Search

Aims : Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), likely related to underlying inflammation. We examined VTE risk associated with two commonly used immunomodulators in RA patients, methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine. Methods and Results : Using U.S. Medicare claims data (2008-2017), we identified RA patients (≥65 years) who initiated methotrexate or hydroxychloroquine without prior use of any immunomodulators. The primary outcome was VTE, a composite of pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Secondary outcomes included PE, DVT, and all-cause mortality. After 1:1 propensity score matching for confounding control, we identified 26,534 pairs of methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine initiators (mean (SD) age 74 (7) years; 79% female). During a total of 56,686 person-years of follow-up, 208 methotrexate and 83 hydroxychloroquine initiators developed VTE. The incidence rate of VTE was higher among methotrexate initiators (6.94/1,000 person-years) than hydroxychloroquine initiators (3.11/1,000 person-years) with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.26 (95%CI 1.75, 2.91). Methotrexate initiators had a greater risk of PE (HR 3.30, 95%CI 2.28, 4.77) and DVT (HR 1.53, 95%CI 1.07, 2.19) than hydroxychloroquine initiators. All-cause mortality was similar between the two groups (HR 0.91, 95%CI 0.83, 1.00). Conclusion : In this large real-world cohort of older RA patients, treatment with methotrexate was associated with a 2-fold increased risk of VTE relative to hydroxychloroquine, although all-cause mortality was similar. Future experimental studies with non-user control groups are needed to determine the causal relationships between the study drugs and VTE and whether methotrexate elevates or hydroxychloroquine reduces the risk of VTE.

Objective Guidelines for methotrexate (MTX) use in rheumatic disease may not be feasible for physicians practicing in the least developed countries. We aimed to understand the experiences of MTX prescribers relating to MTX use for rheumatic disease in African countries to inform the development of culturally and geographically appropriate recommendations. Methods African physicians who self‐identified as MTX prescribers from countries classified as having a low versus a medium or high Human Development Index (L‐HDI versus MH‐HDI) participated in semistructured interviews between August 2016 and September 2017. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded thematically, and stratified by HDI. Results Physicians (23 rheumatologists; six internists) from 29 African countries were interviewed (15 L‐HDI; 14 MH‐HDI). Identified barriers to MTX use included inconsistent MTX supply (reported by 87% L‐HDI versus 43% MH‐HDI), compounded by financial restrictions (reported by 93% L‐HDI versus 64% MH‐HDI), patient hesitancy based partly on cultural beliefs and societal roles (reported by 71%), few prescribers (reported by 33%), prevalent infections (especially viral hepatitis, tuberculosis, and human immunodeficiency virus), and both availability and cost of monitoring tests. MTX pretreatment evaluation and starting and maximal doses were similar between L‐HDI countries and MH‐HDI countries. Conclusion The challenges of treating rheumatic disease in African countries include unreliable drug availability and cost, limited subspecialists, and patient beliefs. Adapting recommendations for MTX use in the context of prevalent endemic infections; ensuring safe but feasible MTX monitoring strategies, enhanced access to stable drug supply, and specialized rheumatology care; and improving patient education are key to reducing the burden of rheumatic diseases in L‐HDI countries.

Objective Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are 1.5 times more likely to develop cardiovascular disease (CVD) attributed to chronic inflammation. A decrease in inflammation in patients with RA is associated with increased low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. This study was undertaken to prospectively evaluate the changes in lipid levels among RA patients experiencing changes in inflammation and determine the association with concomitant temporal patterns in markers of myocardial injury. Methods A total of 196 patients were evaluated in a longitudinal RA cohort, with blood samples and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels measured annually. Patients were stratified based on whether they experienced either a significant increase in inflammation (an increase in hsCRP of ≥10 mg/liter between any 2 time points 1 year apart; designated the increased inflammation cohort [n = 103]) or decrease in inflammation (a decrease in hsCRP of ≥10 mg/liter between any 2 time points 1 year apart; designated the decreased inflammation cohort [n = 93]). Routine and advanced lipids, markers of inflammation (interleukin-6, hsCRP, soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor II), and markers of subclinical myocardial injury (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T [hs-cTnT], N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide) were measured. Results Among the patients in the increased inflammation cohort, the mean age was 59 years, 81% were women, and the mean RA disease duration was 17.9 years. The average increase in hsCRP levels was 36 mg/liter, and this increase was associated with significant reductions in LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, total cholesterol, apolipoprotein (Apo B), and Apo A-I levels. In the increased inflammation cohort at baseline, 45.6% of patients (47 of 103) had detectable circulating hs-cTnT, which further increased during inflammation (P = 0.02). In the decreased inflammation cohort, hs-cTnT levels remained stable despite a reduction in inflammation over follow-up. In both cohorts, hs-cTnT levels were associated with the overall estimated risk of CVD. Conclusion Among RA patients who experienced an increase in inflammation, a significant decrease in routinely measured lipids, including LDL cholesterol, and an increase in markers of subclinical myocardial injury were observed. These findings highlight the divergence in biomarkers of CVD risk and suggest a role in future studies examining the benefit of including hs-cTnT for CVD risk stratification in RA.

Objective We aimed to determine the real-world prevalence and investigate risk factors for rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-related lung disease on chest computed tomography (CT) imaging. We also investigated the impact of RA-related lung disease on mortality. Methods We studied chest CT imaging abnormalities among RA patients. We determined the presence and type of abnormalities using the chest CT imaging radiologic report. RA-related lung disease was defined as interstitial lung disease (ILD), bronchiectasis, or pleural disease. We examined whether demographics and RA characteristics were associated with RA-related lung disease using logistic regression. RA-related lung disease and mortality was described using survival curves and Cox regression. Results We analyzed 190 patients who had chest CT imaging performed for clinical indications. Mean age was 64.2 years (SD 11.8), 80.0% were female, and 75.3% were seropositive. RA-related lung disease was detected in 54 patients (28.4%); 30 (15.8%) had ILD, 27 (14.2%) had bronchiectasis, and 18 (9.5%) had pleural disease. RA-related lung disease was reported in both seropositive and seronegative RA (28.7% vs. 27.7%, p = 1.00). Male sex (OR 2.62, 95%CI 1.17–5.88) and current methotrexate use (OR 2.73, 95%CI 1.27–5.61 vs. not current) were associated with RA-related lung disease. Twenty-four (44.4%) patients with RA-related lung disease died during mean 7.0 years of follow-up. RA-related lung disease had HR of 5.35 (95%CI 0.72–39.9) for mortality compared to normal chest CT. Conclusions In this real-world study, RA-related lung disease was commonly detected on chest CT imaging regardless of RA serostatus. RA-related lung disease had high mortality, emphasizing the importance in close monitoring of these patients.

Most recommendations for the use of methotrexate (MTX) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are issued by developed countries. It is unknown whether they are relevant globally. We reviewed existing recommendations on the use of MTX for the treatment of RA and summarized areas of agreement that could be relevant for least developed countries (LDCs).Electronic databases and registries were searched for recommendations on MTX use in RA, duplicates were eliminated, and the most updated version adopted when there were several versions on the same recommendation. Reviewers used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument for study quality assessment. Similarities and discrepancies of recommendations are reported.After deduplication, 1693 unique citations were found; 25 full texts were screened and 12 included in the narrative synthesis. Average scores for the AGREE II domains ranged from 33.3 to 83.3%. Recommendations targeted rheumatologists and health care providers involved in RA care. Most covered some but not all of the following areas: baseline "pre-MTX" assessment (7/12;58%), prescription of MTX (10/12;83.3%), management of MTX side effects (6/12;50%), and special considerations (e.g., peri-operative management) (8/12; 66.7%). Recommendations agreed on baseline tests prior to starting MTX, monitoring, and need for folic acid supplementation. These aspects can serve as the foundation for the development of MTX recommendations relevant to LDCs. Recommendations disagreed on the MTX starting dose, optimal route, titration, and intervals to monitor toxicity.Existing recommendations do not uniformly address all aspects related to the use of MTX and disagree in relevant aspects of MTX use. Adaptations to these recommendations are needed to facilitate their implementation in LDCs. Key Points • This paper summarizes current recommendations on the use of methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. • Areas of agreement between recommendations include the following: pre-methotrexate patient assessment, need for folic acid supplementation, and toxicity monitoring. • Areas of disagreement relate to methotrexate starting and maximal dose, titration, and frequency of assessments.

Objective Phase III clinical trials of the tumour necrosis factor inhibitors SB4, SB2, and SB5 (biosimilars to etanercept, infliximab, and adalimumab, respectively) have demonstrated efficacy in moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Data from these trials were used to identify baseline characteristics associated with radiographic progression and to build a matrix risk model for its prediction. Methods Patients with radiographic progression and baseline demographic and disease characteristic data were pooled across the 3 phase III studies of each biosimilar and its reference product. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were evaluated for their relationship with radiographic progression (1-year mean change in mTSS > 0); 3 factors were selected based on strongest Pearson’s correlation coefficient with the change in modified Total Sharp Score. Univariate logistic regression was performed to assess the association between each baseline factor and the rate of radiographic progression, with subsequent matrix model development performed using multivariate logistic regression. Results A total of 1371 patients were included in the analysis, with a radiographic progression rate of 27.4%. The 3 baseline predictors of radiographic progression, based on Pearson’s correlation coefficient, were 28 swollen joint count (SJC28), C-reactive protein (CRP), and physician global assessment (PhGA). A matrix model showed that the predicted risk of radiographic progression was higher with the increased level of SJC28, CRP, and PhGA (P Conclusions In this pooled analysis of phase III clinical trial data of biosimilars for RA, identifiable baseline factors (SJC28, CRP, and PhGA) associated with radiographic progression were similar to those described in prior studies. Even though radiographic progression was minimal, a small number of patients who have increased SJC28, CRP, and PhGA at baseline should be closely monitored and follow treat-to-target approach. Clinical trial registration numbers EudraCT 2012-005026-30. Registered 30 April 2013, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2012-005026-30/results EudraCT 2012-005733-37. Registered 10 July 2013, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2012-005733-37/results EudraCT 2013-005013-13. Registered 01 April 2014, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2013-005013-13/results

Objective Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other systemic rheumatic diseases (SRDs) are at increased risk of developing herpes zoster (HZ). Zoster recombinant adjuvanted (ZRA) is a recombinant vaccine approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2018. Concern has been raised that the ZRA may trigger disease flares in rheumatology patients who are immunocompromised. We investigated the impact of the ZRA vaccine in patients with RA and SRD and measured the incidence of flares and side effects. Methods A flare was defined as occurring within 12 weeks of vaccine administration by either 1) documentation of RA flare in office notes, telephone encounter, or patient portal communication or 2) new or increased dose of corticosteroids. Results We identified 403 patients (239 patients with RA and 164 patients with SRD) who received the ZRA vaccine from February 1, 2018, to February 1, 2019. We measured a 6.7% (n = 27) incidence of flare. Side effects occurred in 12.7% (n = 51) of patients. All flares and side effects were regarded as mild. Three cases of HZ were reported as occurring 2, 10, and 11 months after the vaccination. Conclusion In 403 patients who received the ZRA vaccine, the incidence of disease flares was 7% or less and that of side effects was 13% or less, both of which are less than the incidence rates observed in the pivotal trials.

