Search

Objective: To investigate and compare clinical features and US signs of inflammation in joints and entheses in patients with psoriasis with and without musculoskeletal pain, and the additional value of US in classification of PsA. Furthermore, to explore the association between such findings and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and the performance of screening-questionnaires for identifying patients with PsA., Methods: Patients with psoriasis (n = 126) recruited from a nationwide survey were evaluated at one of four rheumatology departments. The evaluation included clinical examination, laboratory tests, radiography, greyscale and colour Doppler US of 48 joints and 12 entheses, PROs, and four screening questionnaires for PsA. Patients were classified with Classification for PsA (CASPAR), US-modified CASPAR, and US-only criteria., Results: When subgroups of self-reported pain (63%), no pain (29%) and diagnosed PsA (9%) were compared, patients with pain had higher tenderness-related clinical scores (tender joints, entheses and FM points) and US greyscale sum-scores, compared with 'no pain' patients. PROs were negligibly moderately correlated with pain-related clinical scores (Spearman's rho = 0.11-0.59, all patients), and negligibly weakly with US sum-scores (rho = 0.01-0.34). More patients could be classified as PsA when US synovitis/enthesitis was included as an entry criterion (US-modified CASPAR, 66% of all patients) compared with conventional CASPAR (35%) or US-only criteria (52%). Sensitivities of screening questionnaires were low for fulfilment of CASPAR (0.23-0.66), US-modified CASPAR (0.17-0.57), and US-only (0.20-0.57) criteria., Conclusion: Self-reported pain in psoriasis is related to US inflammation. US-modified CASPAR criteria identified almost twice as many patients as conventional CASPAR criteria. Screening questionnaires showed limited value., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on treat-to-target strategies (disease activity, remission rates) and access to physical consultations in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease, as well as to explore characteristics of patients with/without physical consultations in the clinic and the impact of early vs established disease., Methods: Patients with RA, PsA or axial SpA (axSpA) prospectively followed in the nationwide DANBIO registry answered online questionnaires and reported patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in June and November 2020. Patient characteristics, disease activity and physical consultations in the clinic before and during the pandemic were identified in DANBIO [all patients and subgroups with early disease (disease duration ≤2 years)]. In individual patients, changes in PROs before and during the pandemic were calculated. Characteristics of patients with/without physical consultations were described (age, gender, education level, comorbidities, disease duration, treatment)., Results: We included 7836 patients (22% of eligible patients), 12% of which had early disease. PROs were stable before and during the pandemic, with median changes approximating zero, as well as in patients with early disease. Remission rates were stable. The relative decrease in the number of patients with physical consultations was 21-72%, which was highest in axSpA. Characteristics of patients with/without physical consultations were similar. Self-reported satisfaction with treatment options and access was >70%; the preferred contact form was physical consultation (66%)., Conclusion: In this nationwide study performed during the first 8 months of the pandemic, patient satisfaction was high and the PROs and remission rates remained stable despite the remarkable reduction in physical consultations, as well as in patients with early disease. Characteristics of patients with/without physical consultations appeared similar., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To study if clinical, radiographic and MRI markers can predict MRI and radiographic damage progression and achievement of stringent remission in patients with established RA in clinical remission followed by a targeted treatment strategy., Methods: RA patients (DAS28-CRP <3.2, no swollen joints) receiving conventional synthetic DMARDs were randomized to conventional or MRI-targeted treat-to-target strategies with predefined algorithmic treatment escalations. Potentially predictive baseline variables were tested in multivariate logistic regression analyses., Results: In the 171 patients included, baseline MRI osteitis independently predicted progression in MRI erosion [odds ratio (OR) 1.13 (95% CI 1.06, 1.22)], joint space narrowing [OR 1.15 (95% CI 1.07, 1.24)] and combined damage [OR 1.23 (95% CI 1.13, 1.37)], while tenosynovitis independently predicted MRI erosion progression [OR 1.13 (95% CI 1.03, 1.25)]. A predictor of radiographic