female gender1.89 (1.01-3.53)*2.04 (0.99-4.21)$0.90 (0.40-2.04)1.20 (0.48-3.03)BASDAI per unit1.39 (1.21-1.60)**1.27 (1.08-1.49) *0.79 (0.63-1.00)*BASFI per unit1.22 (1.08-1.38)*0.70 (0.56-0.88)*0.68 (0.53-0.86)*ASDAS-CRP per unit1.47 (1.11-1.95)*0.63 (0.39-1.01)$Started on TNF1.95 (0.92-4.15)$2.78 (1.21-6.38)*4.23 (1.63-11.00)*Symptomscale per unit1.28 (1.13-1.45)**0.76 (0.61-0.96)*WPI index per unit1.24 (1.13-1.36)**1.14 (1.02-1.28) *0.84 (0.73-0.96)*0.84 (0.72-0.97)*HADS Anxiety per unit1.12 (1.05-1.20)*0.96 (0.88-1.04)Chalder per unit1.14 (1.05-1.24)*0.91(0.81-1.02)Jenkins baseline1.07 (1.01-1.13)*0.90 (0.83-0.98)*ROC/sensitivity/specificity0.75/55.6/75.60.78/62.3/73.7

Logistic regression models. OR; Odds ratio, BASDAI; Bath Ankylosing Spondyilits Disease Activity IndexBASFI; Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index, TNF; Tumour Necrosis Factor inhibitor, HADS; Hospital Anxiety Scale, WPI; widespread pain index, Chalder; Chalder fatigue index, Jenkins; Jenkins sleep evaluation, ROC; receiver operator curve.

Conclusion:

The development of FM in patients with axSpA can be predicted by high levels of axSpA activity and presence of widespread pain, while low levels of the same variables, and starting a TNF-inhibitor predict recovery from FM. The presence of co-morbid FM should be considered in patients with a history of high axSpA disease activity and wide spread pain.

References:

[1]Zhao SS, Duffield SJ, Goodson NJ. The prevalence and impact of comorbid fibromyalgia in inflammatory arthritis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2019;33(3):101423.

Disclosure of Interests:

Sella Aarrestad Provan Consultant of: Novartis, Linda Dean: None declared, Gareth T. Jones Grant/research support from: Pfizer, AbbVie, UCB, Celgene and GSK., Gary Macfarlane: None declared

OP0109 CO-MEDICATION WITH A CONVENTIONAL SYNTHETIC DMARD IN PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS IS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPROVED RETENTION OF TNF INHIBITORS: RESULTS FROM THE EUROSPA COLLABORATION

Background:

Axial spondylarthritis (axSpA) patients treated with a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) may receive a concomitant conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (csDMARD), although the value of combination therapy remains unclear.

Objectives:

Describe the proportion and phenotype of patients with axSpA initiating their first TNFi as monotherapy compared to TNFi+csDMARD combination therapy, and to compare the 1-year TNFi retention between the two groups.

Methods:

Data from 13 European registries was collected. Two exposure treatment groups were defined: TNFi monotherapy at baseline (=TNFi start date) and TNFi+csDMARD combination therapy. TNFi retention rates were assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves for each country and combined. Hazard ratios (HR, 95% CI) for discontinuing the TNFi were obtained with Cox models: (i) crude; adjusted for (ii) country, and (iii) country, sex, age, calendar year, disease duration and BASDAI. Participating countries were dichotomized into two strata, depending on their 1-year retention rate being above (stratum A) or below (stratum B) the average retention rate across all countries.

Results:

22,196 axSpA patients were included with 34% on TNFi+csDMARD combination therapy. Baseline characteristics are presented in table 1. Overall, the crude TNFi retention rate was marginally longer in the combination therapy group (80% (79-81%)) compared to the monotherapy group (78% (77-79%)) and was primarily driven by differences in stratum B (fig. 1). TNFi retention rates varied significantly across countries (range:-11.0% to +11.3%), with a clear distinction between the 2 strata. The HRs for discontinuation over 1-year (reference=TNFi monotherapy) in the 3 models were: (i) 0.88 (0.82-0.93), (ii) 0.87 (0.82-0.92), (iii) 0.88 (0.82-0.93).