OBJECTIVE Seropositivity for anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)/rheumatoid factor (RF) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with increased overall mortality; however, the association between antibody titers and mortality is not well established. Investigating relationships between antibody titers and mortality may clarify their role in RA pathogenesis. This study was undertaken to evaluate the association of antibody titers with mortality and its modification by disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). METHODS Eligible patients with established RA were identified through administrative claims data linked to laboratory results (2005-2016). Patients were categorized by positivity status for ACPA, RF, or both. Patients were further divided into groups by autoantibody titers. DMARD-exposed patients were categorized into biologic DMARD (bDMARD) and conventional DMARD (cDMARD) subcohorts. Crude mortality rates/1,000 patient-years and Kaplan-Meier curves were compared between antibody categories. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression and sensitivity (propensity-matched patients) analyses were conducted. RESULTS Overall, 53,849 and 79,926 patients had evaluable ACPA and RF status, respectively. For both autoantibodies, mortality rates were significantly higher in seropositive versus seronegative patients (risk increase of 48.0% and 44.0% in ACPA- and RF-positive patients, respectively; P < 0.001 each). Mortality rates were greatest in patients with higher versus lower autoantibody titers (ACPA hazard ratio [HR] 1.60 [95% confidence interval (95% CI]) 1.45-1.76]; RF HR 1.78 [95% CI 1.66-1.91]). In cDMARD-exposed patients, HRs were higher in seropositive versus seronegative cohorts; in bDMARD-exposed patients, there was no difference in mortality by serostatus. CONCLUSION Elevated ACPA/RF titers were independently associated with increased mortality among patients with RA and persisted in patients treated with cDMARDs but not with bDMARDs.

Background: Publications suggest immunomodulation co-therapy improves responder rates in uncontrolled/refractory gout patients undergoing pegloticase treatment. The MIRROR open-label trial showed a 6-month pegloticase+methotrexate co-therapy responder rate of 79%, compared to an established 42% pegloticase monotherapy responder rate. Longer-term efficacy/safety data are presented here.Methods: Uncontrolled gout patients (serum urate [SU]≥6 mg/dL and SU≥6 mg/dL despite urate-lowering therapy [ULT], ULT intolerance, or functionally-limiting tophi) were included. Patients with immunocompromised status, G6PD deficiency, severe kidney disease, or methotrexate contraindication were excluded. Oral methotrexate (15 mg/week) and folic acid (1 mg/day) were administered 4-weeks before and during pegloticase therapy. Twelve-month responder rate (SUResults: Fourteen patients were included (all male, 49.3 ± 8.7 years, 13.8 ± 7.4 year gout history, pre-therapy SU: 9.2 ± 2.5 mg/dL). Three patients were non-responders and discontinued study treatment before 24-weeks, one patient exited the study per-protocol at 24-weeks (enrolled prior to treatment extension amendment), and 10 remained in study through Week 52. Of the 10, 8 completed 52-weeks of pegloticase+methotrexate and were 12-month responders. The remaining two discontinued pegloticase+methotrexate at Week 24 (met treatment goals) and stayed in study under observation (allopurinol prescribed at physicians’ discretion); one remained a responder at 12-months. At 52-weeks, change from baseline in SU was -8.2 ± 4.1 mg/dL (SU: 1.1 ± 2.4 mg/dL, n=10). Gout flares were common early in treatment but progressively decreased while on therapy (Weeks 1-12: 13/14 [92.9%], Weeks 36-52: 2/8 [25.0%]). One patient recovered from sepsis (serious AE). Two non-responders developed high ADA titres; fewer patients had trough concentrations (Cmin) below quantitation limit (BQL) and median Cmin was higher (1.03 mg/mL vs. BQL) than in pegloticase monotherapy trials.Conclusions: Methotrexate+pegloticase co-therapy was well-tolerated over 12-months, with sustained SU lowering, progressive gout flare reduction, and no new safety concerns. Antibody/PK findings suggest methotrexate attenuates ADA formation, coincident with higher treatment response rates.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03635957, registered 17 August 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03635957

Objective Previous attempts to estimate rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity using claims data only did not yield high performance. We aimed to assess whether supplementing claims data with readily available electronic medical record (EMR) data might result in improvement. Methods We used a subset of the Brigham and Women's Hospital Rheumatoid Arthritis Sequential Study (BRASS) that had linked Medicare claims. The disease activity score in 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) was considered the gold standard of measure. Variables in the linked Medicare claims, as well as EMR recorded in the preceding one-year period were used as potential explanatory variables. We constructed three models: "Claims-Only," "Claims + Medications," and "Claims + Medications + Labs (laboratory data from EMR). We selected variables via adaptive LASSO. Model performance was measured with adjusted R2 for continuous DAS28-CRP and C-statistics for binary category classification (high/moderate vs low disease activity/remission). Results We identified 300 patients with laboratory data and linked Medicare claims. The mean age was 68 years and 80% were female. The mean (SD) DAS28-CRP was 3.6 (1.6) and 51% had high or moderate DAS28-CRP. For the continuous estimation, the adjusted R2 was 0.02 for Claims-Only, 0.09 for Claims + Medications, and 0.18 for Claims + Medications + Labs. The C-statistics for discriminating the binary categories were 0.61 for Claims-Only, 0.68 for Claims + Medications, and 0.76 for Claims + Medications + Labs. Conclusion Adding EMR-derived variables to claims-derived variables resulted in modest improvement. Even with EMR variables, we were unable to estimate continuous DAS28-CRP satisfactorily. However, in claims-EMR models, we were able to discriminate between binary categories of disease activity with reasonable accuracy.

Author(s): Shadick, Nancy A; Katz, Patricia; Iannaccone, Christine I; Maica, Gabriela; Coblyn, Jonathan; Weinblatt, Michael E; Cui, Jing | Abstract: ObjectiveLifestyle factors, such as inactivity and obesity, contribute to cognitive decline in the general population, but little is known about how these factors may affect individuals with a chronic inflammatory condition such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We studied the clinical and functional risk factors related to a worsening of perceived cognitive function in patients with RA.MethodsWe collected clinical and functional questionnaire data over 10 years in a prospective RA cohort including yearly self-reported memory, concentration, and word-finding difficulties graded from "never" to "often." Generalized estimating equation models examined the role of exercise (defined as those meeting the Department of Health and Human Services physical activity guidelines of 75 minutes of vigorous or 150 minutes of moderate aerobic activity per week), body mass index (BMI), sleep, depression (Mental Health Index-Depression), Disease Activity Score (DAS)28-c-reactive protein (CRP)3 score, disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, and corticosteroid use from the previous year as predictors of cognitive complaints that progressed to "often" compared with the previous year (the first year (T i ) progressed to "often" 1 year later (T i+1)).ResultsOf 1219 RA subjects, 127 (10.4%) described either poor memory, concentration, or word-finding difficulties as affecting them "often" at study entry. RA patients (n = 1092, mean age = 56.5 years, 82% female, 58% college educated) were less likely to report word-finding difficulties, poor memory, and concentration as "often" if they were physically active (p = 0.0001, P = 0.01, P l 0.0001, respectively). Female RA patients developed more concentration complaints compared with males (P = 0.03); patients taking an anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy were less likely to complain of poor memory (P = 0.01). Sleep, BMI, fatigue, depression, DAS28-CRP3, methotrexate, and corticosteroid use were not independently associated with a worsening of any cognitive complaints.ConclusionRA patients who are physically active are less likely to report cognitive difficulties. Our study suggests potential modifiable risk factors for the prevention of cognitive dysfunction in RA.

