Search

Background/Aims Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a multi-system disease with a range of management options. Treatment may vary by geographic location. We compared disease characteristics and prescribing practices in the UK and Europe in the post-Covid era. Methods The ASSIST study was a cross-sectional observational study of PsA patients aged 18 years and older selected from 24 centres across 5 countries (UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain) between July 2021 and March 2022 (IRAS: 287039). Patients attending a face-to-face appointment with a diagnosis of PsA made by a rheumatologist were selected by systematic sampling at each centre and treated in routine clinical practice. Patient and disease characteristics, current treatment and treatment decisions (medications unchanged, switched, added or reduced) were recorded. The analysis was descriptive, with no imputation of missing data. Results 503 patients were included, with arthritis subtype, patient age, disease activity and duration shown (Table 1). Physician- and patient-reported disease severity was highest in the UK, where median patient age was lowest. Conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDS constituted a higher percentage of current PsA treatment in UK than continental Europe (66.4% vs 44.9%), whereas biologic use was more frequent in Europe (68.1% vs 36.4%). Adalimumab was the most commonly used biologic in the UK and Spain. Adalimumab and secukinumab were equally used in Germany, and ixekizumab and adalimumab were joint-first in Italy. Implementing change to the current PsA treatment was most common in the UK, predominantly being a treatment increase. This may reflect the higher level of disease activity or younger patient age in the UK than other countries, as treatment escalation is more likely earlier in the disease course. In the UK, treatment escalation was more commonly achieved by medication addition (26.2%) than medication switch (14%) or dose increase (7.5%). In Europe, medication addition and switch were of more similar frequency (10.9% vs 9.85%). Conclusion Disease characteristics and treatment strategies varied between countries, but particularly between UK and the rest of Europe. In contrast to mainland Europe, csDMARDs predominated in the UK, perhaps reflecting current NICE guidelines. Treatment escalation was most common in the UK, in keeping with higher disease activity. Disclosure L. Watson: None. C. Coyle: None. M. Brooke: None. U. Kiltz: None. E. Lubrano: None. R. Queiro: None. D. Trigos: None. J. Brandt-Juergens: None. S. D'Angelo: None. A. Delle Sedie : None. E. Dernis: None. P. Helliwell: None. P. Ho: None. A. Hueber: None. B. Joven: None. M. Koehm: None. C. Montilla: None. J. Packham: None. J.P. Tasende: None. F.J.R. Garcia: None. A. Ruyssen-Witrand: None. R. Scrivo: None. S. Twigg: None. M. Welcker: None. M. Soubrier: None. T. Wirth: None. L. Gossec: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, UCB. Grants/research support; Amgen, Galapagos, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz, UCB. L.C. Coates: None.

Background/Aims A personalised approach is required to optimise management of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Shared decision-making between physician and patient is key, resulting in greater patient satisfaction and outcomes. We assessed the degree of perceived collaboration following clinic visits in the UK and Europe and whether this was associated with treatment escalation. Methods The ASSIST study was a cross-sectional observational study of PsA patients aged 18 years and older selected from 24 centres across 5 countries (UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain) between July 2021 and March 2022 (IRAS: 287039). Patients attending a face-to-face appointment with a diagnosis of PsA made by a rheumatologist were selected by systematic sampling at each centre and treated in routine clinical practice. Patients completed the collaboRATE questionnaire (scored 0-9), where high scores indicate greater perceived collaboration. The perceived efficacy in patient-physician interactions (PEPPI) tool (scored 5-25) assessed the patients’ view on their confidence in the consultation. Patient, physician, and disease characteristics were recorded, alongside treatment decisions (medications unchanged, switched, added or reduced). The analysis was descriptive, with no imputation of missing data. Results 503 patients were included, with key characteristics shown (Table 1). Generally, the level of disease severity was low (mean total PsAID score 3.6/10) and PEPPI scores were high, indicating patient confidence in the consultation. A subgroup (n = 10) perceived difficulty in sharing their concerns (PEPPI 5) had treatment escalation. However, in patients with high collaboRATE scores, even patients with low PsAID scores had treatment escalation. Conclusion Patients report high levels of shared decision-making in face-to-face PsA consultations, unrelated to treatment escalation. In patients with low PsAID scores, those with higher perceived collaboration are more likely to have treatment escalation than those without, perhaps reflecting the identification of otherwise undetected symptoms/concerns. Disclosure L.L. Watson: None. C. Coyle: None. M. Brooke: None. U. Kiltz: None. E. Lubrano: None. R. Queiro: None. D. Trigos: None. J. Brandt-Juergens: None. S. D'Angelo: None. A. Delle Sedie : None. E. Dernis: None. P. Helliwell: None. P. Ho: None. A. Hueber: None. B. Joven: None. M. Koehm: None. C. Montilla: None. J. Packham: None. J.P. Tasende: None. F.J.R. Garcia: None. A. Ruyssen-Witrand: None. R. Scrivo: None. S. Twigg: None. M. Welcker: None. M. Soubrier: None. T. Wirth: None. L. Gossec: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, UCB. Grants/research support; Amgen, Galapagos, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz, UCB. L.C. Coates: None.