Table 1Baseline characteristicsAll patients(n=22196)Country stratum ACountry stratum BTNFi mono(n=4940)csDMARD + TNFi(n=2547)TNFi mono(n=9693)csDMARD + TNFi(n=5016)Age (years), mean (SD)42.6 (12.5)43.4 (12.0)42.8 (12.2)41.6 (12.7)43.7 (12.7)Females, %41.137.738.242.044.2Disease duration (yrs), mean (SD)5.7 (8.0)6.2 (7.7)6.7 (7.4)4.9 (8.2)6.1 (8.2)Enthesitis, %50.316.733.957.859.7SJC-28, median (IQR)0 (0-1)0 (0-0)0 (0-2)0 (0-0)0 (0-2)VAS pain (0-100), mean (SD)60.9 (24.5)63.3 (26.5)67.8 (23.3)60.2 (23.4)57.2 (24.3)CRP (mg/L), median (IQR)8 (3-20)7.8 (2-20)18 (6.7-32.6)6.0 (2.7-15)8.0 (3-22)BASDAI (0-10), mean (SD)5.7 (2.1)5.7 (2.2)6.2 (2.1)5.6 (2.0)5.4 (2.2)BASFI (0-10), mean (SD)4.4 (2.5)4.4 (2.6)4.9 (2.5)4.3 (2.4)4.2 (2.9)ASDAS, mean (SD)3.5 (1.1)3.7 (1.0)4.0 (1.0)3.3 (1.0)3.3 (1.1)On Infliximab, %25.721222436Baseline csDMARD use, %-Methotrexate045063-Sulfasalazine068033-Leflunomide0801

Conclusion:

Considerable differences were observed across countries in the use of combination therapy and TNFi retention in axSpA patients. The overall 1-year TNFi retention was higher with csDMARD co-therapy compared to TNFi monotherapy. TNFi monotherapy had a 12-13% higher risk of treatment discontinuation.

Acknowledgments:

Novartis Pharma AG and IQVIA

MN and BD participated equally

Disclosure of Interests:

Michael Nissen Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Consultant of: Novartis, Lilly, Abbvie, Celgene and Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Novartis, Lilly, Abbvie, Celgene and Pfizer, Bénédicte Delcoigne: None declared, Daniela Di Giuseppe: None declared, Lennart T.H. Jacobsson Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis and Pfizer, Karen Fagerli: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Grant/research support from: Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Adrian Ciurea Consultant of: Consulting and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis and Pfizer., Dan Nordström Consultant of: Abbvie, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB., Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB., Ziga Rotar Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Florenzo Iannone Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: Novartis and Pfizer, Manuel Pombo-Suarez Consultant of: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Björn Gudbjornsson Speakers bureau: Novartis and Amgen, Heřman Mann: None declared, Nurullah Akkoc: None declared, Catalin Codreanu Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Brigitte Michelsen: None declared, Gary Macfarlane: None declared, Merete L. Hetland Grant/research support from: BMS, MSD, AbbVie, Roche, Novartis, Biogen and Pfizer, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, Speakers bureau: Orion Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, CellTrion, Merck and Samsung Bioepis, Matija Tomsic: None declared, Burkhard Moeller: None declared, Pedro Ávila-Ribeiro Grant/research support from: Novartis, Carlos Sánchez-Piedra: None declared, Heikki Relas Grant/research support from: Abbvie., Consultant of: Abbvie, Celgene, and Pfizer., Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, and Pfizer., Arni Jon Geirsson: None declared, Lucie Nekvindova: None declared, Gozde Yildirim Cetin Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, MSD, Ruxandra Ionescu Consultant of: Consulting fees from Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Speakers bureau: Consulting and speaker fees from Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Niels Steen Krogh: None declared, Johan Askling Grant/research support from: JA acts or has acted as PI for agreements between Karolinska Institutet and the following entities, mainly in the context of the ARTIS national safety monitoring programme of immunomodulators in rheumatology: Abbvie, BMS, Eli Lilly, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, and UCB Pharma, Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: Grants from Pfizer, Biogen and Abbvie, Ulf Lindström: None declared

Common and unique associated factors for medically unexplained chronic widespread pain and chronic fatigue

OBJECTIVE

Chronic widespread pain and chronic fatigue share common associated factors but these associations may be explained by the presence of concurrent depression and anxiety.

METHODS

We mailed questionnaires to a randomly selected sample of people in the UK to identify participants with chronic widespread pain (ACR 1990 definition) and those with chronic fatigue. The questionnaire assessed sociodemographic factors, health status, healthcare use, childhood factors, adult attachment, and psychological stress including anxiety and depression. To identify persons with unexplained chronic widespread pain or unexplained chronic fatigue; we examined participant's medical records to exclude medical illness that might cause these symptoms.