Objective To assess the frequency of cardiovascular and venous thromboembolic events in clinical studies of baricitinib, an oral, selective JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor approved in more than 50 countries for the treatment of moderately‐to‐severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Data were pooled from 9 RA studies. Placebo comparison up to 24 weeks included data from 6 studies. Randomized dose comparison between baricitinib doses of 2 mg and 4 mg used data from 4 studies and from the associated long‐term extension study. The data analysis set designated “All‐bari‐RA” included all baricitinib exposures at any dose. Results Overall, 3,492 RA patients received baricitinib (7,860 patient‐years of exposure). No imbalance compared to the placebo group was seen in the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (incidence rates [IRs] of 0.5 per 100 patient‐years for placebo and 0.8 per 100 patient‐years for 4 mg baricitinib), arterial thrombotic events (ATE) (IRs of 0.5 per 100 patient‐years for placebo and 0.5 per 100 patient‐years for 4 mg baricitinib), or congestive heart failure (CHF) broad term (IRs of 4.3 per 100 patient‐years for placebo and 2.4 per 100 patient‐years for 4 mg baricitinib). Deep vein thrombosis (DVT)/pulmonary embolism (PE) were reported in 0 of 1,070 patients treated with placebo and 6 of 997 patients treated with 4 mg baricitinib during the placebo‐controlled period; these events were serious in 2 of 6 patients, while all 6 had risk factors and 1 patient developed DVT/PE after discontinuation of the study drug. In the 2 mg–4 mg‐extended data analysis set, IRs of DVT/PE were comparable between the doses across event types (IRs of 0.5 per 100 patient‐years in those receiving 2 mg baricitinib and 0.6 per 100 patient‐years in those receiving 4 mg baricitinib). In the All‐bari‐RA data analysis set, the rates were stable over time, with an IR of DVT/PE of 0.5 per 100 patient‐years. Conclusions In RA clinical trials, no association was found between baricitinib treatment and the incidence of MACE, ATE, or CHF. With regard to incidence of DVT/PE, 6 events occurred in patients treated with 4 mg baricitinib, but no cases of DVT/PE were reported in the placebo group. During longer‐term evaluation, the incidence of DVT/PE was similar between the baricitinib dose groups, with consistent IR values over time, and this was similar to the rates previously reported in patients with RA.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving tofacitinib versus those receiving tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. METHODS RA patients who were initiating treatment with tofacitinib or a TNF inhibitor and had not previously received any biologic agent or tofacitinib were identified from the Truven MarketScan database (2012-2016) or Medicare claims (parts A, B, and D) database (2012-2015). Patients were followed up until treatment discontinuation, treatment switch, insurance disenrollment, or administrative censoring. The outcome of VTE was identified using inpatient claims for pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were determined using a Cox proportional hazards model after accounting for confounding through propensity score-based fine-stratification weighting. HRs were pooled across databases using the inverse variance meta-analytic method. RESULTS A total of 34,074 RA patients (mean age 50 years; 5.6% tofacitinib initiators) and 17,086 RA patients (mean age 71 years; 5.8% tofacitinib initiators) were identified from the Truven and Medicare databases, respectively. The crude incidence rates of VTE per 100 person-years were 0.60 (95% CI 0.26-1.19) and 0.34 (95% CI 0.27-0.41) in Truven and 1.12 (95% CI 0.45-2.31) and 0.92 (95% CI 0.76-1.11) in Medicare for patients receiving tofacitinib and patients receiving TNF inhibitors, respectively. Propensity score-adjusted HRs showed no significant differences in the risk of VTE between tofacitinib-treated and TNF inhibitor-treated patients in either database, with a pooled HR of 1.33 (95% CI 0.78-2.24). CONCLUSION Occurrence of VTE in a total of 50,865 RA patients initiating treatment with tofacitinib or a TNF inhibitor was infrequent (

Objective To investigate the incidence and predictors of dyspnea on exertion among subjects with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods We investigated dyspnea on exertion using a prospective cohort, the Brigham RA Sequential Study (BRASS). Clinically significant dyspnea on exertion was defined as a score of ≥ 3 (unable to ambulate without breathlessness or worse) on the validated Medical Research Council (MRC) scale (range 0‐5). We analyzed subjects with MRC score < 3 at BRASS baseline and at ≥ 1 year of follow‐up. The MRC scale was administered annually. We determined the incidence rate (IR) of dyspnea on exertion. We used Cox regression to estimate the hazard ration (HR) for dyspnea on exertion occurring one year after potential predictors were assessed. Results We analyzed 829 subjects with RA and no clinically significant dyspnea on exertion during a mean follow‐up period of 3.0 years (SD 1.9). At baseline, mean age was 55.7 years (SD 13.6), 82.4% of subjects were female, and median RA duration was 8 years. During follow‐up, 112 subjects (13.5%) developed incident dyspnea on exertion during 2476 person‐years of follow‐up (incidence rate 45.2 per 1000 person‐years). Independent predictors of incident dyspnea on exertion were older age (HR 1.03 per year, 95% CI, 1.01‐1.04), female sex (HR 2.22, 95% CI, 1.14‐4.29), mild dyspnea (HR 2.62, 95% CI, 1.60‐4.28), and worsened Multi‐Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire score (HR 2.36 per unit, 95% CI, 1.54‐3.60). Methotrexate use, RA disease activity, and seropositivity were not associated with incident dyspnea on exertion after accounting for other dyspnea risk factors. Conclusion Dyspnea on exertion occurred commonly in patients with RA. Older women with impaired physical function were especially vulnerable to developing dyspnea on exertion.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease characterized by an inflammatory polyarticular arthritis as well as extra-articular manifestations. Although renal involvement of the kidney by RA most often is expressed as an immune complex–mediated glomerulopathy or AA amyloidosis, rheumatoid nodule formation has been rarely described.1 A rheumatoid nodule is characterized by necrotizing granulomatous inflammation, and can be found most commonly subcutaneously in patients with RA over sites prone to pressure or repetitive irritation, but also have been described to involve the deeper connective tissue, lungs, heart, and other tissue sites.2 As the etiology of a necrotizing granuloma can be of an infectious process, this possibility must be excluded particularly for patients with RA. We present a case in which a patient with longstanding RA is found by radiologic imaging to have a kidney mass. Histopathologic review of the subsequent partial nephrectomy revealed a necrotizing granuloma and an immune complex–mediated glomerulopathy predominately with a membranous pattern of injury. After histopathologic, molecular, further laboratory, and clinical evaluation, it was felt that the necrotizing granuloma was not of an infectious etiology and represented a rheumatoid nodule.

Guidelines and recommendations developed and/or endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) are intended to provide general guidance for commonly encountered clinical scenarios. The recommendations do not dictate the care for an individual patient. The ACR considers adherence to the recommendations described in this guideline to be voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding their application to be made by the clinicians in light of each patient’s individual circumstances. Guidelines and recommendations are intended to promote beneficial or desirable outcomes but cannot guarantee any specific outcome. Guidelines and recommendations developed and endorsed by the ACR are subject to periodic revision as warranted by the evolution of medical knowledge, technology, and practice. ACR recommendations are not intended to dictate payment or insurance decisions, or drug formularies or other third-party analyses. Third parties that cite ACR guidelines should state that these recommendations are not meant for this purpose. These recommendations cannot adequately convey all uncertainties and nuances of patient care. The American College of Rheumatology is an independent, professional, medical and scientific society that does not guarantee, warrant, or endorse any commercial product or service. OBJECTIVE. To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS. We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. RESULTS. The guideline addresses treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high-risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional). CONCLUSION. This clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision-making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision-making process based on patients’ values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.

Drs. Pincus, Bergman, and Yazici have raised some concerns about our published article comparing the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) with simultaneous measures of the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3).1 We believe our publication has clearly established that the validated CDAI scores provide a fundamentally different evaluation of disease status compared with the RAPID3.

Objective To evaluate the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) with tofacitinib compared with TNFis in patients with RA. Methods RA patients initiating tofacitinib or a TNFi without use of any biologic or tofacitinib any time prior were identified from IBM ‘MarketScan’ (2012–18), Medicare (parts A, B and D, 2012–17) or ‘Optum’ Clinformatics (2012–19) and followed until treatment discontinuation, treatment switch, insurance disenrollment or administrative censoring. The primary outcome, VTE, was identified using inpatient claims for pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis. A Cox proportional hazards model provided hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CIs after accounting for confounding through propensity score fine-stratification weighting. HRs were pooled across databases with inverse variance meta-analytic method. Results A total of 42 201, 25 078 and 20 374 RA patients were identified from MarketScan, Medicare and Optum, respectively, of whom 7.1, 7.1 and 9.7% were tofacitinib initiators. The crude incidence rates per 100 person-years (95% CI) were 0.42 (0.20–0.77) and 0.35 (0.29–0.42) in MarketScan, 1.18 (0.68–1.92) and 0.83 (0.71–0.97) in Medicare, and 0.19 (0.04–0.57) and 0.34 (0.26–0.44) in Optum for tofacitinib and TNFis, respectively. Propensity score-weighted HRs showed no significant differences in the risk of VTE between tofacitinib and TNFis in any database with a pooled HR (95% CI) of 1.13 (0.77–1.65). Conclusion Overall, VTE occurred infrequently (

Idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease (iMCD) is a poorly understood hematologic disorder involving cytokine-induced polyclonal lymphoproliferation, systemic inflammation, and potentially fatal multiorgan failure. Although the etiology of iMCD is unknown, interleukin-6 (IL-6) is an established disease driver in approximately one-third of patients. Anti–IL-6 therapy, siltuximab, is the only US Food and Drug Administration–approved treatment. Few options exist for siltuximab nonresponders, and no validated tests are available to predict likelihood of response. We procured and analyzed the largest-to-date cohort of iMCD samples, which enabled classification of iMCD into disease categories, discovery of siltuximab response biomarkers, and identification of therapeutic targets for siltuximab nonresponders. Proteomic quantification of 1178 analytes was performed on serum of 88 iMCD patients, 60 patients with clinico-pathologically overlapping diseases (human herpesvirus-8–associated MCD, N = 20; Hodgkin lymphoma, N = 20; rheumatoid arthritis, N = 20), and 42 healthy controls. Unsupervised clustering revealed iMCD patients have heterogeneous serum proteomes that did not cluster with clinico-pathologically overlapping diseases. Clustering of iMCD patients identified a novel subgroup with superior response to siltuximab, which was validated using a 7-analyte panel (apolipoprotein E, amphiregulin, serum amyloid P-component, inactivated complement C3b, immunoglobulin E, IL-6, erythropoietin) in an independent cohort. Enrichment analyses and immunohistochemistry identified Janus kinase (JAK)/signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 signaling as a candidate therapeutic target that could potentially be targeted with JAK inhibitors in siltuximab nonresponders. Our discoveries demonstrate the potential for accelerating discoveries for rare diseases through multistakeholder collaboration.

