Search

Objective: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flares are associated with increased damage and decreased health-related quality of life. We hypothesized that there is discordance between physicians' and patients' views of SLE flare. In this study, we aimed to explore patient and physician descriptions of SLE flares., Methods: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using in-depth interviews with a purposeful sample of patients with SLE (who met 1997 American College of Rheumatology or Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics criteria) and practicing rheumatologists. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using applied thematic analysis., Results: Forty-two patient participants with SLE, representing a range of SLE activity, completed interviews. The majority described flare symptoms as joint pain, fatigue, and skin issues lasting several days. Few included objective signs or laboratory measures, when available, as features of flare. We interviewed 13 rheumatologists from 10 academic and 3 community settings. The majority defined flare as increased or worsening SLE disease activity, with slightly more than half requiring objective findings. Around half of the rheumatologists included fatigue, pain, or other patient-reported symptoms., Conclusion: Patients and physicians described flare differently. Participants with SLE perceived flares as several days of fatigue, pain, and skin issues. Providers defined flares as periods of increased clinical SLE activity. Our findings suggest the current definition of flare may be insufficient to integrate both perceptions. Further study is needed to understand the pathophysiology of patient flares and the best way to incorporate patients' perspectives into clinical assessments., (Copyright © 2024 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

Objective: We evaluated the influence of triage assessments by extended role practitioners (ERP) on improving timeliness of rheumatology consultations for patients with suspected inflammatory arthritis (IA) or systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARD)., Methods: Rheumatologists reviewed primary care providers' referrals and identified patients with inadequate referral information, so that a decision about priority could not be made. Patients were assessed by an ERP to identify those with IA/SARD requiring an expedited rheumatologist consult. The time from referral to the first consultation was determined comparing patients who were expedited to those who were not, and to similar patients in a usual care control group identified through retrospective chart review., Results: Seven rheumatologists from 5 communities participated in the study. Among 177 patients who received an ERP triage assessment, 75 patients were expedited and 102 were not. Expedited patients had a significantly shorter median (interquartile range) wait time to rheumatologist consult: 37.0 (24.5-55.5) days compared to non-expedited patients [105 (71.0-135.0) days] and controls [58.0 (24.0-104.0) days]. Accuracy comparing the ERP identification of IA/SARD to that of the rheumatologists was fair (κ 0.39, 95% CI 0.25-0.53)., Conclusion: Patients triaged and expedited by ERP experienced shorter wait times compared to usual care; however, some patients with IA/SARD were missed and waited longer. Our findings suggest that ERP working in a triage role can improve access to care for those patients correctly identified with IA/SARD. Further research needs to identify an ongoing ERP educational process to ensure the success of the model.

Objective: Many factors influence a patient's preference in engaging in shared decision making (SDM). Several training programs have been developed for teaching SDM to physicians, but none of them focused on the patients' preferences. We developed an SDM training program for rheumatologists with a specific focus on patients' preferences and assessed its effects., Methods: A training program was developed, pilot tested, and given to 30 rheumatologists. Immediately after the training and 10 weeks later, rheumatologists were asked to complete a questionnaire to evaluate the training. Patients were asked before and after the training to complete a questionnaire on patient satisfaction., Results: Ten weeks after the training, 57% of the rheumatologists felt they were capable of estimating the need of patients to engage in SDM, 62% felt their communication skills had improved, and 33% reported they engaged more in SDM. Up to 268 patients were included. Overall, patient satisfaction was high, but there were no statistically significant differences in patient satisfaction before and after the training., Conclusion: The training was received well by the participating rheumatologists. Even in a population of rheumatologists that communicates well, 62% reported improvement. The training program increased awareness about the principles of SDM in patients and physicians, and improved physicians' communicative skills, but did not lead to further improvement in patients' satisfaction, which was already high.

