Search

At the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) 2022 annual meeting, the Collaborative Research Network (CRN) met to present updates on several projects. These included the GRAPPA-Industry biomarker projects, Axial Psoriatic Arthritis Molecular and Clinical Characterisation Study, Axial Involvement in Psoriatic Arthritis Cohort (AXIS) study, and the Health Initiatives in Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Consortium European States (HIPPOCRATES). The meeting concluded with a discussion on pathways to further academia-industry collaboration., (Copyright © 2023 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

The 2022 annual meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) was held from July 14 to 17, 2022, in New York City, New York, USA, and was attended by 420 rheumatologists, dermatologists, basic scientists, allied health professionals, patient research partners, and industry partners from 31 countries. A GRAPPA executive retreat, a Trainee Symposium, and the Patient Research Partners Network meeting were held prior to the annual meeting. Presentations included updates in basic research, focusing on biomarkers, personalization of treatments, and the promise of single-cell omics, elucidating the pathogenesis of psoriatic disease (PsD). Presentations also highlighted guttate and plaque psoriasis (PsO), the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its treatments on patients with PsD globally, and the effects of sex and gender in PsD. Reports of ongoing projects included an update on the recently published treatment recommendations, educational initiatives, and the Diagnostic Ultrasound Enthesitis Tool (DUET) study. A session on early identification of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) among patients with PsO included an update on PsA screening tools. Debates were held on whether early intervention for PsO will reduce PsA, whether interleukin (IL)-17 or IL-23 inhibition is a better treatment for PsO and PsA, similarities and differences between axial PsA and axial spondyloarthritis with PsO, and data affecting the understanding of guttate and plaque PsO. Reports from the International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) and Young GRAPPiAns concurrent sessions were presented in addition to reports of several other partner groups. Here, we highlight features of the annual meeting and introduce the manuscripts published together as a meeting report., (Copyright © 2023 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) leadership congregated for a strategic planning meeting before the 2022 GRAPPA annual meeting in New York, USA. Meeting aims were to review GRAPPA's performance in relation to its 2016 goals and identify successes and areas for further improvement, identify key GRAPPA priorities and activities for the next 5 years, and explore committee structures to best support these aims., (Copyright © 2023 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

A core mission of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) is to provide education about psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis globally. This is a multifaceted endeavor involving in-person and virtual lectures, discussions, podcasts, and archived videos directed toward clinicians and researchers who are involved with psoriatic disease (PsD) care. In partnership with patient service leagues, we also aim to provide education to patients with PsD. At the 2022 annual meeting, an update of the ongoing and expected educational initiatives was presented. A project with a high educational and research value is the Axial Involvement in Psoriatic Arthritis (AXIS) cohort established in collaboration with the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis international Society (ASAS). Here we summarize the status of the project., (Copyright © 2023 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) working group-comprising rheumatologists, dermatologists, methodologists, and patient research partners-provided updates at the GRAPPA 2022 annual meeting on its work to evaluate composite outcome measures for PsA. Ten composite outcome measures were considered. Initial steps were to define the population, the purpose of use, and the proposed pros and cons of the 10 candidate composite instruments for PsA. Preliminary Delphi exercises within the working group and GRAPPA stakeholders confirmed high priority for evaluating minimal disease activity (MDA); moderate priority for Disease Activity in PsA (DAPSA), American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI), 3 visual analog scale (VAS), and 4VAS; and low priority for Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), Psoriatic Arthritis Responder Criteria (PsARC), and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3). Further appraisal of candidate composite instruments is ongoing., (Copyright © 2023 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: SRJ reports grants from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corbus, GSK, Roche and Merck, and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Ikaria.