Background The multi-biomarker disease activity (MBDA) test measures 12 serum protein biomarkers to quantify disease activity in RA patients. A newer version of the MBDA score, adjusted for age, sex, and adiposity, has been validated in two cohorts (OPERA and BRASS) for predicting risk for radiographic progression. We now extend these findings with additional cohorts to further validate the adjusted MBDA score as a predictor of radiographic progression risk and compare its performance with that of other risk factors. Methods Four cohorts were analyzed: the BRASS and Leiden registries and the OPERA and SWEFOT studies (total N = 953). Treatments included conventional DMARDs and anti-TNFs. Associations of radiographic progression (ΔTSS) per year with the adjusted MBDA score, seropositivity, and clinical measures were evaluated using linear and logistic regression. The adjusted MBDA score was (1) validated in Leiden and SWEFOT, (2) compared with other measures in all four cohorts, and (3) used to generate curves for predicting risk of radiographic progression. Results Univariable and bivariable analyses validated the adjusted MBDA score and found it to be the strongest, independent predicator of radiographic progression (ΔTSS > 5) compared with seropositivity (rheumatoid factor and/or anti-CCP), baseline TSS, DAS28-CRP, CRP SJC, or CDAI. Neither DAS28-CRP, CDAI, SJC, nor CRP added significant information to the adjusted MBDA score as a predictor, and the frequency of radiographic progression agreed with the adjusted MBDA score when it was discordant with these measures. The rate of progression (ΔTSS > 5) increased from Conclusion The adjusted MBDA score was validated as an RA disease activity measure that is prognostic for radiographic progression. The adjusted MBDA score was a stronger predictor of radiographic progression than conventional risk factors, including seropositivity, and its prognostic ability was not significantly improved by the addition of DAS28-CRP, CRP, SJC, or CDAI.

ObjectiveTo determine the association between novel lifestyle factors on risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-associated interstitial lung disease (ILD), define the threshold at which smoking increases RA-ILD risk, and calculate the degree to which known lifestyle and clinical factors predict RA-ILD.MethodsThis nested case-control study matched incident RA-ILD cases to RA non-ILD controls on age, sex, RA duration, rheumatoid factor, and time from exposure assessment to RA-ILD. Exposures included education, BMI, smoking, anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies, race, joint erosions, rheumatoid nodules, C-reactive protein (CRP), disease activity score, functional status, disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use, and glucocorticoid use. OR for each exposure on risk of RA-ILD were obtained from logistic regression models. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated based on all lifestyle and clinical exposures.ResultsWe identified 84 incident RA-ILD cases and 233 matched controls. After adjustment, obesity, high-positive CRP (≥ 10 mg/L), and poor functional status (multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire [MDHAQ] ≥ 1) were associated with increased risk of RA-ILD (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.11–5.24 vs normal BMI; OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.21–5.64 vs CRP < 3 mg/L; OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.32–7.26 vs MDHAQ < 0.2). Smoking 30 pack-years or more was strongly associated with risk of RA-ILD compared to never smokers (OR 6.06, 95% CI 2.72–13.5). Together, lifestyle and clinical risk factors for RA-ILD had an AUC of 0.79 (95% CI 0.73–0.85).ConclusionObesity, CRP, functional status, and extensive smoking may be novel risk factors for RA-ILD that may be useful for RA-ILD risk assessment and prevention. The overall ability to predict RA-ILD remains modest.

ObjectiveTo examine the efficacy and safety of pegloticase in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in patients with uncontrolled gout in an exploratory, open-label clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03635957) prior to a randomized, controlled trial.MethodsA multicenter, open-label efficacy and safety study of pegloticase with MTX co-treatment was conducted in patients with uncontrolled gout. Patients were administered oral MTX (15 mg/week) and folic acid (1 mg/day) 4 weeks prior to and throughout pegloticase treatment. The primary study outcome was the proportion of responders, defined as serum uric acid (sUA) < 6 mg/dL for ≥ 80% of the time during Month 6 (Weeks 20, 22, and 24). All analyses were performed on a modified intent-to-treat population, defined as patients who received ≥ 1 pegloticase infusion.ResultsSeventeen patients were screened and 14 patients (all men, average age 49.3 ± 8.7 years) were enrolled. On Day 1, mean sUA was 9.2 ± 2.5 mg/dL, and 12 of the 14 patients had visible tophi. At the 6-month timepoint, 11/14 (78.6%, 95% CI 49.2–95.3%) met the responder definition, with 3 patients discontinuing after meeting protocol-defined treatment discontinuation rules (preinfusion sUA values > 6 mg/dL at 2 consecutive scheduled visits). All patients tolerated MTX. No new safety concerns were identified.ConclusionIn this study, an increased proportion of patients maintained therapeutic response at 6 months when treated concomitantly with MTX and pegloticase as compared to the previously reported 42% using pegloticase alone. These results support the need for a randomized study of MTX or placebo with pegloticase to validate these open-label findings.

To date, the impact of background glucocorticoids (GC) on the efficacy and safety of abatacept or adalimumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is not clearly established. This post hoc analysis of (AMPLE) trial (NCT00929864) compared efficacy and safety outcomes over 2 years in patients treated with abatacept or adalimumab plus background methotrexate (MTX), who continued GC (&le, 10 mg/day) versus those who were not receiving GC (no-GC). Of 646 randomized patients, 317 received abatacept + MTX (161 GC, 156 no-GC) and 326 received adalimumab + MTX (162 GC, 164 no-GC). At Year 2, the adjusted mean changes from baseline in Disease Activity Score (DAS28 C-reactive protein (CRP)) and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) were not significantly different in the GC versus no-GC subgroups receiving abatacept or adalimumab. A similar proportion of patients achieved remission, HAQ-DI score improvement &ge, 0.3 and radiographic progression rates. No clinically meaningful safety differences were observed between GC versus no-GC subgroups either with abatacept or adalimumab. In patients with active RA of similar baseline disease activity treated with abatacept or adalimumab plus background MTX, there was no additional value of background GC on clinical, functional or radiographic outcomes over two years.

SB4, SB2, and SB5 are biosimilars of etanercept (ETN), infliximab (INF), and adalimumab (ADA), respectively. This pooled analysis evaluated the immunogenicity of these treatments across three phase...

OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance to rheumatology providers on the management of adult rheumatic disease in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: A task force, including 10 rheumatologists and 4 infectious disease specialists from North America, was convened. Clinical questions were collated, and an evidence report was rapidly generated and disseminated. Questions and drafted statements were reviewed and assessed using a modified Delphi process. This included 2 rounds of asynchronous anonymous voting by e-mail and 3 webinars with the entire panel. Task force members voted on agreement with draft statements using a 1-9-point numerical scoring system, and consensus was determined to be low, moderate, or high based on the dispersion of votes. For approval, median votes were required to meet predefined levels of agreement (median values of 7-9, 4-6, and 1-3 defined as agreement, uncertainty, or disagreement, respectively) with either moderate or high levels of consensus. RESULTS: The task force approved 77 initial guidance statements: 36 with moderate and 41 with high consensus. These were combined, resulting in 25 final guidance statements. CONCLUSION: These guidance statements are provided to promote optimal care during the current pandemic. However, given the low level of available evidence and the rapidly evolving literature, this guidance is presented as a "living document," and future updates are anticipated.

Objective To provide guidance to rheumatology providers on the management of adult rheumatic disease in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods A task force, including 10 rheumatologists and 4 infectious disease specialists from North America, was convened. Clinical questions were collated, and an evidence report was rapidly generated and disseminated. Questions and drafted statements were reviewed and assessed using a modified Delphi process. This included asynchronous anonymous voting by email and webinars with the entire panel. Task force members voted on agreement with draft statements using a 1-9-point numerical scoring system, and consensus was determined to be low, moderate, or high based on the dispersion of votes. For approval, median votes were required to meet predefined levels of agreement (median values of 7-9, 4-6, and 1-3 defined as agreement, uncertainty, or disagreement, respectively) with either moderate or high levels of consensus. Results Draft guidance statements approved by the task force have been combined to form final guidance. Conclusion These guidance statements are provided to promote optimal care during the current pandemic. However, given the low level of available evidence and the rapidly evolving literature, this guidance is presented as a "living document," and future updates are anticipated.

Objective To develop and evaluate an adjusted score for the multi-biomarker disease activity (MBDA) test to account for the effects of age, sex and adiposity in patients with RA. Methods Two models were developed to adjust MBDA score for age, sex and adiposity, using either serum leptin concentration or BMI as proxies for adiposity. Two cohorts were studied. A cohort of 325 781 RA patients who had undergone commercial MBDA testing and had data for age, sex and serum leptin concentration was used for both models. A cohort of 1411 patients from five studies/registries with BMI data was used only for the BMI-adjusted MBDA score. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses evaluated the adjusted MBDA scores and conventional clinical measures as predictors of radiographic progression, assessed in terms of modified total Sharp score (ΔmTSS). Results Two models were developed, based on findings that MBDA score was higher in females than males and increased with age, leptin concentration and BMI. In pairwise regression analyses, the leptin-adjusted (P = 0.00066) and BMI-adjusted (P = 0.0027) MBDA scores were significant independent predictors of ΔmTSS after adjusting for DAS28-CRP, whereas DAS28-CRP was not, after adjusting for leptin-adjusted (P = 0.74) or BMI-adjusted (P = 0.87) MBDA score. Moreover, the leptin-adjusted MBDA score was a significant predictor of ΔmTSS after adjusting for the BMI-adjusted MBDA score (P = 0.025) or the original MBDA score (0.027), whereas the opposite was not true. Conclusion Leptin-adjusted MBDA score significantly adds information to DAS28-CRP and the original MBDA score in predicting radiographic progression. It may offer improved clinical utility for personalized management of RA.