Objective: To evaluate agreement of the updated European League Against Rheumatism and European Scleroderma Trials and Research group (EUSTAR) recommendations for treatment of systemic sclerosis (SSc) among international experts. In addition, to determine factors that might influence agreement., Methods: Level of agreement (10-point scale: 0 = not at all, 10 = completely agree) and local drug availability (yes/no) were assessed using an online survey. The Web link to the survey was shared with 481 unique e-mail addresses and SSc networks (Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium, Australian Scleroderma Interest Group, International Systemic Sclerosis Inception Cohort). Level of agreement was compared between subgroups stratified for participant characteristics., Results: In total, 263 experts participated, of whom n = 209 (79%) completed each single item. The majority were rheumatologists (n = 200, 76%) working in Europe (n = 185; 71%); 59% (n = 156) were EUSTAR members; and 57% (n = 151) had > 10 years of clinical experience. Overall level of agreement was high (mean 8.0, SD 2.5). The 3 highest mean agreements included (1) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for scleroderma renal crisis (9.2, SD 2.1); (2) blood pressure control in SSc-patients treated with corticosteroids (9.0, SD 2.2); (3) proton pump inhibitors to prevent reflux complications (9.0, SD 2.2). The 3 lowest mean agreements included (1) fluoxetine for Raynaud phenomenon (RP; 4.6, SD 2.8); (2) hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for severe SSc (7.1, SD 2.9); (3) phosphodiesterase inhibitors 5 for RP (7.3, SD 2.7). Agreement differed between Europe and non-Europe for the use of iloprost, bosentan, methotrexate, HSCT, and cyclophosphamide. Treatment availability could partially explain differential agreement for iloprost, bosentan, and HSCT., Conclusion: In general, worldwide expert agreement on updated recommendations for treatment of SSc is high, supporting their value. Differences in agreement are partially explained by geographical area and treatment availability.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized cancer therapy by blocking inhibitory pathways of the immune system to fight cancer cells. Their use is often limited by the development of autoimmune toxicities, which can affect multiple organ systems and are referred to as immune-related adverse events (irAE). Among these are rheumatologic irAE, including inflammatory arthritis, myositis, vasculitis, and others. Rheumatologic irAE seem to be different from irAE in other organs and from traditional autoimmune diseases in that they can occur early or have delayed onset, and can persist chronically, even after cancer therapy is terminated. Because immune checkpoint inhibitors are increasingly used for many types of cancer, it is important for oncologists and rheumatologists to recognize and manage toxicities early. In this review, we discuss currently approved immune checkpoint inhibitors and their mechanisms of action and systemic toxicities, with a focus on the management and effect on further cancer therapy of rheumatic irAE.

Objective: Given the complexity and heterogeneity of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), high-performing classification criteria are critical to advancing research and clinical care. A collaborative effort by the European League Against Rheumatism and the American College of Rheumatology was undertaken to generate candidate criteria, and then to reduce them to a smaller set. The objective of the current study was to select a set of criteria that maximizes the likelihood of accurate classification of SLE, particularly early disease., Methods: An independent panel of international SLE experts and the SLE classification criteria steering committee (conducting SLE research in Canada, Mexico, United States, Austria, Germany, Greece, France, Italy, and Spain) ranked 43 candidate criteria. A consensus meeting using nominal group technique (NGT) was conducted to reduce the list of criteria for consideration., Results: The expert panel NGT exercise reduced the candidate criteria for SLE classification from 43 to 21. The panel distinguished potential "entry criteria," which would be required for classification, from potential "additive criteria." Potential entry criteria were antinuclear antibody (ANA) ≥ 1:80 (HEp-2 immunofluorescence), and low C3 and/or low C4. The use of low complement as an entry criterion was considered potentially useful in cases with negative ANA. Potential additive criteria included lupus nephritis by renal biopsy, autoantibodies, cytopenias, acute and chronic cutaneous lupus, alopecia, arthritis, serositis, oral mucosal lesions, central nervous system manifestations, and fever., Conclusion: The NGT exercise resulted in 21 candidate SLE classification criteria. The next phases of SLE classification criteria development will require refinement of criteria definitions, evaluation of the ability to cluster criteria into domains, and evaluation of weighting of criteria.

(Gilles Boire): It was both a pleasure and an honor to present the 2019 Dunlop-Dottridge Lecture. My co-author and I will now discuss benefits and pitfalls of biomarkers developed through emerging techniques, evaluated through the experiential perspective of a seasoned clinician, as they apply to the quest for biomarker identification in rheumatic diseases.

Objective: To determine barriers and facilitators to the uptake of findings from the Research in Arthritis in Canadian Children emphasizing Outcomes (ReACCh-Out) study into clinical care by pediatric rheumatologists (PR) and allied health professionals (AHP) caring for children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) in Canada., Methods: PR and AHP participated in this qualitative study through telephone interviews. Interview guides were developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework and focused on the use of information from the ReACCh-Out study in the practice of counseling patients and families. A directed content analysis approach was used for coding., Results: Nineteen interviews (8 PR and 11 AHP) were completed. All PR had knowledge of the ReACCh-Out study. Three major themes were identified: (1) both groups are motivated to use information from research in clinical care; (2) volume and emotional effect of information on families are barriers; and (3) specific timepoints in care trigger providing this information. AHP had less knowledge of the ReACCh-Out study, did not feel it was their primary role to provide this information, and have a desire for more opportunity to participate in academic forums related to research., Conclusion: We have described a comprehensive overview of the barriers and facilitators perceived by healthcare providers in the translation of knowledge from JIA research into use in clinical practice. These findings provide a foundation for the development of knowledge translation strategies in the care of children with JIA and other rheumatic diseases.