Objective: The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC), American College of Rheumatology (ACR), and the Lupus Foundation of America are developing a revised systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) damage index (the SLICC/ACR Damage Index [SDI]). Shifts in the concept of damage in SLE have occurred with new insights into disease manifestations, diagnostics, and therapy. We evaluated contemporary constructs in SLE damage to inform development of the revised SDI., Methods: We conducted a 3-part qualitative study of international SLE experts. Facilitated small groups evaluated the construct underlying the concept of damage in SLE. A consensus meeting using nominal group technique was conducted to achieve agreement on aspects of the conceptual framework and scope of the revised damage index. The framework was finally reviewed and agreed upon by the entire group., Results: Fifty participants from 13 countries were included. The 8 thematic clusters underlying the construct of SLE damage were purpose, items, weighting, reversibility, impact, time frame, attribution, and perspective. The revised SDI will be a discriminative index to measure morbidity in SLE, independent of activity or impact on the patient, and should be related to mortality. The SDI is primarily intended for research purposes and should take a life-course approach. Damage can occur before a diagnosis of SLE but should be attributable to SLE. Damage to an organ is irreversible, but the functional consequences on that organ may improve over time through physiological adaptation or treatment., Conclusion: We identified shifts in the paradigm of SLE damage and developed a unifying conceptual framework. These data form the groundwork for the next phases of SDI development., (© 2021 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To evaluate whether a change in the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria threshold score affects accurate classification of SLE cases compared to disease-based control subjects. We evaluated a range of threshold scores to determine the score that maximizes the accurate classification of early SLE., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study comparing SLE cases and control patients. A EULAR/ACR criteria score was calculated using baseline information. Sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratios (+LRs), and negative likelihood ratios (-LRs) with 95% CIs were used to evaluate operating characteristics. Threshold scores of 6 to 12 were evaluated in subjects with early disease (ie, disease duration of ≤ 5 years). +LRs > 10 and -LRs < 0.1 provide evidence to rule in or rule out SLE., Results: A total of 2764 patients were included: 1980 SLE cases who fulfilled either the ACR or Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics criteria and 784 control subjects. The EULAR/ACR SLE criteria had a sensitivity of 98% (95% CI 97-98), a specificity of 99% (95% CI 98-100), a +LR of 95.5 (95% CI 48.0-190), and a -LR 0.03 (95% CI 0.02-0.03). The criteria operated well in those with early disease, in women, in men, and in White, Black, Chinese, and Filipino people. A score of 10 maximized the accurate classification of patients with early disease (+LR 174.4, 95% CI 43.8-694.6; -LR 0.03, 95% CI 0.02-0.04). An increase in the threshold score from 10 to 11 resulted in significant worsening in the -LR (threshold score 10: -LR 0.03, 95% CI 0.02-0.03 vs threshold score 11: -LR 0.05, 95% CI 0.04-0.06)., Conclusion: The EULAR/ACR SLE classification criteria threshold score of 10 performs well, particularly among those with early disease and across sexes and ethnicities., (Copyright © 2023 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

Objectives: To determine the ability of a EULAR/ACR SLE criteria score ≥20 to predict damage accrual and mortality., Methods: Inception SLE patients from the Toronto Lupus Clinic recruited in the first 12 months after diagnosis were included. A EULAR/ACR criteria score was calculated based on the baseline clinical and laboratory information. A EULAR/ACR score of 20 was used as a threshold to compare outcomes between groups (EULAR/ACR score <20 vs ≥20), based on receiver operating characteristic analysis., Results: 867 SLE patients were included. The group of patients with the higher score accrued more damage compared to the group with the lower score in the first 10 years after diagnosis (210 [46%] vs 167 [40%] for patients with a score ≥20 vs < 20 respectively p = 0.02). This was corroborated by multivariable regression analysis (HR 1.34, p = 0.007). Patients with a score of ≥20 had a higher risk of death (HR 2.34, p = 0.001). When excluding patients who had kidney involvement at baseline, the group with the higher score continued to be at a higher risk of damage accrued (HR 1.46, p = 0.006), although there was no difference in mortality between groups (p = 0.54)., Conclusion: A EULAR/ACR criteria score ≥20 at baseline is an indicator of long-term outcomes, especially damage accrual., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interests No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Set working group is focused on the development of a core set of instruments used to assess the domains described in the 2016 PsA Core Domain Set. At the 2021 annual meeting, the group presented an update on the domain of structural damage. In this report, we discuss the steps taken to assess the domain match and feasibility of plain radiographic instruments in the assessment of structural damage in PsA., (Copyright © 2022 by The Journal of Rheumatology.)

Objective: The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria and the revised American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997 criteria are list based, counting each SLE manifestation equally. We derived a classification rule based on giving variable weights to the SLICC criteria and compared its performance to the revised ACR 1997, the unweighted SLICC 2012, and the newly reported European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR)/ACR 2019 criteria sets., Methods: The physician-rated patient scenarios used to develop the SLICC 2012 classification criteria were reemployed to devise a new weighted classification rule using multiple linear regression. The performance of the rule was evaluated on an independent set of expert-diagnosed patient scenarios and compared to the performance of the previously reported classification rules., Results: The weighted SLICC criteria and the EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria had less sensitivity but better specificity compared to the list-based revised ACR 1997 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria. There were no statistically significant differences between any pair of rules with respect to overall agreement with the physician diagnosis., Conclusion: The 2 new weighted classification rules did not perform better than the existing list-based rules in terms of overall agreement on a data set originally generated to assess the SLICC criteria. Given the added complexity of summing weights, researchers may prefer the unweighted SLICC criteria. However, the performance of a classification rule will always depend on the populations from which the cases and non-cases are derived and whether the goal is to prioritize sensitivity or specificity., (© 2020, American College of Rheumatology.)