OBJECTIVE To investigate the safety and efficacy of ABT-122, a tumor necrosis factor (TNF)- and interleukin-17A (IL-17A)-targeted dual variable domain immunoglobulin, in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who have experienced an inadequate response to methotrexate. METHODS Patients (n = 240) were randomized to receive ABT-122 (120 or 240 mg every week), adalimumab (40 mg every other week), or placebo in a 12-week double-blind, parallel-group study. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients achieving ≥20% improvement in disease activity according to the American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20) at week 12. Secondary and exploratory 12-week end points included 50% improvement (ACR50) and 70% improvement (ACR70) response rates, and proportion of patients meeting the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response criteria for ≥75% (PASI75) and ≥90% (PASI90) improvement in skin scores among those with ≥3% of their body surface area affected by psoriasis. RESULTS In both ABT-122 dose groups, ACR20 response rates at week 12 (64.8-75.3%) were superior to that in patients receiving placebo (25.0%) (P < 0.001) but similar to that in patients receiving adalimumab (68.1%). ACR50 and ACR70 response rates were also superior in both ABT-122 dose groups (36.6-53.4% and 22.5-31.5%, respectively) compared to the placebo group (12.5% and 4.2%, respectively) (P < 0.05). Among eligible patients in the placebo, adalimumab, ABT-122 120 mg every week, and ABT-122 240 mg every week treatment groups, PASI75 responses were achieved in 27.3%, 57.6%, 74.4%, and 77.6% of patients, respectively, whereas PASI90 responses were achieved in 18.2%, 45.5%, 48.8%, and 46.9% of patients, respectively. Frequencies of treatment-emergent adverse events, including infections, were similar across all treatment groups, causing no discontinuations. No serious infections or systemic hypersensitivity reactions were reported with ABT-122. CONCLUSION Dual neutralization of TNF and IL-17A with ABT-122 had efficacy and safety that was similar to, and not broadly differentiated from, that of adalimumab over a 12-week treatment course in patients with PsA.

Objectives: Describe the development and feasibility of a telephone peer support program that provides education, emotional support, and enhances coping skills among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Methods: In an academic arthritis center, peer coaches received 5 training modules: 1) definition and expectations of peer coaching, 2) structure/management of phone calls, 3) confidentiality, 4) psychological techniques for encounters, 5) referral guidelines and resources. Follow-up, acceptability and comparison with patients receiving standard care included mean adjusted change differences at 6 months in fatigue, pain, self-efficacy, functional status (SF-12), flare frequency and medication adherence (ASK-20). Results: Eighteen peer coaches were assigned on average, 1.7 (SD, 1.4) patients. They spoke 8.4 (SD, 7.2) times; 21 of 29 patients completed the program. The most common topics requested were how to manage flares, 10(48%), medical aspects of RA, 10(48%) and understanding how to live with RA, 9(43%). After 6 months, non-significant improvements occurred in study outcomes (largest changes SF-12 PCS (mean adjusted change (SE) intervention v. standard care, 4.7(2.6) v. 0.5(2.0)) and how RA impacts one’s life (1.8(6.4) v. −4.9(5.8)). Participants reported many benefits from peer support. They felt less alone, 13(62%), more part of a sharing community, 12(57%) and had a better understanding of RA, 9(43%). They felt calmer, 9(43%), less sad,5(24%) and that they had more support from family and friends, 5(24%). Conclusions: An RA telephone peer support program is feasible and acceptable to patients. While the study was underpowered to detect statistical improvements, patients reported benefits suggesting the need for randomized evaluation.

OBJECTIVE Current validated cardiovascular (CV) risk estimates were developed in populations with relatively stable levels of inflammation, whereas patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) routinely experience significant changes in inflammation. This study was undertaken to test whether changes in inflammation affect estimated CV risk as measured using validated population-based risk calculators. METHODS Participants in a prospective RA cohort who experienced a decrease or an increase of ≥10 mg/liter in the C-reactive protein (CRP) level at 2 consecutive time points 1 year apart (CRP decrease group and CRP increase group, respectively) were included in this study. We estimated 10-year CV risk using the following calculators: Framingham Risk Score, 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Score, Reynolds Risk Score (RRS), and QRISK2. Of these calculators, only the RRS includes a variable addressing the CRP level. Paired t-tests were performed to compare risk scores at baseline and 1-year follow-up. We calculated the correlations between the changes in risk scores and changes in pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (pro BNP), a surrogate marker of CV risk. RESULTS One hundred eighty RA patients were included in the study (mean age 57.8 years, 84% female, 80% seropositive). Of the calculators studied, only the RRS was sensitive to changes in inflammation; an increase in inflammation was associated with increased estimated CV risk (P < 0.0001), and only the RRS was correlated with changes in proBNP (r = 0.17, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION Our data showed no significant change in CV risk estimated using validated general population CV risk calculators except for the RRS. These findings suggest that CV risk may be modulated by changes in inflammation in RA, which is not typically considered when using existing CV risk calculators.

Objective The 24-week equivalent efficacy and comparable safety results of the biosimilar SB5 and reference adalimumab (ADA) from the phase III randomized study in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been reported previously. We undertook this transition study to evaluate patients who switched from ADA to SB5 or who continued to receive SB5 or ADA up to 52 weeks. Methods In this phase III study, patients were initially randomized 1:1 to receive SB5 or ADA (40 mg subcutaneously every other week). At 24 weeks, patients receiving ADA were rerandomized 1:1 to continue with ADA (ADA/ADA group) or to switch to SB5 (ADA/SB5 group) up to week 52; patients receiving SB5 continued with SB5 for 52 weeks (SB5 group). Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity were evaluated up to 52 weeks. Results The full analysis set population consisted of 542 patients (269 in the SB5 group, 273 in the ADA overall group [patients who were randomized to receive ADA at week 0], 125 in the ADA/SB5 group, and 129 in the ADA/ADA group). The percentages of patients meeting the American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50%, or 70% improvement criteria (achieving an ACR20, ACR50, or ACR70 response) at week 24 were maintained after the transition from ADA to SB5, and these response rates were comparable across treatment groups throughout the study. ACR20 response rates ranged from 73.4% to 78.8% at week 52. Radiographic progression was minimal and comparable across treatment groups. The safety profile and the incidence of antidrug antibodies were comparable across treatment groups after transition. Conclusion SB5 was well tolerated over 1 year in patients with RA, with efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity comparable to those of ADA. Switching from ADA to SB5 had no treatment-emergent issues such as increased adverse events, increased immunogenicity, or loss of efficacy.

Introduction To assess the relationship between low bone mineral density (BMD), anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide-2 (anti-CCP2) antibodies, and disease activity in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Patients enrolled in a single-center, observational cohort registry of patients with RA. Eligible patients had known BMD, as measured by digital X-ray radiogrammetry (DXR–BMD), and anti-CCP2 antibody measurements at the same time point or within 6 months. Anti-CCP2–immunoglobulin (Ig)G-positive (+) patients (≥ 20 U/mL) were distributed into three equal groups (Gp1–3), representing increasing anti-CCP2 antibody concentrations. Associations between BMD and anti-CCP2 antibody status and titer were explored in multivariate regression analyses controlling for covariates (including age, duration of RA, use of steroids, use of osteoporosis medication). Association between disease activity (DAS28 [CRP] Results A total of 149 patients (all women) were included (47 anti-CCP2 antibody negative [−], 102 anti-CCP2+ [34\titer group]). Mean disease duration was greater in the three anti-CCP2+ groups vs. the anti-CCP2− group. DXR–BMD was lower in the anti-CCP2+ vs. the anti-CCP2− groups (Gp1–3 vs. anti-CCP2−: P P P = 0.0181). Conclusion Among patients with established RA, data suggest that anti-CCP2+ patients, particularly those with high anti-CCP2 antibody titers, have lower hand BMD, and patients with lower hand BMD are less likely to have low disease activity. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT01793103.

The 19th annual international Targeted Therapies meeting brought together over 100 leading basic scientists and clinical researchers from around the world in the field of immunology, molecular biology and rheumatology and other specialties. During the meeting, breakout sessions were held consisting of 5 disease-specific groups with 20-40 experts assigned to each group based on clinical or scientific expertise. Specific groups included: rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, systemic lupus erythematous, connective tissue diseases (e.g. Sjogren's syndrome, Systemic sclerosis, vasculitis including Bechet's and IgG4 related disease), and a basic science immunology group spanning all of the above clinical domains. In each group, experts were asked to consider and update previously identified unmet needs in 3 categorical areas: basic/translational science, clinical science and therapeutic development, and clinical care. Overall, similar primary unmet needs were identified within each disease foci, and several additional needs were identified since the time of last year's congress. Within translational/basic science, the need for better understanding the heterogeneity within each disease was highlighted so that predictive tools for therapeutic responses can be developed. Within clinical science and therapeutic trials, a strong focus was placed upon the need to identify pre-clinical states of disease allowing prevention in those at risk. The ability to cure remains perhaps the ultimate unmet need. Further, the need to develop new and affordable therapeutics, as well as to conduct strategic trials of currently approved therapies was again highlighted. Within the clinical care realm, improved co-morbidity management and patient-centered care were identified as unmet needs. Lastly, it was strongly felt there was a need to develop a scientific infrastructure for well-characterized, longitudinal cohorts paired with biobanks and mechanisms to support data-sharing. This infrastructure could facilitate many of the unmet needs identified within each disease area.