RESULTS

Of 1443 participants (58.0% response rate) medical records of 990 were examined. 9.4% (N=93) had unexplained chronic widespread pain and 12.6% (N=125) had unexplained chronic fatigue. Marital status, childhood psychological abuse, recent threatening experiences and other somatic symptoms were commonly associated with both widespread pain and fatigue. No common effect was found for few years of education and current medical illnesses (more strongly associated with chronic widespread pain) or recent illness in a close relative, neuroticism, depression and anxiety scores (more strongly associated with chronic fatigue). Putative associated factors with a common effect were associated with unexplained chronic widespread pain or unexplained chronic fatigue only when there was concurrent anxiety and/or depression.

DISCUSSION

This study suggests that the associated factors for chronic widespread pain and chronic fatigue need to be studied in conjunction with concurrent depression/anxiety. Clinicians should be aware of the importance of concurrent anxiety or depression.

Investigating the role of pain-modulating pathway genes in musculoskeletal pain

AIMS

The aim of this study was to determine if genetic variation in the pain-modulating gene DREAM and its pathway genes influence susceptibility to reporting musculoskeletal pain in the population.

METHODS

Pairwise tag single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in DREAM, PDYN and OPRK1 were genotyped in a UK population-based discovery cohort in whom pain was assessed using blank body manikins at three time points. Depression and anxiety symptoms were assessed at the first time point. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression was used to test for association between SNPs and the maximum number of pain sites reported (0-29) across the three time points. Significantly associated SNPs (p < 0.05) were subsequently genotyped for validation in a cohort of European men with pain assessed at two time points.

RESULTS

Thirty-five SNPs were genotyped in 1055 subjects, of whom 83% reported pain, in the discovery cohort. SNPs in each gene were associated with the maximum number of pain sites reported, were independent of symptoms of anxiety and depression and had a significant cumulative effect (p = 7.0 × 10(-5) ). Significantly associated SNPs were successfully genotyped in 1733 men, 76% of whom reported pain, in the validation cohort, but did not show significant association with the number of pain sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic variation in the DREAM pathway genes was associated with the extent of pain reporting in a population-based cohort. These findings were not replicated in a single independent cohort; however, given the potential of this pathway as a therapeutic target, further investigation in additional cohorts is warranted.

Psychosocial risk markers for new onset irritable bowel syndrome--results of a large prospective population-based study

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) affects up to 22% of the general population. Its aetiology remains unclear. Previously reported cross-sectional associations with psychological distress and depression are not fully understood. We hypothesised that psychosocial factors, particularly those associated with somatisation, would act as risk markers for the onset of IBS. We conducted a community-based prospective study of subjects, aged 25-65 years, randomly selected from the registers of three primary care practices. Responses to a detailed questionnaire allowed subjects' IBS status to be classified using a modified version of the Rome II criteria. The questionnaire also included validated psychosocial instruments. Subjects free of IBS at baseline and eligible for follow-up 15 months later formed the cohort for this analysis (n=3732). An adjusted participation rate of 71% (n=2456) was achieved at follow-up. 3.5% (n=86) of subjects developed IBS. After adjustment for age, gender and baseline abdominal pain status, high levels of illness behaviour (odds ratio (OR)=5.2; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 2.5-11.0), anxiety (OR=2.0; 95% CI 0.98-4.1), sleep problems (OR=1.6; 95% CI 0.8-3.2), and somatic symptoms (OR=1.6; 95% CI 0.8-2.9) were found to be independent predictors of IBS onset. This study has demonstrated that psychosocial factors indicative of the process of somatisation are independent risk markers for the development of IBS in a group of subjects previously free of IBS. Similar relationships are observed in other "functional" disorders, further supporting the hypothesis that they have similar aetiologies.

Acculturation and the prevalence of pain amongst South Asian minority ethnic groups in the UK

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal pain is reported more commonly by South Asians in the UK than by white Europeans. This may result from a variety of factors, including cultural differences, and thus we investigated the extent to which differences in the prevalence of pain within the South Asian population could be explained by differences in acculturation (the extent to which immigrants take on the culture of their host population).

METHODS

Nine hundred and thirty-three Europeans and 1914 South Asian (1165 Indian, 401 Pakistani and 348 Bangladeshi) subjects were recruited from the age-sex registers of 13 general practices in areas with high densities of South Asian populations (Bolton, Oldham, Ashton-under-Lyne and Birmingham). A 28-item acculturation scale was developed, based, on aspects including use of language, clothing style, and use of own-culture media. Principle component analysis generated a score (range 0-100), which was validated against constructs expected to relate to acculturation, such as years of full time education and time spent in the UK. The presence of widespread pain was assessed by the answer to the question 'Have you suffered from pain all over the body in the past month?'