Background/objectives: The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2019 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus system showed high specificity, while attaining also high sensitivity. We hereby analysed the performance of the individual criteria items and their contribution to the overall performance of the criteria., Methods: We combined the EULAR/ACR derivation and validation cohorts for a total of 1197 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and n=1074 non-SLE patients with a variety of conditions mimicking SLE, such as other autoimmune diseases, and calculated the sensitivity and specificity for antinuclear antibodies (ANA) and the 23 specific criteria items. We also tested performance omitting the EULAR/ACR criteria attribution rule, which defines that items are only counted if not more likely explained by a cause other than SLE., Results: Positive ANA, the new entry criterion, was 99.5% sensitive, but only 19.4% specific, against a non-SLE population that included other inflammatory rheumatic, infectious, malignant and metabolic diseases. The specific criteria items were highly variable in sensitivity (from 0.42% for delirium and 1.84% for psychosis to 75.6% for antibodies to double-stranded DNA), but their specificity was uniformly high, with low C3 or C4 (83.0%) and leucopenia <4.000/mm³ (83.8%) at the lowest end. Unexplained fever was 95.3% specific in this cohort. Applying the attribution rule improved specificity, particularly for joint involvement., Conclusions: Changing the position of the highly sensitive, non-specific ANA to an entry criterion and the attribution rule resulted in a specificity of >80% for all items, explaining the higher overall specificity of the criteria set., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To determine the ominosity of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification Criteria by determining its predictive role for disease severity in the first 5 years following diagnosis., Methods: 867 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) from the Toronto Lupus Clinic were included (all first 12 months after SLE diagnosis). The EULAR/ACR criteria score was calculated based on baseline information. To determine disease severity in the first 5 years after diagnosis, adjusted mean SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (AMS), flares, remission and immunosuppressive treatment were used as outcomes. The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) registry comprised the validation cohort., Results: Based on receiver operating characteristic analysis, a EULAR/ACR score of 20 was used as a threshold to compare outcomes between groups. In the first 5 years of disease course, patients with a score of ≥20 had higher AMS scores (p<0.001) and were more likely to ever experience a flare (p<0.001). These patients had lower probabilities of achieving remission and higher requirements for immunosuppressives. Results were confirmed in the SLICC validation cohort. Patients with a score of ≥20 had higher AMS during the first 5 years of disease (5.4 vs 3.1% and ≥20 vs <20 respectively, p≤0.001). The score correlated with AMS (r=0.43, p≤0.001) in the same time frame., Conclusion: A EULAR/ACR score of ≥20 is an indicator of ominosity in SLE. Patients with a score of ≥20 were characterised by a more active disease course throughout the first 5 years. These criteria provide prognostic information regarding disease severity in the first 5 years following diagnosis., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SRJ reports grants from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corbus, GSK, Roche, Merck and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Ikaria., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) held its annual meeting in 2020 in an online format due to travel restrictions during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19; caused by SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. The virtual meeting was attended by 351 rheumatologists, dermatologists, representatives of biopharmaceutical companies, and patient research partners. Similar to previous years, GRAPPA's annual meeting focused on the 3 overlapping missions of education, research, and clinical care of psoriatic disease. Trainee sessions this year included the annual trainee symposium and a grant-writing workshop. Plenary sessions included updates on COVID-19 and psoriatic disease from multispecialty and patient perspectives, and updates on pustular psoriasis and associated musculoskeletal manifestations. Progress on research and updates were presented for the following groups: Collaborative Research Network, Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis Working Group, International Dermatology Outcome Measures, Composite Measures, Education Committee, and Treatment Guidelines. New this year were 3 concurrent workshops on ultrasound assessment of joints and entheses, magnetic resonance imaging of psoriatic arthritis, and pustular psoriasis efficacy endpoints; 6 "Meet the Expert" sessions; and facilitated "poster tours." In our prologue, we introduce the papers that summarize this meeting., (Copyright © 2021 by The Journal of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Information about the prediagnosis period in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is limited. The present study was undertaken to compare health care utilization related to musculoskeletal issues during a 5-year period prior to the diagnosis of PsA versus that of subjects with no prior inflammatory arthritis within a primary care setting., Methods: We conducted a population-based, matched cohort study using electronic medical records and administrative data in Ontario, Canada. Age- and sex-matched cohorts of PsA patients and comparators from the same family physicians were assembled. Comparators were not allowed to have prior spondyloarthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, or rheumatoid arthritis billing code diagnoses. The study outcomes included health care utilization and costs related to nonspecific musculoskeletal issues during a 5-year period prior to the index date., Results: We studied 462 PsA patients and 2,310 matched comparators. The odds ratio (OR) related to visiting a primary care physician for nonspecific musculoskeletal issues in patients with PsA was 2.14 (95% confidence interval 1.73-2.64) in the year immediately preceding the index date and was similarly elevated up to 5 years prior. The OR related to using other musculoskeletal-related health care services, including musculoskeletal specialists visits, joint injections, joint imaging, and emergency department visits, was higher in PsA as early as 5 years preceding the index date. Total and musculoskeletal-related health care costs prior to the index date were higher for patients with PsA versus comparators., Conclusion: A prodromal PsA phase characterized by nonspecific musculoskeletal symptoms may exist. Further study is needed to determine if this represents a window for earlier diagnosis of PsA., (© 2020, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Numerous patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) exist for the measurement of physical function for psoriatic arthritis (PsA), but only a few are validated comprehensively. The objective of this project was to prioritize PROM for measuring physical function for potential incorporation into a standardized outcome measurement set for PsA., Methods: A working group of 13 members including 2 patient research partners was formed. PROM measuring physical function in PsA were identified through a systematic literature review and recommendations by the working group. The rationale for inclusion and exclusion from the original list of existing PROM was thoroughly discussed and 2 rounds of Delphi exercises were conducted to achieve consensus., Results: Twelve PROM were reviewed and discussed. Six PROM were prioritized: Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and 4 modifications (HAQ-Disability Index, HAQ-Spondyloarthritis, modified HAQ, multidimensional HAQ), Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form survey physical functioning domain, and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical functioning module., Conclusion: Through discussion and Delphi exercises, we achieved consensus to prioritize 6 physical function PROM for PsA. These 6 PROM will undergo further appraisal using the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1.