Background:Busy rheumatologists may assess disease activity and risk for radiographic progression (RP) in RA with informal, qualitative versions of evaluator and/or patient global assessments (EGA and PGA). RA patient care may be improved by having a convenient, objective disease activity measure that predicts risk for RP more accurately than EGA or PGA.Objectives:To compare the abilities of MBDA score, patient global assessment and evaluator global assessment to assess risk for radiographic progression (RP), and to assess the ability of MBDA score to predict RP among patients with concordant or discordant PGA and EGA.Methods:Patients were pooled from two RCTs of patients with recent onset RA treated with conventional and biologic DMARDs (OPERA and SWEFOT, N=386) and from a registry of patients with predominantly established RA and diverse treatments (BRASS, N=380). Pearson correlations were determined between MBDA scores (adjusted for the effects of age, sex and adiposity) (scale 1-100), PGA and EGA (each on a scale of 1-10) at baseline. PGA and EGA were considered discordant when they differed by >2.5. Univariable logistic regression assessed ability to predict RP (change in TSS >5 over 1 year) for MBDA score, PGA and EGA as continuous variables; and for discordance of PGA and EGA as 2-level (concordant vs. discordant) or 3-level (PGA>EGA, concordant, EGA>PGA) categorical variables. Multivariable regression considered the main effect and interaction terms of the MBDA score, as a continuous variable, paired with each other variable, to test the ability of each pair to assess risk of RP. All models included a random effect on cohort. Odds ratios were reported for every 10-unit increase in MBDA score. Frequency of RP was determined in subgroups with MBDA score low (44) for patient groups based on PGA/EGA concordance or discordance.Results:The 766 patients studied were 76% female, 76% positive for RF and/or anti-CCP Ab, with mean age 55 years, DAS28-CRP 4.7, CRP 22 mg/L, CDAI 26, SJC 9.1, PGA 4.4, EGA 3.4, MBDA score 53. No interaction was seen between MBDA score and type of cohort (early vs established RA). PGA and EGA were discordant in 294 of 766 (38%) patients and were weakly to moderately correlated (r=0.38). Among discordant patients, PGA was >EGA in 227 cases and EGA was >PGA in 67 cases. Correlations between MBDA score and PGA or EGA were r=0.41 and r=0.34, respectively. In univariable analyses, MBDA score was a statistically significant predictor of radiographic progression (OR=1.53, p=6.3x10-8) whereas PGA, EGA, 2-level discordance and 3-level discordance were not (p=0.38, 0.47, 0.74, 0.83, respectively). In multivariable analyses, significant interactions were observed between MBDA score and discordance (2-level, p=0.0029; 3-level, p=0.0087). The interaction analysis demonstrated, in PGA/EGA-concordant patients, low risk of radiographic progression when MBDA score was low and elevated risk when it was high (OR=1.33 [1.1, 1.59]). A relationship between MBDA score and RP risk was also demonstrated, with heightened trend, among discordant patients with PGA >EGA (OR=2.04 [1.53, 2.81]) and EGA >PGA (OR=3.43 [1.37, 13.8]) (Figure 1).Conclusion:MBDA score was a significant predictor of radiographic progression, whereas PGA and EGA were not. MBDA score predicted progression whether PGA and EGA were concordant or discordant. These results suggest that MBDA score detects joint-damaging disease activity more accurately than PGA and EGA and it does so whether or not PGA and EGA are in agreement.Disclosure of Interests:Leonard Calabrese Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cresecendo, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Horizon, Janssen, Novartis, and Sanofi., Michael E. Weinblatt Shareholder of: Canfite, Inmedix, Scipher, and Vorso, Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Crescendo Bioscience, Corrona, EqRX, GSK,Genosco, Gilead, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Set Point, Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Myriad Genetics, Inc.,Eli Lilly and Sanofi, Nancy Shadick Consultant of: BMS, Grant/research support from: Lilly, mallinckrodt, BMS, Amgen and Sanofi, Cecilie Heegaard Brahe: None declared, Mikkel Østergaard Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Centocor, GSK, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Takeda, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Myriad Genetics, Inc., Janssen, and Merck, Merete L. Hetland Speakers bureau: Orion, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, CelltrionRoche, Myriad Genetics, Inc., Eli Lily, MSD, Pfizer, and UCB, Megan Horton Shareholder of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Employee of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Darl Flake Shareholder of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Employee of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Eric Sasso Shareholder of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Employee of: Myriad Autoimmune

Objective Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) often ask whether specific foods, popularized as inflammatory or antiinflammatory, can improve or worsen their RA. Patients with RA took a survey on diet and RA symptoms, and the survey data were collected and analyzed. Methods A dietary survey was mailed to 300 subjects in a single-center RA registry at a large academic center. Subjects were asked about their consumption of 20 foods and whether these foods make their RA symptoms better, worse, or unchanged. Semiannual registry data include demographics, medications, comorbidities, and disease activity scores. Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon's rank sum tests evaluated associations between subject characteristics from the most recent registry assessment and changes in RA symptoms from specific foods. Results Of the 217 subjects (72% response rate), 83% were female; the median RA duration was 17 years (interquartile range 9–27 years), and 58% were taking a biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. Twenty-four percent of subjects reported that foods affect their RA symptoms, with 15% reporting improvement and 19% reporting worsening. Blueberries and spinach were the foods most often reported to improve RA symptoms, while soda with sugar and desserts were those most often reported to worsen RA symptoms. Younger age and noting that sleep, warm room temperature, and vitamin/mineral supplements improve RA were each associated with reporting that foods affect RA symptoms. Medication use, sex, body mass index, smoking, disease duration, disease activity scores, and self-reported RA flares were not associated with reporting that foods affect RA. Conclusion Nearly one-quarter of RA subjects with longstanding disease reported that diet had an effect on their RA symptoms.

Objective SB5 is a biosimilar agent for adalimumab (ADA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and immunogenicity of SB5 in comparison with reference ADA in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods In this phase III, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study, patients with moderately to severely active RA despite treatment with methotrexate were randomized 1:1 to receive SB5 or reference ADA at a dosage of 40 mg subcutaneously every other week. The primary efficacy end point was the response rate based on the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) at week 24 in the per-protocol set (completer analysis). Additional end points included efficacy, PK, safety, and immunogenicity assessments. Results Of the 544 patients randomized to receive a study drug, the full analysis set comprised 542 patients (269 in the SB5 group, 273 in the reference ADA group) and the per-protocol set comprised 476 patients (239 receiving SB5, 237 receiving reference ADA). The ACR20 response rate at week 24 in the per-protocol set was equivalent between those receiving SB5 and those receiving reference ADA (72.4% and 72.2%, respectively); the difference in the ACR20 response rate (0.1%, [95% confidence interval −7.83%, 8.13%]) was within the predefined equivalence margin (±15%). Similar results were seen in the full analysis set (missing data being considered a nonresponse). The SB5 and reference ADA treatment groups were comparable across other end points, including the ACR 50% and ACR 70% improvement response rates, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate, PK data, incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events, and the antidrug antibody response. Subgroup analyses showed that the efficacy and safety of SB5 and reference ADA were comparable regardless of antidrug antibody status. Conclusion The ACR20 response rate at week 24 was equivalent between patients treated with the biosimilar agent SB5 and those treated with reference ADA. SB5 and reference ADA were both well tolerated, with comparable safety profiles, in patients with RA.

Objective Previous cross-sectional studies have shown that rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with fibromyalgia (FM) have higher disease activity, greater medical costs, and worse quality of life compared to RA patients without FM. We determined the impact of FM on 2-year changes in the functional status of RA patients in a prospective study. Methods Subjects included participants in the Brigham Rheumatoid Arthritis Sequential Study who were enrolled in a substudy of the effects of pain in RA. Subjects completed questionnaires, including the Multi-Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) and Polysymptomatic Distress (PSD) scale, semiannually, and underwent physical examination and laboratory tests yearly. Results Of the 156 included RA subjects, 16.7% had FM, while 83.3% did not. In a multivariable linear regression model adjusted for age, sex, race, baseline MDHAQ score, disease duration, rheumatoid factor/cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody seropositivity, disease activity, and psychological distress, RA patients with FM had a 0.14 greater 2-year increase in MDHAQ score than RA patients without FM (P = 0.021). In secondary analyses examining the association between continuous PSD scale score and change in MDHAQ, higher PSD scale scores were significantly associated with greater 2-year increases in MDHAQ score (β coefficient 0.013, P = 0.011). Conclusion Both the presence of FM and increasing number of FM symptoms predicted worsening of functional status among individuals with RA. Among individuals with RA and FM, the magnitude of the difference in changes in MDHAQ was 4- to 7-fold higher than typical changes in MDHAQ score among individuals with established RA.

Objective: In disease-modifying antirheumatic drug–naive patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had achieved sustained low disease activity (a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate of ≤3.2 at both week 40 and week 52) after 1 year of treatment with certolizumab pegol (CZP) at a standard dose (200 mg every 2 weeks plus optimized methotrexate [MTX]), we evaluated whether continuation of CZP treatment at a standard dose or at a reduced frequency (200 mg every 4 weeks plus MTX) was superior to stopping CZP (placebo plus MTX) in maintaining low disease activity for 1 additional year. Methods: A total of 293 patients from period 1 of our study were re-randomized 2:3:2 in period 2 to CZP at a standard dose (n = 84), CZP at a reduced frequency (n = 127), or placebo plus MTX (CZP stopped) (n = 82). The primary end point was the percentage of patients who maintained low disease activity throughout weeks 52–104 without flares. We used a hierarchical testing scheme, comparing CZP at a standard dose with CZP stopped. If P < 0.05 was achieved, then CZP at a reduced frequency was compared with CZP stopped (nonresponder imputation). Results: The 293 patients from period 1 represented 36% fewer patients than projected, yielding a smaller number of patients eligible for period 2. Higher proportions of patients treated with the standard and reduced frequency regimens maintained low disease activity than those who had stopped CZP (48.8% and 53.2%, respectively, versus 39.2% [P = 0.112 and P = 0.041, respectively; nominal P value, first hierarchical test not significant]). Similar trends were observed for radiographic nonprogression (change from baseline of ≤0.5 in modified Sharp/van der Heijde score; 79.2% and 77.9% of patients, respectively, versus 70.3%) and normative physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index score of ≤0.5; 71.4% and 70.6% of patients, respectively, versus 57.0%). Safety profiles were similar between all groups, with no new safety signals identified for continuing CZP to week 104. No deaths were reported. Conclusion: The study failed to meet its primary end point. However, there were no clinically meaningful differences between the standard and reduced frequency doses of CZP plus MTX; both controlled RA more effectively than stopping CZP.