RESULTS

Widespread pain was more common in all three South Asian ethnic groups than in the white Europeans [odds ratio (OR) = 3.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9-4.9], with this increase ranging from 2.7 to 5.8 in the different South Asian subgroups. There was a similar increase in consultation rates for pain. Within the South Asians, pooling all three groups, there was a strong negative association between acculturation score and widespread pain, which remained after adjusting for age and sex: [OR (95% CI) per standard deviation decrease in acculturation score -1.2 (1.0-1.3)]. Adjusting for acculturation accounted for some, but not all, of the differences between the ethnic groups in the prevalence of widespread pain: OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.4-3.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Widespread pain is more commonly reported in South Asians though there are interesting differences within the South Asian community. Lower acculturation has a strong influence on the reporting of pain, but cannot explain all of the difference between South Asian and European populations.

A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between the psychological distress of cancer patients and their carers

The identification of factors that might affect the relationship between patients' and carers' psychological distress has received insufficient attention to date. A meta-analysis was conducted with 21 independent samples of cancer patients and their carers, to quantify the relationship and difference between respective measures of psychological distress. Correlation coefficients and standard differences were extracted from 21 studies that met pre-defined inclusion criteria. Random effects models were used. Variables that modified this relationship were examined with potential causes of heterogeneity explored. Analysis confirmed the positive association between patient and carer psychological distress (r = 0.35, P<0.0001), and indicated that patients and carers did not experience significantly more or less psychological distress than one another (P = 0.64). Subgroup analysis was performed to explore potential sources of heterogeneity, and initial findings indicated a relationship between time since diagnosis and the strength of correlation between patient and carer psychological distress. The meta-analysis was limited by the large clinical and methodological variability between studies, and further systematic prospective research is required. This preliminary evidence suggests that early intervention with the patient and their carer could prevent later development of psychological distress in both members.

Association between pain in the hip region and radiographic changes of osteoarthritis: results from a population-based study

OBJECTIVES

The relationship between hip pain and radiographic change in the population is unclear due to lack of agreed definition for hip pain and difficulties in obtaining radiographs from asymptomatic random samples. Our objective was to assess the relationship between hip pain and radiographic change in osteoarthritis (OA) in a population sample aged over 45.

METHODS

One thousand and seventy-one responders to a postal questionnaire using a recently validated approach to defining hip pain were stratified into hip pain-positive and -negative groups and samples of each were X-rayed and scored for OA using both minimum joint space and the Croft score. The association between pain and X-ray score was estimated, weighting back to the age and gender distribution of the original population.

RESULTS

Hip pain prevalence was 7% in males and 10% in females. Severe OA was present in 16% of those with and 3% of those without pain. Adjusting for age and gender, there was a very strong association of pain with severe OA [odds ratio (OR) 17.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.0-102], but no association with mild/moderate OA (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.4-4.7). By contrast, only 22% of men aged 45-54 with severe OA had current pain, though in older age groups the proportions with pain were higher (54-70%).

CONCLUSIONS

Hip pain is relatively infrequent in the general population compared with the published reports of other regional pain syndromes. Mild/moderate radiographic change is very frequent and not related to pain, whereas severe change is rare but strongly related. In younger males, severe radiographic change is much less likely to be associated with pain.

Psychosocial and illness related predictors of consultation rates in primary care--a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Despite extensive research, the reasons why patients consult their doctors are unclear. The aim of the current study was to identify the psychosocial and illness related factors that independently predicted primary care consultation over a 5-year period.

METHOD

We carried out a prospective, population-based cohort study with three waves of data collection by postal questionnaire in one general practice in Greater Manchester (UK). Consultation data were sought from primary care records on a random subsample of 800 adult patients. The main outcome measure was the number of consultations (including surgery and home visits) over the 5 years of the study as determined by raters blind to questionnaire responses. Questionnaire measures included the 12-item version of the General Health Questionnaire, the Illness Attitude Scales, a somatic symptom scale, a fatigue scale, a functional assessment of disability.

RESULTS

Consultation data were obtained on 738 patients (92% of selected subjects), who accounted for 12182 consultations. Negative illness attitudes, the presence of physical and psychiatric disorder, health anxiety, changes in psychological distress, reported physical symptoms and demographic factors such as age and sex were independently associated with consultation over a 5-year period. These variables together accounted for a difference of ten consultations per year between groups.