Objective: To develop new classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) jointly supported by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)., Methods: This international initiative had four phases. 1) Evaluation of antinuclear antibody (ANA) as an entry criterion through systematic review and meta-regression of the literature and criteria generation through an international Delphi exercise, an early patient cohort, and a patient survey. 2) Criteria reduction by Delphi and nominal group technique exercises. 3) Criteria definition and weighting based on criterion performance and on results of a multi-criteria decision analysis. 4) Refinement of weights and threshold scores in a new derivation cohort of 1,001 subjects and validation compared with previous criteria in a new validation cohort of 1,270 subjects., Results: The 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria for SLE include positive ANA at least once as obligatory entry criterion; followed by additive weighted criteria grouped in 7 clinical (constitutional, hematologic, neuropsychiatric, mucocutaneous, serosal, musculoskeletal, renal) and 3 immunologic (antiphospholipid antibodies, complement proteins, SLE-specific antibodies) domains, and weighted from 2 to 10. Patients accumulating ≥10 points are classified. In the validation cohort, the new criteria had a sensitivity of 96.1% and specificity of 93.4%, compared with 82.8% sensitivity and 93.4% specificity of the ACR 1997 and 96.7% sensitivity and 83.7% specificity of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics 2012 criteria., Conclusion: These new classification criteria were developed using rigorous methodology with multidisciplinary and international input, and have excellent sensitivity and specificity. Use of ANA entry criterion, hierarchically clustered, and weighted criteria reflects current thinking about SLE and provides an improved foundation for SLE research., (© 2019, American College of Rheumatology.)

The 2018 Annual Meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) was held in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and was attended by rheumatologists, dermatologists, and representatives of biopharmaceutical companies and patients. As in previous years, GRAPPA members held a symposium for trainees to discuss their research in psoriatic disease with experts in the field. Other subjects featured during the annual meeting included GRAPPA-Collaborative Research Network's second annual meeting; the association between psoriatic disease and cardiovascular events; updates from working groups in International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT); a 2016 study that benchmarked care in psoriatic arthritis (PsA); the genetic contribution to PsA and strong need for genome-wide association studies on patients with PsA; the GRAPPA Ultrasound Working Group's goal to optimize the evaluation of enthesitis in patients with PsA using ultrasound through the development and validation of new instruments; and an update on GRAPPA's research and educational projects. In this prologue, we introduce the papers that summarize the meeting.

At the 2018 annual meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA), members received updates on several ongoing efforts. Among them were updates on GRAPPA's patient research partners; educational initiatives; research efforts, including the trainee symposium, pilot research grants, and Collaborative Research Network; treatment recommendations; and additional efforts related to advancing the understanding of disease aspects.

Objective: To develop an evidence-based guideline for the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), as a collaboration between the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF)., Methods: We identified critical outcomes in PsA and clinically relevant PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes) questions. A Literature Review Team performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence supporting the benefits and harms of available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for PsA. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A voting panel, including rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health professionals, and patients, achieved consensus on the direction and the strength of the recommendations., Results: The guideline covers the management of active PsA in patients who are treatment-naive and those who continue to have active PsA despite treatment, and addresses the use of oral small molecules, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-12/23 inhibitors (IL-12/23i), IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4-Ig (abatacept), and a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib). We also developed recommendations for psoriatic spondylitis, predominant enthesitis, and treatment in the presence of concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, or serious infections. We formulated recommendations for a treat-to-target strategy, vaccinations, and nonpharmacologic therapies. Six percent of the recommendations were strong and 94% conditional, indicating the importance of active discussion between the health care provider and the patient to choose the optimal treatment., Conclusion: The 2018 ACR/NPF PsA guideline serves as a tool for health care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate therapy in common clinical scenarios. Best treatment decisions consider each individual patient situation. The guideline is not meant to be proscriptive and should not be used to limit treatment options for patients with PsA., (© 2018, American College of Rheumatology.)

The members of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) have shown great interest in developing a common GRAPPA database. To address this interest, GRAPPA included a symposium at its 2017 annual meeting to examine the concepts of registries and databases. At this symposium, examples of existing databases were reviewed, and their challenges and achievements were discussed.

The 2017 Annual Meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) was held in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and was attended by rheumatologists, dermatologists, representatives of biopharmaceutical companies, and patients. As in previous years, GRAPPA members held a symposium for trainees to discuss their research in psoriatic disease with experts in the field. Other subjects featured during the annual meeting included a discussion of the history, clinical features, controversies, and immunogenetics of juvenile psoriatic arthritis; updates from working groups in Outcome Measures in Rheumatology and International Dermatology Outcome Measures; a discussion of the benefits and challenges of setting up a longitudinal psoriatic arthritis (PsA) database; 3 separate discussions of the effects of the microbiome on skin and joints in psoriasis and PsA; a discussion of options for assessing joints and entheses in PsA by ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging; an update on GRAPPA's research and educational projects; a discussion of patient centricity, including the incorporation of patient research partners (PRP) into psoriasis and PsA research and educational efforts, from GRAPPA's PRP; and a discussion of the GRAPPA-Collaborative Research Network's inaugural meeting. In this prologue, we introduce the papers that summarize that meeting.