Background/Aims Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a heterogeneous, multi-dimensional disease. Treatment pathways are not well defined and have to be tailored to the individual; however, little is known about the factors underpinning a decision to intensify treatment. By comparing treatment data between countries, we can understand more about factors influencing patient outcomes and establish international benchmarks in practice. Methods ASSIST was a cross sectional study of patients (18 years and older) diagnosed with PsA. Participants were selected from 24 centres across 5 countries (UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain). Patients were selected from face to face (F2F) appointments using systematic sampling with random starting numbers generated for each site. Participants were treated as usual in their routine clinical practice. The Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and the EQ-5D-5L QoL survey were provided to all participants as patient-reported outcome tools. The perceived confidence on patient-physician interaction score (PEPPI) and the CollaboRATE measure were used to assess patient satisfaction with a consultation. Results 503 patients from 24 centres across five countries in Europe (49.1% F, 50.9% M) (mean age 53) participated in the survey between 12/07/2021-22/03/2022. Despite similar rates of treatment escalation and similar satisfaction with consultations, QoL was poorer in the UK. Comparing EQ-5D-5L scores, participants in the UK (107) reported worse outcomes across all domains except pain/discomfort versus participants in mainland Europe (396). 52.3% in the UK reported some problems with self-care versus 33.9% in mainland Europe. 72.9% of patients in the UK reported issues with mobility (mainland Europe: 61.6%). The UK had the highest percentage of participants reporting issues with anxiety (66.4%). The UK had the most severe HAQ scores, (mean= 0.936) compared to means of 0.62 or below in other countries. Physician-reported severity of disease was higher in the UK; however, patients in the UK reported the second highest PEPPI scores, the second highest collaboRATE scores and comparable methods of treatment escalation (dose adjustment or addition of another medication) to mainland Europe. Moreover, data on co-morbidities (including FCI categorical breakdown) does not demonstrate obvious variation between the UK and Europe. Conclusion Overall, patients with PsA in the UK reported lower quality of life (QoL) compared to patients in mainland Europe. It is not clear from our data why the UK performs less well on the majority of EQ-5D-5L domains and HAQ scoring compared to Europe. This may relate to variation in disease activity; however, there is potential selection bias in the higher disease activity reported by physicians in the UK as patients with more severe disease could have been selected for F2F appointments compared to mainland Europe. There may also be additional factors outside of the consultation impacting these scores, which could be identified with future research. Disclosure C. Coyle: None. L. Watson: None. M. Brooke: None. U. Kiltz: None. E. Lubrano: None. R. Queiro: None. D. Trigos: None. J. Brandt-Jürgens: None. S. D'Angelo: None. A. Delle Sedie: None. E. Dernis: None. P. Helliwell: None. P. Ho: None. A. Hueber: None. B. Joven Ibáñez: None. M. Köhm: None. C. Montilla Morales: None. J. Packham: None. J. Antonio Pinto Tasende: None. F. Ramíez García: None. A. Ruyssen-witrand: None. R. Scrivo: None. S. Twigg: None. M. Welcker: None. M. Soubrier: None. T. Wirth: None. L. Gossec: None. L. Coates: None.