Objective: To characterize physical activity (PA) participation (meeting ≥150-minutes of moderate intensity or 75-minutes of vigorous (MVPA/week)), examine associations between disease activity and MVPA and identify MVPA correlates in adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over 3 years. Methods: This study included 573 RA patients (94% Caucasian, 83% female, mean age 61 years, mean RA duration 19.5 years) with ≥1 annual registry visit and who completed the PA questionnaire. Baseline and annual measures included: demographics/medical history, self-efficacy for disease management, quality of life, patient/physician global assessment, physical function, and self-reported PA. A logistic repeated measures model using the Generalized Estimation Equation examined the relationship between disease activity and MVPA. Results: Average disease activity (DAS28-CRP3) was 3.1 (SD, 1.4), 36% were physically inactive and 29% met MVPA recommendations. There was a negative borderline association with disease activity (OR=0.89; 95%CI 0.79–1.00). Correlates of meeting MVPA recommendations, adjusting for disease activity, were being Caucasian (OR=2.95; 95%CI 1.29–6.75), older age (age >69 OR=0.58; 95%CI 0.36–0.92) poor mental health (OR=0.63; 95%CI 0.41–0.95), poor physical function (OR=0.59; 95%CI 0.34–1.01), overweight/obese (body mass index >25–30 OR=0.69; 95%CI 0.50–0.95; >30–39.9 OR=0.60; 95%CI 0.41–0.88; ≤40 OR=0.24; 95%CI 0.08–0.74) and patient global assessment (≥10-20) OR=0.57; 95%CI 0.39–0.83). Conclusions: A small proportion met MVPA recommendations despite well-controlled disease. Disease activity was negatively associated with PA over time. PA correlates were linked to lifestyle, mental health and patient perceptions of disease, suggesting PA interventions that address patient perspectives may facilitate RA management. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

BackgroundTo assess the effect of baricitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX).MethodsIn this double-blind phase 3 study, patients were randomised 3:3:2 to placebo (n=488), baricitinib 4 mg once daily (n=487), or adalimumab 40 mg biweekly (n=330) with background MTX. PROs included the SF-36, EuroQol 5-D (EQ-5D) index scores and visual analogue scale, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), patient’s assessment of pain and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Rheumatoid Arthritis (WPAI-RA), and measures collected in electronic patient daily diaries: duration and severity of morning joint stiffness (MJS), Worst Ttiredness and Worst Joint Pain. The primary study endpoint was at week 12. Treatment comparisons were assessed with logistic regression for categorical measures or analysis of covariance for continuous variables.ResultsCompared with placebo and adalimumab, baricitinib showed statistically significant improvements (p≤0.05) in HAQ-DI, PtGA, pain, FACIT-F, SF-36 physical component score, EQ-5D index scores and WPAI-RA daily activity at week 12. Improvements were maintained for measures assessed to week 52. Statistically significant improvement in patient diary measures (MJS duration and severity), worst tiredness and worst joint pain were observed for baricitinib versus placebo and adalimumab at week 12 (p≤0.05).ConclusionsBaricitinib provided significantly greater improvement in most PROs compared with placebo and adalimumab, including physical function MJS, pain, fatigue and quality of life. Improvement was maintained to the end of the study (week 52).Trial registrationNCT01710358.

Background The collection of routine clinical data in the setting of research registries can serve an important role in understanding real world care. However, relatively little is known about the patient experience in registries, motivating us to survey patients enrolled in two chronic disease registries. Methods We conducted similar surveys in two disease-based registries based at one academic medical center in the US. One group of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) had been enrolled in a registry, and we focused on retention factors. In a second group of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) recently enrolled or considering enrollment, we examined factors that would influence their enrollment and willingness to answer frequent questionnaires and give biospecimens. The surveys were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the two cohorts were compared using nonparametric and chi-square tests. Results We received 150 (50%) completed surveys from RA and 169 (63%) from IBD patients. Mean age of subjects was 62 years in RA and 43 in IBD with more women respondents with RA (83%) than IBD (62%). The two groups described very similar factors as the top three motivations for participation: desire to help others, desire to improve care of own disease, and ease of volunteering. Preferred methods of surveying included mail, e-mail, but telephone was not favored; age was an important correlate of this preference. Respondents preferred surveys either every 1–3 months (28.7% RA and 55.0% IBD) or every 4–6 months (50.7% RA and 29.0% IBD). They differed in the preference for payment for answering surveys with 68.0% with RA answering that no payment was necessary but only 36.1% with IBD felt similarly. Conclusions Patients engaged in clinical registries demonstrate a high level of commitment to improve care and many report a willingness to answer questions relatively frequently. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0343-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective To quantify differences and determine the factors contributing to the difference in patient global assessment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity (PtGA) between RA patients with multiple morbidities (RA-MM) and those with RA only. Methods We compared the PtGA between RA-MM patients and those with RA only, followed up in a longitudinal cohort (n = 1,040). In analyses performed on RA-MM patients (n = 575) and those with RA only (matched for swollen joint count, tender joint count, evaluator global assessment, and disease duration), the mean difference in PtGA (ΔPtGA) between the 2 groups was assessed. The contribution of patient characteristics to the explained variation of ΔPtGA in the matched cohort was calculated as semipartial R2 and summarized as the percentage of the total R2 in linear regression models. Results RA-MM patients reported higher (or worse) PtGA, with an increased PtGA associated with more morbidities (P for linear trend

ObjectivesDespite the therapeutic value of current rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatments, agents with alternative modes of action are required. Mavrilimumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor-α, was evaluated in patients with moderate-to-severe RA.MethodsIn a phase IIb study (NCT01706926), patients with inadequate response to ≥1 synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug(s), Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)−C reactive protein (CRP)/erythrocyte sedimentation rate ≥3.2, ≥4 swollen joints despite methotrexate (MTX) were randomised 1:1:1:1 to subcutaneous mavrilimumab (150, 100, 30 mg), or placebo every other week (eow), plus MTX for 24 weeks. Coprimary outcomes were DAS28−CRP change from baseline to week 12 and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response rate (week 24).Results326 patients were randomised (150 mg, n=79; 100 mg, n=85; 30 mg, n=81; placebo, n=81); 305 completed the study (September 2012–June 2013). Mavrilimumab treatment significantly reduced DAS28−CRP scores from baseline compared with placebo (change from baseline (SE); 150 mg: −1.90 (0.14), 100 mg: −1.64 (0.13), 30 mg: −1.37 (0.14), placebo: −0.68 (0.14); pSignificantly more mavrilimumab-treated patients achieved ACR20 compared with placebo (week 24: 73.4%, 61.2%, 50.6% vs 24.7%, respectively (pConclusionsMavrilimumab significantly decreased RA disease activity, with clinically meaningful responses observed 1 week after treatment initiation, representing a novel mechanism of action with persuasive therapeutic potential.Trial registration numberNCT01706926; results.

Baricitinib is an oral, reversible inhibitor of the Janus kinases JAK1 and JAK2 that may have therapeutic value in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.We conducted a 52-week, phase 3, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial in which 1307 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who were receiving background therapy with methotrexate were randomly assigned to one of three regimens in a 3:3:2 ratio: placebo (switched to baricitinib after 24 weeks), 4 mg of baricitinib once daily, or 40 mg of adalimumab (an anti-tumor necrosis factor α monoclonal antibody) every other week. End-point measures evaluated after adjustment for multiplicity included 20% improvement according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20 response) (the primary end point), the Disease Activity Score for 28 joints (DAS28), the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, and the Simplified Disease Activity Index at week 12, as well as radiographic progression of joint damage as measured by the van der Heijde modification of the total Sharp score (mTSS) (range, 0 to 448, with higher scores indicating greater structural joint damage) at week 24.More patients had an ACR20 response at week 12 with baricitinib than with placebo (primary end point, 70% vs. 40%, P0.001). All major secondary objectives were met, including inhibition of radiographic progression of joint damage, according to the mTSS at week 24 with baricitinib versus placebo (mean change from baseline, 0.41 vs. 0.90; P0.001) and an increased ACR20 response rate at week 12 with baricitinib versus adalimumab (70% vs. 61%, P=0.014). Adverse events, including infections, were more frequent through week 24 with baricitinib and adalimumab than with placebo. Cancers were reported in five patients (two who received baricitinib and three who received placebo). Baricitinib was associated with reductions in neutrophil counts and increases in levels of creatinine and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.In patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had had an inadequate response to methotrexate, baricitinib was associated with significant clinical improvements as compared with placebo and adalimumab. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Incyte; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01710358 .).