The 2016 annual meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) was held in Miami, Florida, USA, and attended by rheumatologists, dermatologists, and representatives of biopharmaceutical companies and patient groups. As in previous years, GRAPPA members held a symposium for trainees to discuss their research in psoriatic disease with experts in the field. A strategic planning session was convened by the Steering Committee this year to review the work of GRAPPA since its inception in 2003. Other subjects featured during the annual meeting included a partnership with KPMG LLP (UK) to conduct interviews at research centers worldwide to analyze the process of care in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA); a discussion of the effects of interleukin 17-related pathways on the skin and joints in psoriasis and PsA; summaries of recently published treatment recommendations and related guides; 4 separate discussions of psoriasis patient examinations; updates from working groups in the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology and the International Dermatology Outcome Measures; a discussion of patient centricity from GRAPPA's patient research partners; and an update of research and educational projects from GRAPPA. In this prologue, we introduce the papers that summarize that meeting.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Set working group recently published the updated 2016 psoriatic arthritis (PsA) core domain set, a set of disease features that should be measured in all clinical trials. At the GRAPPA annual meeting in July 2016, the PsA working group presented the updated PsA core domain set endorsed by 90% of participants at OMERACT in May 2016 and drafted a roadmap for the development of the PsA core outcome measurement set. In this manuscript, we review the development process of the PsA core domain set and the ongoing and proposed work streams for development of a PsA core measurement set.

In advance of its 2016 annual meeting, members of the steering committee of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) convened for a strategic planning meeting. The purpose of this advance meeting was to review the work of GRAPPA since its inception in 2003, ascertain and review the current priorities of the group, and devise a strategy for proceeding. The key accomplishments of GRAPPA to date, priorities and objectives for the next 5 years, and goals and opportunities for the GRAPPA committees were discussed. GRAPPA has a responsibility and commitment to patients, its members, and partners to innovate, inspire, and improve knowledge and the ability to care for people with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis.

At the 2015 annual meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA), attendees were presented with brief updates on several ongoing initiatives, including educational projects. Updates were presented on the treatment recommendations project, the development of simple criteria to identify inflammatory musculoskeletal disease, new patient/physician Delphi exercises, and BIODAM (identifying biomarkers that predict progressive structural joint damage). The publication committee also gave a report. Herein we summarize those project updates.

In preparation for strategic planning of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA), a special session titled the Presidential Round Table took place during the GRAPPA annual meeting in Stockholm, Sweden, in July 2015. During this session, past, current, and incoming presidents of GRAPPA reflected on GRAPPA's history and provided insights about GRAPPA's future, followed by general discussion by the membership.

The 2015 Annual Meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) was held in Stockholm, Sweden, and attended by rheumatologists, dermatologists, and representatives of biopharmaceutical companies and patient groups. In this prologue, we introduce the articles that summarize that meeting. As in previous years, GRAPPA members held a Trainees Symposium, providing an opportunity for trainees to discuss their research in psoriatic disease with experts in the field. Two dermatology sessions were held: an update on the International Dermatology Outcome Measures group; and a description of a new tool, the Comprehensive Assessment of the Psoriasis Patient, to more accurately assess the full burden of plaque psoriasis and its subtypes. Four distinct plenary sessions were held to update members on the status of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) initiative. GRAPPA's patient research partners discussed their 2 years of involvement in GRAPPA activities and were active in several sessions before and during the 2015 annual meeting. New work was presented toward developing a patient-reported instrument to measure flare in psoriatic disease, and the status of GRAPPA's multiple research and continuing education programs in psoriasis and PsA was summarized. Finally, a Presidential Round Table was held in which the past, current, and incoming presidents reflected on GRAPPA's history and provided insights about its future.

Objective: The Canadian Rheumatology Association (CRA) and the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) have collaborated to update the recommendations for the management of spondyloarthritis (SpA)., Methods: A working group was assembled and consisted of the SPARCC executive committee, rheumatologist leaders from SPARCC collaborating sites, Canadian rheumatologists from across the country with an interest in SpA (both academic and community), a rheumatology trainee with an interest in SpA, an epidemiologist/health services researcher, a member of the CRA executive, a member of the CRA therapeutics committee, and a patient representative from the Canadian Spondylitis Association. An extensive review was conducted of literature published from 2007 to 2014 involving the management of SpA. The working group created draft recommendations using multiple rounds of Web-based surveys and an in-person conference. A survey was sent to the membership of the CRA to obtain an extended review that was used to finalize the recommendations., Results: Guidelines for the management of SpA were created. Part I focuses on the principles of management of SpA in Canada and includes 6 general management principles, 5 ethical considerations, target groups for treatment recommendations, 2 wait time recommendations, and recommendations for disease monitoring. Also included are 6 modifications for application to juvenile SpA., Conclusion: These recommendations were developed based on current literature and applied to a Canadian healthcare context. It is hoped that the implementation of these recommendations will promote best practices in the treatment of SpA.