Despite all its promises, telemedicine is still not widely implemented in the care of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). The aim of this study is to investigate opportunities, barriers, acceptance, and preferences concerning telemedicine among RMD patients and professional stakeholders. From November 2017 to December 2019, a participatory, mixed-methods study was conducted, consisting of (1) expert interviews (n = 27) with RMD patients and professional stakeholders, (2) a national paper-based patient survey (n = 766), and (3) focus groups (n = 2) with patient representatives and rheumatologists. The qualitative findings indicate that patients equate personal contact with physical face-to-face contact, which could be reduced by implementing telemedicine, thus negatively influencing the patient–doctor relationship. Correspondingly “no personal contact with the doctor” is the main reason (64%) why 38% of the surveyed patients refuse to try telemedicine. Professional stakeholders expect telemedicine to contribute to the effective allocation of scarce resources in rheumatology care. The main barriers reported by stakeholders were the scarcity of time resources in RMD care, the absence of physical examinations, and organizational challenges associated with the implementation of telemedicine in RMD care. While the exact integration of telemedicine into routine care has yet to be found, the consequences on the patient-physician relationship must be permanently considered.

BACKGROUND Mobile applications promise to improve current health care. A growing number app quality studies exist to help patients and physicians choose appropriate, helpful and useful applications. However, current mobile app quality ratings are mostly physician-based. They exclude patients although as end-users, patients are able to provide the most relevant feedback. In a recent physician-based review of rheumatic apps, Rheuma Auszeit received the best overall rating (4.2/5), however this app has never been systematically evaluated by the intended end-users, rheumatic patients. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was (1) to assess the quality of Rheuma Auszeit by rheumatic patients and (2) to evaluate the association between uMARS (User Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale) scores and patients’ characteristics. METHODS Consecutive patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and spondyloarthritis were seen at the rheumatology clinic at university hospital Erlangen, Germany. They were asked to evaluate the app Rheuma Auszeit using the uMARS and to complete a paper-based survey evaluating the individual preferences, attitudes and ehealth literacy. uMARS assesses the dimensions of engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information, and subjective quality on 5-point scales. The association between uMARS scores and patients’ characteristics was further explored. RESULTS Between December 2018 and January 2019, a total of 126 patients evaluated Rheuma Auszeit using uMARS and filled out the paper-based survey. The median uMARS score was 3.9, IQR 0.7. Functionality was the domain with the highest rating (median 4.8, IQR 0.8), followed by aesthetics (median 4.0, IQR 0.7), information (median 3.5, IQR 0.8), and engagement (median 3.2, IQR 1.0). Subjective quality was average (median 3.0, IQR 1.0). The lowest scoring individual item was customization with a median of 2.5/5. Lower functionality scores were reported among older female rheumatic patients (P CONCLUSIONS Rheuma Auszeit was well accepted by patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondyloarthritis. Lacking customization could lead to low app compliance and should be improved. The study highlights the potential and feasibility of therapeutic complementary digital solutions in rheumatology.

BACKGROUND The global burden of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) is rising. Professional ressources in rheumatology are scarce. The use of telemedicine could improve access to RMD care. Despite all its promises, telemedicine is still not widely implemented in RMD care. OBJECTIVE To investigate opportunities, barriers, acceptance, and preferences concerning telemedicine among RMD patients and professional stakeholders involved in RMD patient management. METHODS From November 2017 to December 2019 a participatory mixed-methods-study was conducted based on three parts: (1) qualitative expert interviews with RMD patients and professional stakeholders that were used to participatively design (2) a national paper-based patient survey. The survey results were hence discussed in (3) focus groups with patient representatives and rheumatologists. RESULTS Fifteen patients and 26 professional stakeholders participated in the qualitative and further 766 patients took part in the quantitative research. The qualitative interview data reveals opportunities and barriers from the patients' (n=5) and professional stakeholders’(n=23) perspectives: Patients appreciate the potentials of telemedicine to overcome space and time in health care. In contrast, the loss of personal patient-doctor contact is the main concern of patients regarding telemedicine use. Personal contact is equated with physical face-to-face contact, which could be reduced by implementing telemedicine, thus negatively influencing the patient-doctor relationship. Professional stakeholders expect telemedicine to contribute to effective allocation of scarce resources in rheumatology care. This is countered by the absence of physical examinations and organizational challenges as barriers of the use of telemedicine. Both, patients and professional stakeholders describe telemedicine as something broad and complex to define. These qualitative findings align with the survey results: 38% (264/690) of the surveyed patients refuse to try telemedicine, 32% (216/690) are not sure, and 30% (210/690) would like to try telemedicine. ‘No personal contact with the doctor’ (64%, 220/346) was most frequently chosen as a reason against telemedicine, followed by ‘Data security’ (28%, 96/346). Patients prefer to use the telephone (60%, 206/341) over video-consultations (35%, 118/341) as telemedicine use cases. Only 2 (0.3%, 2/714) survey participants indicated that they already had a video consultation with their physician. The focus groups revealed a homogeneous spectrum of opinions with participants confirming the survey results. Patients (n=10) emphasize the high relevance of physical doctor-patient contact. Rheumatologists (n=4) highlight the potential of telemedicine, as a support of existing care structures. However, the exact integration of telemedicine into medical routines remains unclear, especially in view of scarce time resources in rheumatology care. CONCLUSIONS As digital transformation of rheumatology care progresses, the desire for a close patient-doctor relationship persists. Many study participants fear that the use of telemedicine will have negative effects on patient-doctor relationship and therefore oppose the use of telemedicine. We identified further barriers and opportunities, such as information needs, digital infrastructure and equipment requirements, and patient preferences on the composition of digital services, to guide the design and implementation of telemedicine in rheumatology care.