CONCLUSION

Consultation in primary care is a complex behaviour with a complex aetiology. Terms such as 'frequent attenders' may be less helpful than recognizing a number of dimensions that operate across the whole spectrum of consultation frequency. Future research should consider the wider context of consultation.

Syndrome of symptomatic adult acetabular dysplasia (SAAD syndrome)

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of acetabular dysplasia in subjects presenting with hip pain to primary care and its relationship with radiographic osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip.

DESIGN

Cross sectional analysis of a prospective cohort.

SETTING

35 general practices across the UK.

SUBJECTS

195 patients (63 male, 132 female) aged 40 years and over presenting with a new episode of hip pain

RESULTS

The prevalence of acetabular dysplasia in this study of new presenters with hip pain was high (32%). There was no significant relationship between acetabular dysplasia and radiographic OA overall.

CONCLUSIONS

The high prevalence of acetabular dysplasia across all grades of OA severity suggests that dysplasia itself may be an important cause of hip pain ("symptomatic adult acetabular dysplasia").

Predicting radiographic hip osteoarthritis from range of movement

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to test the hypothesis that new attenders in primary care with hip pain and radiographic osteoarthritis (OA) have a decreased range of movement compared with those without OA. The secondary objective was to define the planes of movement and thresholds that were the most discriminatory for OA.

METHODS

Men and women aged 40 yr and over presenting with a new episode of hip pain were recruited from 36 general practices across the UK. A standardized radiographic and clinical examination was performed. The discriminating ability of the range of movement for each plane to identify those with radiographic OA was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

New hip pain attenders with radiographic OA had restricted movement at the hip compared with those without radiographic change. Restriction in internal rotation was the most predictive and flexion the least predictive of radiographic OA. At this cut-off, restriction in any single plane had a sensitivity of 86% for moderate and 100% for severe OA (specificity was 54 and 42% respectively). Restriction in all three planes had greater discrimination (sensitivity was 33% for mild to moderate OA and 54% for severe OA; specificity was 93 and 88% respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Restriction in range of movement was predictive of the presence of OA in these new presenters to primary care with hip pain, and the results of this examination could be used to inform decisions regarding radiography.

Health impact of pain in the hip region with and without radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis: a study of new attenders to primary care. The PCR Hip Study Group

OBJECTIVES

To assess the health impact of hip pain at the time of first presentation to primary care, and the influence on this of radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Cross sectional survey of 195 patients (63 male, 132 female), aged 40 years and over, presenting with a new episode of hip pain, recruited from 35 general practices across the UK. Health status at presentation was determined by a structured questionnaire on symptoms, healthcare use, and health related quality of life (SF-36). Pelvic radiographs were assessed blindly for hip osteoarthritis using standard scoring systems.

RESULTS

The overall impact on health was substantial. Before their first consultation, three quarters of patients needed analgesics, half used topical creams or ointments, and one in eight used a walking stick. Most of these impact measures were, however, unrelated to the degree of radiographic change, though use of a walking stick was increased in those with the most severe damage. Health status, as judged by the SF-36, was also impaired for measures of physical function and pain, but the impact on the "mental health", "general health", and "vitality" dimensions was small. There was a weak relation between the SF-36 scores and radiographic change, with many domains unrelated to the severity of radiographic damage.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to show the therapeutic impact and pattern of impairment in health status resulting from hip pain at the time of first presentation to the healthcare services. Unlike many regional pain syndromes seen in primary care, such as back pain, hip pain does not impact on wider aspects of quality of life, such as general health status, mental health, or vitality. Furthermore, any impact of hip pain in this group is not markedly influenced by the degree of structural damage. Further follow up is required to determine whether such damage influences the persistence of any adverse impact.

Functional food properties of non-digestible oligosaccharides: a consensus report from the ENDO project (DGXII AIRII-CT94-1095)

This paper results from the final phase of the ENDO project (DGXII AIRII-CT94-1095), a European Commission-funded project on non-digestible oligosaccharides (NDO). All participants in the programme met to perform a consensus exercise on the possible functional food properties of NDO. Topics studied during the project (including a workshop on probiotics and prebiotics) and related aspects, for which considerable evidence has been generated recently, were evaluated on the basis of existing published scientific evidence. There was a general consensus that: (1) there is strong evidence for a prebiotic effect of NDO in human subjects. A prebiotic effect was defined as a food-induced increase in numbers and/or activity predominantly of bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria in the human large intestine; (2) there is strong evidence for the impact that NDO have on bowel habit; (3) there is promising evidence that consumption of inulin-type fructans may result in increased Ca absorption in man; (4) there are preliminary indications that inulin-type fructans interact with the functioning of lipid metabolism; (5) there is preliminary evidence in experimental animals of a preventive effect against colon cancer. Human nutrition studies are needed to substantiate these findings. It was concluded that the nutritional properties of NDO may prove to be a key issue in nutritional research in the future.