Objectives: Clinical research data are often collected on paper and later inputted onto an electronic database. This method is time consuming and potentially introduces errors. Therefore, to make primary data collection more efficient and less error prone we aimed to develop a touch-screen application for data collection in a psoriatic arthritis research clinic and compared it with the pre-existing paper-based system., Methods: We developed a Web application using Java and optimized it for the iPad®. It highlights missing fields for physicians in real time, and only permits submission of data collection form after corrections are made. For its evaluation, seven physicians participated, and before each patient visit they were randomly assigned paper or iPad® data entry. Number of errors, length of visit, and time between clinic visit and completion of data entry were measured., Results: A total of 106 patients seen in the clinic who agreed to participate were randomly assigned to be evaluated by clinic physicians using the iPad® (fifty-three patients) or a paper protocol (fifty-three patients). On average, 3.34 omissions were found per paper form, of which 2.24 would have been detected on the iPad®. The iPad® increased the mean patient encounter time from 37.2 minutes to 46.5 minutes, but eliminated delay between a clinic visit and its data entry., Conclusions: Entering data using the iPad® application makes the patient encounter slightly longer, but reduces "missing fields." It also eliminates the delay between clinic visit and data entry thus improving the efficiency of clinical data capture in a research setting.

The 2013 Annual Meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) was held in July 2013 in Toronto, Canada, and attended by rheumatologists, dermatologists, and representatives of biopharmaceutical companies and patient groups. We introduce the articles that summarize the meeting: A summary of a GRAPPA-organized Fellows Symposium adjacent to the 2013 European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology meeting in Istanbul; at the GRAPPA meeting proper, proceedings of a trainee symposium, where rheumatology fellows and dermatology residents presented their research; a summary of experiences and perspectives of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) research of 8 patient research partners with PsA who were invited to participate as delegates. Other presentations and discussions included an interactive session on composite measures of disease severity and response, including voting by GRAPPA members; a 3 part update of basic/translational/clinical science, including new bone formation, enthesitis pathophysiology, and comorbidity monitoring; a 3 part dermatology update on psoriasis outcome measures, the Brigham Scalp Nail Inverse Palmoplantar Psoriasis Composite Index, and large-scale databases; a short summary of the ongoing GRAPPA effort to update treatment guidelines for PsA; updates on several GRAPPA educational and rheumatology-related projects; and a discussion of clinical criteria to identify inflammatory arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, and spondylitis as distinguished from non-inflammatory conditions.

Objective: To determine the frequency of each American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criterion met at time of enrollment, and the increase in each of the criteria over 5 years., Methods: In 2000 the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) recruited an international inception cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE; ≥ 4 ACR criteria) who were followed at yearly intervals according to a standard protocol. Descriptive statistics were used to assess the total and cumulative number of ACR criteria met at each visit. Regression models were done to compare the increase of individual and cumulative criteria as a function of race/ethnicity group, and sex., Results: In all, 768 patients have been followed for a minimum of 5 years. Overall, 59.1% of the patients had an increase in the number of ACR criteria they met over the 5-year period. The mean number of ACR criteria met at enrollment was 5.04 ± 1.13 and at year 5 was 6.03 ± 1.42. At enrollment, nonwhite patients had a higher number of ACR criteria (5.19 ± 1.23) than white patients. The total number of criteria increased in both white and nonwhite ethnicities, but increased more among whites. Males had a slightly lower number of criteria at enrollment compared to females and males accrued fewer criteria at 5 years., Conclusion: In this international inception cohort of SLE patients with at least 4 ACR criteria at entry, there was an accumulation of ACR criteria over the following 5 years. The distribution of criteria both at inception and over 5 years is affected by sex and ethnicity.

Objective: To describe the development of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 Responder Index-50 (S2K RI-50) Website (www.s2k-ri-50.com) and to assess satisfaction with its training and examination modules among rheumatologists and rheumatology fellows., Methods: The development of the Website occurred in 3 phases. The first was a deployment phase that consisted of preparing the site map along with its content. The content included the S2K RI-50 training manual, the tests and corresponding question bank, and the online adaptive training module, along with the extensive site testing. The second phase included the participation of rheumatologists and trainees who completed the Website modules. The third was a quality assurance phase in which an online survey was developed to determine the satisfaction level of its users. Further modifications were implemented per participants' recommendations., Results: The site has been online since it was registered in September 2010. Fourteen rheumatologists and rheumatology trainees from different centers reviewed and completed the material contained in the Website. The survey revealed acceptance among rheumatologists for the Website's content, design, and presentation. The Website was rated as user-friendly and useful in familiarizing investigators with the S2K RI-50. After completion of the training and examination modules, participants reported a suitable level of preparation to implement the S2K RI-50 in clinical trials and research settings in a timely manner., Conclusion: The Website includes training and examination modules that familiarize rheumatologists with the S2K RI-50 and assesses their competence to use the index. This prepares them for the use of the S2K RI-50 in clinical trials and research settings.