BACKGROUND The worldwide burden of musculoskeletal diseases is increasing. The number of newly registered rheumatologists has stagnated. Primary care, which takes up a key role in early detection of rheumatic disease, is working at full capacity. COVID-19 and its containment impede rheumatological treatment. Telemedicine in rheumatology (telerheumatology) could support rheumatologists and general practitioners. OBJECTIVE The goal of this study was to investigate acceptance and preferences related to the use of telerheumatology care among German rheumatologists and general practitioners. METHODS A nationwide, cross-sectional, self-completed, paper-based survey on telerheumatology care was conducted among outpatient rheumatologists and general practitioners during the pre-COVID-19 period. RESULTS A total of 73.3% (349/476) of survey participants rated their knowledge of telemedicine as unsatisfactory, poor, or very poor. The majority of survey participants (358/480, 74.6%) answered that they do not currently use telemedicine, although 62.3% (291/467) would like to. Barriers to the implementation of telemedicine include the purchase of technology equipment (182/292, 62.3%), administration (181/292, 62.0%), and poor reimbursement (156/292, 53.4%). A total of 69.6% (117/168) of the surveyed physicians reckoned that telemedicine could be used in rheumatology. Surveyed physicians would prefer to use telemedicine to communicate directly with other physicians (370/455, 81.3%) than to communicate with patients (213/455, 46.8%). Among treatment phases, 64.4% (291/452) of participants would choose to use telemedicine during follow-up. Half of the participants would choose telecounseling as a specific approach to improve rheumatology care (91/170, 53.5%). CONCLUSIONS Before COVID-19 appeared, our results indicated generally low use but high acceptance of the implementation of telerheumatology among physicians. Participants indicated that the lack of a structural framework was a barrier to the effective implementation of telerheumatology. Training courses should be introduced to address the limited knowledge on the part of physicians in the use of telemedicine. More research into telerheumatology is required. This includes large-scale randomized controlled trials, economic analyses, and the exploration of user preferences.

Background. Limited information exists about the very early forms of psoriatic arthritis. In particular, differences and responsiveness of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in very early as compared to established PsA have not been investigated to date.Methods. Cross-sectional and prospective longitudinal evaluation of PROs related to pain (VAS), physical function (HAQ-DI, SF-36 physical), mental function (SF-36 mental), impact of psoriatic skin (DLQI), joint (PsAID) and global disease (VAS) in two small prospective observational studies on secukinumab 300mg over 6 months in very early disease patients (IVEPSA study; N=20) and established PsA (PSARTROS study; N=20). Cluster analysis was performed at baseline and 24-weeks follow-up.Results. While responses in pain and physical activity-related PROs to secukinumab were more pronounced in established PsA than very early disease, effects on PROs related to general health perception, as well as those related to emotional and mental well-being, were modified in a similar way in very early disease and established PsA. Cluster analysis based on global disease activity and PROs showed that baseline clusters reflected very early disease and established PsA, while after secukinumab treatment these clusters were abolished and new clusters based on differential responses to physically and mentally-oriented PROs formed.Conclusions. Inhibition of IL-17A by secukinumab leads to comprehensive improvement of general health perception and mental well-being in very early and established PsA, while overall responses in pain and physical activity are more pronounced in established disease. Most importantly, treatment restructures the original patients clusters based on disease stage and leads to the formation of new clusters that reflect their response in physical and mental-orientated PROs.Trial Registration: NCT02483234, Registered 26 June 2015, retrospectively registered