erosion progression was age, while gender predicted progression in joint space narrowing. Following an MRI treat-to-target strategy predicted stringent remission across all remission definitions: Clinical Disease Activity Index remission OR 2.94 (95% CI 1.25, 7.52), Simplified Disease Activity Index remission OR 2.50 (95% CI 1.01, 6.66), ACR/EULAR Boolean remission OR 5.47 (95% CI 2.33, 14.13). Similarly, low tender joint count and low patient visual analogue scale pain and global independently predicted achievement of more stringent remission., Conclusion: Baseline MRI osteitis and tenosynovitis were independent predictors of 2 year MRI damage progression in RA patients in clinical remission, while independent predictors of radiographic damage progression were age and gender. Following an MRI treat-to-target strategy, low scores of patient-reported outcomes and low tender joint count predicted achievement of stringent remission., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov), NCT01656278., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To investigate the diagnostic utility of different combinations of SI joint MRI lesions for differentiating patients with axial SpA (axSpA) from other conditions with and without buttock/pelvic pain., Methods: A prospective cross-sectional study included patients with axSpA (n = 41), patients with lumbar disc herniation (n = 25), women with (n = 46) and without (n = 14) post-partum (birth within 4-16 months) buttock/pelvic pain and cleaning assistants (n = 26), long-distance runners (n = 23) and healthy men (n = 29) without pain. Two independent readers assessed SI joint MRI lesions according to the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada MRI definitions and pre-defined MRI lesion combinations with bone marrow oedema (BME) and fat lesions (FAT), respectively. Statistical analyses included the proportion of participants with scores above certain thresholds, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and likelihood ratios., Results: BME adjacent to the joint space (BME@joint space) was most frequent in axSpA (63.4%), followed by women with post-partum pain (43.5%), but was present in nearly all groups. BME adjacent to fat lesions (BME@FAT) and BME adjacent to erosions (BME@erosion) were only present in axSpA patients and in women with post-partum pain, but scores ≥3 and ≥4, respectively, were only seen in axSpA patients. FAT@erosion was exclusively recorded in axSpA patients. FAT@joint space and FAT@sclerosis were present in most groups, but with higher scores in the axSpA group., Conclusion: BME@joint space and FAT@joint space were frequent in axSpA but also in other conditions, reducing the diagnostic utility. FAT@erosion, and BME@FAT, BME@erosion and FAT@sclerosis above certain thresholds, were exclusively seen in axSpA patients and may thus have diagnostic utility in the differentiation of axSpA from other conditions., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To estimate the prevalence of Danish RA patients currently on biologic monotherapy and compare the effectiveness and drug adherence of biologic therapies applied as monotherapy., Methods: All RA patients registered in the Danish biologics database (DANBIO) as receiving biologic DMARD (bDMARD) treatment as monotherapy without concomitant conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) during the study period 1 May, 2011 through 30 April 2013 were eligible for inclusion. All patient files were checked to ensure that they were in accordance with the treatment registration in DANBIO. Descriptive statistics for prevalence, effectiveness and drug adherence of bDMARD monotherapy were calculated., Results: Of the 775 patients on bDMARD monotherapy, adalimumab (21.3%), etanercept (36.6%) and tocilizumab (15.3%) were the most prevalent biologic agents administered. At the 6-month follow-up, the overall crude clinical disease activity index remission rate in patients still on a biologic drug was 22%, the 28-joint DAS remission rate was 41% and the response rate of those with a 50% improvement in ACR criteria was 28%. At the 6-month follow-up, the drug adherence rates were similar for the different bDMARDs, with the exception of infliximab, which had significantly poorer drug adherence (P < 0.001). The overall drug adherence (except for infliximab) was approximately 70% after 2 years., Conclusion: Nearly one in five (19%) biologic treatments for RA was prescribed in Denmark as monotherapy, of which 70% were on monotherapy from bio-initiation and 30% were on monotherapy after cessation of a concomitant csDMARD. Acceptable drug adherence and remission rates were achieved with bDMARDs. With the exception of infliximab, no statistically significant differences were observed between anti-TNFs and biologics with other modes of action., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)