Major advances have taken place in the study of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in the past several decades. Future trends in research will likely be based on these advances and will span a wide spectrum of activities including further refinement of disease definition and particularly disease pattern. More precise definitions for axial and peripheral disease and in particular arthritis mutilans will be necessary for further genetic and biomarker studies. Early definition of PsA is crucial. Future research will concentrate on identifying genetic and other biomarkers for early diagnosis, disease expression, disease progression, and comorbidities. Newer therapies will be developed as well.

Objective: To assess the degree to which physicians agree with each other and with ratings obtained with 3 existing responder indices, in rating the response to treatment of lupus nephritis., Methods: Lupus nephritis patient medical records from 125 pairs of visits (6 months apart) were used to create renal response scenarios. Seven nephrologists and 22 rheumatologists rated each scenario as demonstrating complete response, partial response, same, or worsening. The plurality (most frequent) rating of renal response by the physicians was compared with the calculated score from the renal component of the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) index (original and updated [2004] version) and of the Responder Index for Lupus Erythematosus (RIFLE). The degree of agreement among the physicians was assessed by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The degree of agreement between the plurality physician rating and ratings obtained with the established response indices was assessed using the kappa statistic., Results: The ICC among all physicians was 0.64 (0.62 for nephrologists and 0.67 for rheumatologists). The chance-adjusted measure of agreement (kappa coefficient) between the plurality physician rating and the calculated score obtained using established indexes was 0.50 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.38-0.61) for the RIFLE, 0.14 (95% CI 0.03-0.25) for the original BILAG, and 0.23 (95% CI 0.21-0.44) for the BILAG 2004., Conclusion: These findings indicate that rheumatologists as a group and nephrologists as a group have equal agreement in their rating of renal response. There was moderate agreement between plurality physician ratings and ratings obtained using the renal component of the RIFLE. Ratings of response using an index based on the original BILAG did not have good agreement with the plurality physician rating.

Recent advances in biologic therapies have provided hope for patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). However, studies have been hampered by the lack of acceptable and validated outcome measures. This article reviews outcome measures used in the assessment of both skin and joints in PsA, and provides a summary of the Psoriatic Arthritis Workshop during OMERACT 7. A set of domains to be included in the assessment of patients with PsA was derived, and a research agenda was developed.

Objectives: To evaluate whether rheumatologists experienced in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) assess peripheral and axial involvement in the same way and to consider core clinical measurements that should be included in clinical trials in PsA., Methods: Ten patients with PsA, representing a broad range of joint inflammation, joint damage, and spinal involvement, were selected for the study. Each patient was examined by each of 10 rheumatologists, members of the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada, according to a Latin Square design. Assessments included scoring actively inflamed joints and damaged joints, dactylitis, enthesitis, and spinal measurements. Variance components analyses were conducted for continuous measurements based on models with observer, patient, and order effects. Estimates of intraclass correlation coefficients and associated 95% confidence intervals were obtained., Results: There was substantial reliability in the assessment of the number of actively inflamed joints and excellent agreement in the number of damaged joints. Only moderate agreement was found for the number of digits with dactylitis. There was excellent agreement among observers in the intermalleolar distance measurements, but there was not as good agreement in the other measurements of spinal mobility. There was good agreement among the observers in detecting plantar fasciitis, however, the other entheses did not fare as well., Conclusion: In this first multicenter study of the assessment of clinical evaluation of patients with PsA we found that the assessment of peripheral joint disease is reliable although training should be performed prior to initiation of drug trials or comparative studies in this disease. The assessment of back measurements in PsA and other spondyloarthritis requires further study.

Objective: To determine the role of rheumatologists in the management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)., Methods: The lupus clinic database was searched for patients with 3 consecutive visits (every 3-4 months) of which the first 2 visits recorded a SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) of 0. The clinic notes were examined by a physician blinded to the SLEDAI score at the third visit. The physician classified the rheumatologist's action by the following scale: 1 = no change, 2 = closer followup, 3 = new investigations, 4 = increase medications, 5 = lower medications. All interventions (2-5) were further scored as being related to or independent of SLE., Results: Of the 142 SLE patients identified, 70 patients remained inactive (SLEDAI = 0) and 72 patients experienced flare (SLEDAI > 0) at the third visit. In total, 74% of patients, regardless of the status of disease activity, required intervention; 96% of interventions in patients with clinical flare, 72% with serological flare, and 63% with inactive disease were due to management of SLE. The most frequent intervention related to SLE in patients with clinical flare was increasing medication, while in inactive SLE lowering medication was the most common intervention., Conclusion: Even after a period of relative disease quiescence the majority of patients with lupus require active intervention during a subsequent routine clinic visit. Most interventions are related to the management of SLE. Therefore ongoing monitoring by rheumatologists in the management of lupus seems prudent.