Background:The multi-biomarker disease activity (MBDA) blood test measures 12 protein biomarkers (IL-6, CRP, SAA, EGF, VEGF, VCAM, MMP-1, MMP-3, leptin, resistin, TNF-RI and YKL40). It uses a validated algorithm to provide a score on a scale of 1-100 for assessing disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The MBDA score reflects several molecular aspects of inflammation, including cytokines, acute phase reactants, growth factors, molecular adhesion, metalloproteinases and hormones. Insights gained by understanding how vaccination affects these biomarkers in healthy subjects - in whom the level of inflammation prior to vaccination should be low and stable - may aid the understanding of how vaccination affects patients with RA.Objectives:The goal of this study was to understand how immunization of healthy subjects with the influenza vaccine affects the assessment of inflammation with the MBDA score and its 12 biomarkers.Methods:A 4-strain influenza virus vaccine (Fluarix Quadrivalent, GlaxoSmithKline) was administered intramuscularly to 22 healthy volunteer subjects on October 24, 2018. Serum samples were obtained immediately prior to vaccination (baseline) and 1, 2 and 3 weeks after vaccination. No restrictions were placed on subject activity. Samples were stored at -80oC until measurement of the 12 MBDA biomarkers for determination of the adjusted MBDA score, hereafter called the MBDA score. (Adjustment accounts for the effects of age, sex and adiposity1). MBDA scores (natural scale) and biomarker concentrations (log scale) were modeled using generalized estimating equations (GEE) that account for correlations between measurements from the same subject at multiple timepoints. Significance of MBDA score change or biomarker concentration change over time was determined by a likelihood ratio test of timepoints.Results:Of the 22 healthy subjects receiving the influenza virus vaccine, 14 (63.6%) were female, with mean (SD) age of 40.0 years (8.9). MBDA scores were low (44) for 15 (68%), 6 (27%) and 1 (5%) subjects at baseline, and this distribution was stable over time (Figure 1). Overall, MBDA scores did not change significantly over time (p=0.48, Figure 2). Mean changes in MBDA score (95% CI) from baseline to weeks 1, 2 and 3 were 0.32 (-3.07, 3.71), 0.82 (-3.03, 4.67) and 2.86 (-1.10, 6.82), respectively (Figure 2); the week 3 value becomes 0.95 (-1.78, 3.68) if the week 3 outlier is removed. Among the 66 post-baseline measurements of change in MBDA score (Figure 2), 3 (5%) exceeded the 95% CI for change in MBDA score in this study (i.e., 14). When assessing the entire cohort across all timepoints, EGF was the only biomarker that demonstrated statistically significant change over time (p=5.6 x 10-7). At weeks 1, 2 and 3, the mean relative concentrations of EGF, compared with baseline, were 0.62 (0.52, 0.74), 0.86 (0.70, 1.06) and 0.62 (0.50, 0.76), respectively.Figure 1Figure 2Conclusion:Immunization of 22 healthy subjects with a quadrivalent influenza vaccine did not have a statistically significant effect on MBDA scores during a 3-week observation, and it had minimal effect on the component biomarkers.References:[1]Curtis et al.Rheumatology [Oxford]2018;58:874Disclosure of Interests:Daniel Furst Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Actelion, Amgen, BMS, Corbus Pharmaceuticals, the National Institutes of Health, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche/Genentech, Consultant of: AbbVie, Actelion, Amgen, BMS, Cytori Therapeutics, Corbus Pharmaceuticals, the National Institutes of Health, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche/Genentech, Speakers bureau: CMC Connect (McCann Health Company), Lauren Lenz Shareholder of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Employee of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Megan Horton Shareholder of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Employee of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Darl Flake Shareholder of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Employee of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Eric Sasso Shareholder of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Employee of: Myriad Genetics, Inc., Michael E. Weinblatt Grant/research support from: BMS, Amgen, Lilly, Crescendo and Sonofi-Regeneron, Consultant of: Horizon Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Abbvie, Crescendo, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Gilead

Background:RA is a systemic autoimmune disease with heterogeneous manifestation. Recent advances in serum proteomics, such as the SomaScan®platform (SomaLogic, Inc., Boulder, USA), allow for a deeper exploration of the protein biomarkers associated with RA and a better understanding of the molecular aetiology of the disease.Objectives:To characterise the differences in baseline serum proteome of patients with RA (enrolled in the Phase IIIb Abatacept vs adaliMumab comParison in bioLogic-naïvERA subjects with background MTX [AMPLE] study)1compared with a healthy population, and to identify serum protein biomarkers associated with disease severity and radiographic progression.Methods:Patients in the AMPLE study had an inadequate response to MTX and were naïve to biologic DMARDs. Protein abundance was assessed in baseline serum samples from 440 AMPLE study patients and 123 healthy individuals with matching demographics using the SomaScan®platform, with 5000+ slow off-rate modified aptamers and up to 8 log of dynamic range.2Differential abundance testing was performed using linear models to identify differences in protein abundance in patients with RA vs healthy individuals. A separate analysis using a linear model was conducted in only the patients with RA to identify the proteins associated with DAS28 (CRP) and TSS. Pathway analyses were performed for proteins significantly (false discovery rate-adjusted p value Results:Compared with healthy individuals, >2000 serum proteins were significantly differentially expressed in patients with RA, including many proteins that have been associated with RA (e.g. serum amyloid A [SAA], CRP) and complement. Most of the protein expression differences were of small magnitude (fold change Conclusion:Our study revealed that thousands of serum proteins are differentially expressed and several pathways are dysregulated between patients with RA and healthy individuals. Additional pathways were identified that reflect disease severity, including joint damage, distinct from those pathways associated with the disease. The SomaScan®platform provides a unique proteomic tool with a wide dynamic range for the identification of serum protein biomarkers associated with RA and disease severity. Proteomic signatures should be considered in clinical trials to better understand disease pathogenesis and predict risk in response to treatment.References:[1]Schiff M, et al.Ann Rheum Dis2014;73:86–94.[2]Gold L, et al.PLoS One2010;5:e15004.Acknowledgments:Rachel Rankin (medical writing, Caudex; funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb)Disclosure of Interests:David Galbraith Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Minal Caliskan Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Omar Jabado Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sarah Hu Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roy Fleischmann Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Akros, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer, IngelhCentrexion, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Nektar, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche, Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi Genzyme, Selecta, Taiho, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, ACEA, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, UCB, Michael Weinblatt Grant/research support from: Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Crescendo, Lily, Sanofi/Regeneron, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Crescendo, Gilead, Horizon, Lily, Pfizer, Roche, Sean Connolly Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Michael A Maldonado Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sheng Gao Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb

Background:Upadacitinib (UPA), an oral selective JAK1 inhibitor, has demonstrated favorable efficacy and acceptable safety in five Phase 3 global studies in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).1–5Objectives:This analysis reports the efficacy and safety of UPA in predefined RA patient subgroups based on differences in baseline demographics and disease activity.Methods:Data were pooled from three pivotal, double-blind, PBO-controlled, multicenter, Phase 3 studies in patients with RA who had an inadequate response(IR) to conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARD-IR: SELECT-NEXT [N=661]), MTX(MTX-IR; SELECT-COMPARE[N=1629]), or biologic DMARDs(bDMARD-IR: SELECT-BEYOND[N=498]). Two integrated analysis sets were evaluated: one comparing UPA 15 mg QD vs PBO(SELECT-NEXT, SELECT-COMPARE, SELECT-BEYOND) and the other comparing UPA 15 mg QD and UPA 30 mg QD vs PBO(SELECT-NEXT, SELECT-BEYOND). All patients received background treatment with csDMARDs. The proportion of patients achieving ACR20 and DAS28(CRP) ≤3.2 at Week 12 was evaluated by predefined baseline demographics and disease activity measure groups, including age, sex, weight, BMI, race, geographic region, duration of RA, RF, and ACPA status, and level of high sensitivity CRP. Non-responder imputation was used for missing data. Subgroup analyses for safety were performed for age, race, sex, weight, BMI, and Asian region.Results:Across the three Phase 3 studies, 1036, 384, and 1041 patients received UPA 15 mg QD, UPA 30 mg QD or PBO, respectively. The demographic and baseline disease characteristics in the two integrated analysis sets were balanced across treatment groups. ACR20 and DAS28 ≤3.2 response rates at Week 12 were consistently higher with UPA 15 mg and UPA 30 mg vs PBO across the evaluated demographic and baseline disease characteristics(Figure 1a,Figure 1b). The efficacy of UPA 15 mg QD was generally similar to that observed with UPA 30 mg QD. At 12 weeks, the proportion of patients with treatment-emergent AEs, serious AEs, severe AEs, and AEs leading to discontinuation were generally comparable across different age, sex, race, weight, and BMI groups. Compared with the global population, patients receiving UPA in the Asian region had a higher rate of CPK elevations(UPA 30 mg only) and herpes zoster; herpes zoster also has been observed to be higher in the Asian region with other JAK inhibitors.6,7Conclusion:In this analysis of pooled integrated efficacy data in csDMARD-IR or bDMARD-IR patients with RA, UPA 15 mg or 30 mg QD in combination with csDMARDs improved efficacy outcomes at Week 12 when compared with PBO across all predefined subgroups evaluated.References:[1]Burmester GR, et al. Lancet 2018 23;391:2503–2512;[2]Genovese MC, et al. Lancet 2018; 391:2513–24;[3]Smolen JS, et al. Lancet 2019 May 23[Epub ahead of print];[4]van Vollenhoven R, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2018;70(Suppl. 10): Abstract 891;[5]Fleischmann R, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2018;70(Suppl. 10): Abstract 890;[6]Winthrop KL, et al. Arthritis Rheum 2014;66:2675-84;[7] Winthrop KL, et al. ACR 2016 [Abstract 3027]Disclosure of Interests:Michael Weinblatt Grant/research support from: Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Crescendo, Lily, Sanofi/Regeneron, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Crescendo, Gilead, Horizon, Lily, Pfizer, Roche, Eduardo Mysler Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi, and Pfizer., Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi, and Pfizer, Andrew Ostor Consultant of: MSD, Pfizer, Lilly, Abbvie, Novartis, Roche, Gilead and BMS, Speakers bureau: MSD, Pfizer, Lilly, Abbvie, Novartis, Roche, Gilead and BMS, Aaron Broadwell Grant/research support from: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, GSK, Horizon, Janssen, Mallinckrodt, Novartis, Pfizer, Radius, Sanofi-Regeneron, UCB, Sławomir Jeka Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, MSD, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Egis, UCB, Celgene, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, MSD, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Egis, UCB, Celgene, Kendall Dunlap Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Jessica Suboticki Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Jeffrey Enejosa Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Barbara Hendrickson Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Sheng Zhong Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Katya Cherny Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Grace Wright Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Exagen, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, Myriad Autoimmune, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme Regeneron, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Exagen, Lilly, Medical Education Resource, Myriad Autoimmune, Novartis, Sanofi Genzyme Regeneron, UCB, and Vindico