Objective: To evaluate the diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in Canada., Methods: A 63-question electronic survey was developed with the Canadian Rheumatology Association and others. Descriptive analyses of responses were performed., Results: Survey respondents (n = 175) reported varying practices in the diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of SLE. Performance of laboratory investigations for diagnosis and monitoring varied, with 78% of responders performing them at least every 6 months. Validated measures of SLE disease activity and damage were not commonly used. Most common first-line agents besides steroids for induction therapy for class III or IV lupus nephritis included intravenous cyclophosphamide and mycophenolate mofetil. Antimalarial use was common, with 96% of respondents using these in active skin disease. Over 60% of respondents indicated that 80-100% of their patients were taking antimalarials, while another 25% indicated they used these drugs in up to 80% of their patients. There were 71% of responders who reported completing frequent (6-12 mos) ophthalmology screening in patients taking antimalarials. Biologics were infrequently used. Responders were more likely to stop azathioprine and chloroquine than hydroxychloroquine in pregnant patients with SLE. Other aspects of routine care including vaccination and cardiovascular risk management varied considerably. The majority (80%) agreed that a dedicated multidisciplinary care team would improve SLE care., Conclusion: Considerable practice variation in SLE management was noted. This may help inform future recommendations for the diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of SLE in Canada.

Objective: In this qualitative study we analyzed the (1) influence of age, comorbidity, and frailty on management goals in elderly patients with RA; (2) experiences of rheumatologists regarding the use of the Disease Activity Score at 28 joints (DAS28) to monitor disease activity; and (3) differences in management strategies in elderly patients with RA compared to their younger counterparts., Methods: Rheumatologists were purposively sampled for a semistructured interview. Two readers independently read and coded the interview transcripts. Important concepts were taxonomically categorized and combined in overarching themes by using NVivo 11 software., Results: Seventeen rheumatologists (mean age 44.8 yrs, SD 7.7 yrs; 29% male) from 9 medical centers were interviewed. Preserving an acceptable level of functioning was the most important management goal in patients ≥ 80 years and in patients with high levels of comorbidity and frailty. The DAS28 score less frequently steered the management strategy, because rheumatologists commented that comorbidity and an age-related erythrocyte sedimentation rate elevation might distort the DAS28 score. Instead, management of elderly patients highly depended on comorbidity, frailty, and their subsequent effects such as cognitive and physical decline, dependency, and polypharmacy. Presence of 1 or more of these factors frequently resulted in a less future-oriented management approach with less emphasis on the maximal prevention of joint erosions., Conclusion: The treat-to-target model is not automatically adopted in the elderly patient population. Future evidence-based RA management recommendations for elderly patients with RA are needed and should account for factors such as comorbidity and frailty.

Objective: To assess the implementation of European recommendations for use of TNF inhibitors for spondyloarthritis (SpA), rheumatologists' level of knowledge of and adherence to the recommendations, and potential barriers to the application of recommendations., Methods: We conducted a retrospective study among 42 rheumatologists who initiated a first subcutaneous TNF inhibitor for SpA in 2013 or 2014. Thirty items from national and international recommendations were separated into 3 domains: indication, pretherapeutic monitoring, and management under TNF inhibitors. A standardized data collection procedure was used to gather data from medical files to assess the application of each recommendation. Questionnaires assessing the knowledge, level of adherence to each recommendation, and potential barriers to their implementation were sent to rheumatologists., Results: Rheumatologists applied a mean of 60% of items from domains A and B, but less than 50% from domain C items. Recommendations regarding the search for previous infection and the prevention of future infections were the ones most often applied. However, < 60% of rheumatologists assessed cancer and other diseases before TNF inhibitor initiation. More than 95% of rheumatologists knew of the recommendations and had a high level of adherence. Lack of time, difficulties accessing specialized consultations, and lack of flexibility in the recommendations explained rheumatologists' difficulties in applying the recommendations., Conclusion: Despite high levels of knowledge of, and adherence to, recommendations for using TNF inhibitors for SpA, rheumatologists' application was limited because of a lack of human and material resources.

Objective: The aim of our study was to examine why real-world practices and attitudes regarding quantitative measurements of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have received limited attention., Methods: An e-mail survey asked US rheumatologists to self-report on their use of quantitative measurements (metric)., Results: Among 439 respondents, metric rheumatologists (58%) were more likely to be in group practice and to use tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. The quantitative tools most commonly used were the Health Assessment Questionnaire (35.5%) and the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (27.1%). Reasons for not measuring included time needed and electronic availability. Based on simulated case scenarios, providing more quantitative information increased the likelihood that a patient would change to a different disease-modifying antirheumatic drug or biologic., Conclusion: Routine use of quantitative measurement for patients in the United States with RA is increasing over time but remains low.