Objective: The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) frailty index (FI) predicts mortality and damage accrual in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), but its association with hospitalizations has not been described. Our objective was to estimate the association of baseline SLICC‐FI values with future hospitalizations in the SLICC inception cohort. Methods: Baseline SLICC‐FI scores were calculated. The number and duration of inpatient hospitalizations during follow‐up were recorded. Negative binomial regression was used to estimate the association between baseline SLICC‐FI values and the rate of hospitalizations per patient‐year of follow‐up. Linear regression was used to estimate the association of baseline SLICC‐FI scores with the proportion of follow‐up time spent in the hospital. Multivariable models were adjusted for relevant baseline characteristics. Results: The 1,549 patients with SLE eligible for this analysis were mostly female (88.7%), with a mean ± SD age of 35.7 ± 13.3 years and a median disease duration of 1.2 years (interquartile range 0.9–1.5) at baseline. Mean ± SD baseline SLICC‐FI was 0.17 ± 0.08. During mean ± SD follow‐up of 7.2 ± 3.7 years, 614 patients (39.6%) experienced 1,570 hospitalizations. Higher baseline SLICC‐FI values (per 0.05 increment) were associated with more frequent hospitalizations during follow‐up, with an incidence rate ratio of 1.21 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.13–1.30) after adjustment for baseline age, sex, glucocorticoid use, immunosuppressive use, ethnicity/location, SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 score, SLICC/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index score, and disease duration. Among patients with ≥1 hospitalization, higher baseline SLICC‐FI values predicted a greater proportion of follow‐up time spent hospitalized (relative rate 1.09 [95% CI 1.02–1.16]). Conclusion: The SLICC‐FI predicts future hospitalizations among incident SLE patients, further supporting the SLICC‐FI as a valid health measure in SLE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Working Group provided updates at the 2020 GRAPPA annual meeting on its work toward developing a core outcome set for PsA. Working groups were set up for the 4 prioritized domains: enthesitis, fatigue, structural damage, and physical function. Two instruments for measurement of physical function were provisionally endorsed: (1) the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index and (2) the physical functioning domain in the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form survey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Numerous patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) exist for the measurement of physical function for psoriatic arthritis (PsA), but only a few are validated comprehensively. The objective of this project was to prioritize PROM for measuring physical function for potential incorporation into a standardized outcome measurement set for PsA.Methods: A working group of 13 members including 2 patient research partners was formed. PROM measuring physical function in PsA were identified through a systematic literature review and recommendations by the working group. The rationale for inclusion and exclusion from the original list of existing PROM was thoroughly discussed and 2 rounds of Delphi exercises were conducted to achieve consensus.Results: Twelve PROM were reviewed and discussed. Six PROM were prioritized: Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and 4 modifications (HAQ-Disability Index, HAQ-Spondyloarthritis, modified HAQ, multidimensional HAQ), Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form survey physical functioning domain, and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical functioning module.Conclusion: Through discussion and Delphi exercises, we achieved consensus to prioritize 6 physical function PROM for PsA. These 6 PROM will undergo further appraisal using the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess performance of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) composite indices and evaluate guselkumab's effect on achieving low disease activity or remission. Methods: In this phase II trial, patients with active PsA (≥3 tender and ≥3 swollen joints, C‐reactive protein level ≥0.3 mg/dl, ≥3% body surface‐area with psoriasis involvement) were randomized 2:1 to subcutaneous guselkumab 100 mg (n = 100) or placebo (n = 49) at week 0, week 4, and every 8 weeks through week 44. At week 16, patients with <5% improvement in swollen and tender joints could early escape to open‐label ustekinumab. Patients continuing placebo crossed over to receive guselkumab 100 mg at weeks 24, 28, 36, and 44 (placebo to guselkumab). PsA composite indices (Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score [PASDAS], Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis composite score [GRACE], modified Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index [mCPDAI], and Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis [DAPSA]) were analyzed as secondary outcomes (last observation carried forward for missing/post–early escape data through week 24; observed data post–week 24). Instrument performance was assessed. Results: Baseline PASDAS, GRACE, mCPDAI, and DAPSA scores indicated moderate‐to‐high disease activity. At week 24, mean changes in each of these composite indices showed significant improvement with guselkumab (–2.50, –2.73, –3.8, and –23.08, respectively) versus placebo (–0.49, 0.35, –0.8, and –4.98, respectively; P < 0.001 for all). Significantly more guselkumab‐treated patients achieved low/very low/remitted disease activity states according to PASDAS (very low + low 35% versus 4%; P < 0.001), GRACE (30% versus 2%; P < 0.001), mCPDAI (46% versus 10%; P < 0.001), and DAPSA (remission + low 40% versus 12%; P < 0.001). A total of 12% of guselkumab‐treated versus no placebo‐treated patients achieved DAPSA remission (P < 0.01). The PASDAS and GRACE instruments were more sensitive than the mCPDAI and DAPSA tools in detecting treatment effect. Residual skin disease and enthesitis were marginally more prominent in patients achieving DAPSA low disease activity versus other indices. Conclusion: Guselkumab demonstrated efficacy in achieving low disease activity/remission based on all PsA composite indices assessed. Composite index use in PsA trials and the clinic requires careful consideration to optimize feasibility and instrument performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]