Serum IgG antibodies to Helicobacter pylori in patients with recurrent aphthous stomatitis and other oral disorders

OBJECTIVES

To compare the frequency of serum anti-Helicobacter pylori IgG antibodies in patients with recurrent aphthous stomatitis with patients with other oral ulcerative and nonulcerative disorders.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective study of serum IgG antibodies to H. pylori in 75 patients with recurrent aphthous ulcers, 15 patients with other oral ulcerative disorders, 41 patients with other oral mucosal lesions, 27 patients with oral dysaesthesia, and 25 healthy control patients without oral lesions.

RESULTS

The frequency of anti-H, pylori seropositivity was not significantly greater in patients with recurrent aphthous stomatitis (30.6%) compared with patients with other ulcerated oral mucosal lesions (33.0%) and controls (24%).

CONCLUSIONS

Helicobacter pylori does not appear to be of etiologic significance in the development of recurrent aphthous stomatitis.

More pain, more tender points: is fibromyalgia just one end of a continuous spectrum?

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the hypothesis that fibromyalgia represents one end of a spectrum in which there is a more general association between musculoskeletal pain and tender points.

METHODS

The subjects studied were 177 individuals selected from a population based screening survey for musculoskeletal pain. All subjects completed a pain mannikin and were examined for the presence of tender points at the nine American College of Rheumatology bilateral sites.

RESULTS

There were moderately strong associations (odds ratios range 1.3-3.1) between the reported presence of pain in a body segment and the presence of a tender point within that segment. Further, there was evidence of a trend of increasing number of tender points with increasing number of painful segments. The reporting of non-specific pain, aching, or stiffness, was also associated with high tender point counts.

CONCLUSION

This study illustrates that the association between tender points and pain is not restricted to the clinically defined subgroup with chronic widespread pain. Given that widespread pain and tender points have previously been linked with distress, this might reflect lesser degrees, or earlier phases of the somatisation of distress.

Temporal change in diagnostic criteria as a cause of the increase of malignant melanoma over time is unlikely

To assess whether the increase in malignant melanoma incidence could be due, at least in part, to changes in histological criteria of malignancy, pathologists in Australia, France, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the United States and the USSR reviewed diagnoses of 50 consecutive pigmented naevi (40 junctional and compound; 10 intradermal) and 20 consecutive malignant melanomas made in each participating centre around 1930, around 1955 and around 1980. Collaborating pathologists re-read the material, 2,665 cases in all, either from the original slide (82%) or from a recut block (17%), gave their diagnosis and indicated whether the lesion was benign (B), dubious benign (DB), dubious malignant (DM) or malignant (M). As the distribution of review diagnoses was much the same whether the original slide or one made from a recut block was read, the material was pooled. Overall, 2.8% of cases originally reported as B/DB were reviewed as DM/M, while 4.4% of the DM/M diagnoses were held to be B/DB. The shifts between categories were greatest around 1955 and least around 1980, suggesting increasing uniformity of interpretation. All available blocks were recut and sections sent to IARC for review: 1.7% (22) of 1293 B/DB diagnoses were considered to be DM/M and 3.3% (18) of 551 DM/M diagnoses were considered to have been B/DB. The consistently low frequency of shift in diagnostic category, whether the material was reviewed in the collaborating laboratories or by one pathologist at IARC, in a study designed to give maximum attention to those lesions--the junctional and compound naevi--in which a change in opinion as to malignancy would be most likely to arise, suggests that pathologists, irrespective of geographical location, are using common criteria. These findings argue against changes in histological interpretation as being responsible for more than a small portion of the continuous increase of some 3% to 8% per annum observed in malignant melanoma incidence. Other explanations, such as an increase in the frequency or potential for malignant transformation of precursor lesions, must be sought. The anatomical distribution of the malignant melanomas examined followed the usual site pattern by sex, and their thickness was observed to decrease over the period of the study in most centres.