Background. Limited information exists about the very early forms of psoriatic arthritis. In particular, differences and responsiveness of patient-reportedoutcomes (PROs) in very early as compared to established PsA have not been investigated to date.Methods. Cross-sectional and prospective longitudinal evaluation of PROs related to pain (VAS), physical function (HAQ-DI, SF-36 physical), mental function (SF-36 mental), impact of psoriatic skin (DLQI), joint (PsAID) and global disease (VAS) in two small prospective observational studies on secukinumab 300mg over 6 months in very early disease patients (IVEPSA study; N=20) and established PsA (PSARTROS study; N=20). Cluster analysis was performed at baseline and 24-weeks follow-up.Results. While responses in pain and physical activity-related PROs to secukinumab were more pronounced in established PsA than very early disease, effects on PROs related to general health perception, as well as those related to emotional and mental well-being, were modified in a similar way in very early disease and established PsA. Cluster analysis based on global disease activity and PROs showed that baseline clusters reflected very early disease and established PsA, while during interleukin-17 inhibition these clusters were abolished and new clusters based on differential responses to physically and mentally-oriented PROs formed.Conclusions. Inhibition of IL-17A leads to comprehensive improvement of PROs in patients with very early musculoskeletal involvement in PsA. Most importantly, treatment restructures original patients clusters based on the stage of psoriatic disease and leads to the formation of new clusters that reflect their post-treatment state with respect tophysical and mental-orientated PROs.Trial Registration: NCT02483234

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) of the joints, gut and skin are treated with inhibitors of inflammatory cytokines. These cytokines are involved in the pathogenesis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Investigating anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses in IMIDs we observed a significantly reduced incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in IMID patients treated with cytokine inhibitors compared to patients receiving no such inhibitors and two healthy control populations, despite similar social exposure. Hence, cytokine inhibitors seem to at least partially protect from SARS-CoV-2 infection.Authors David Simon and Koray Tascilar contributed equally to this work. Authors Markus F. Neurath and Georg Schett share senior authorship.

UNSTRUCTURED Outcomes of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases have significantly improved over the last three decades, mainly due to therapeutic innovations, more timely treatment, and a recognition of the need to monitor response to treatment and to titrate treatments accordingly. Diagnostic delay remains a major challenge for all stakeholders. The combination of electronic health (eHealth) and serologic and genetic markers holds great promise to improve the current management of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases by speeding up access to appropriate care. The Joint Pain Assessment Scoring Tool (JPAST) project, funded by the European Union (EU) European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) Health program, is a unique European project aiming to enable and accelerate personalized precision medicine for early treatment in rheumatology, ultimately also enabling prevention. The aim of the project is to facilitate these goals while at the same time, reducing cost for society and patients.

Introduction Many antitumor therapies induce apoptotic cell death in order to cause tumor regression. Paradoxically, apoptotic cells are also known to promote wound healing, cell proliferation, and tumor cell repopulation in multicellular organisms. We aimed to characterize the nature of the regenerative signals concentrated in the micromilieu of dead and dying cells. Methods Cultures of viable melanoma B16F10 cells, mouse fibroblasts, and primary human fibroblast-like synoviocytes (FLS) in the presence of dead and dying cells, their supernatants (SNs), or purified agonists and antagonists were used to evaluate the stimulation of proliferation. Viable cell quantification was performed by either flow cytometry of harvested cells or by crystal violet staining of adherent cells. High-performance liquid chromatography and liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry of cell SNs were deployed to identify the nature of growth-promoting factors. Coimplantation of living cells in the presence of SNs collected from dead and dying cells and specific agonists was used to evaluate tumor growth in vivo. Results The stimulation of proliferation of few surviving cells by bystander dead cells was confirmed for melanoma cells, mouse fibroblasts, and primary FLS. We found that small soluble molecules present in the protein-free fraction of SNs of dead and dying cells were responsible for the promotion of proliferation. The nucleoside inosine released by dead and dying cells acting via adenosine receptors was identified as putative inducer of proliferation of surviving tumor cells after irradiation and heat treatment. Conclusion Inosine released by dead and dying cells mediates tumor cell proliferation via purinergic receptors. Therapeutic strategies surmounting this pathway may help to reduce the rate of recurrence after radio- and chemotherapy.

To search for evidence of secondary osteoarthritis (OA) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a cross-sectional and longitudinal setting, and to relate osteophyte formation to functional outcome.Anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-positive RA patients underwent high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography of the hand. Cross-sectional and longitudinal measurements were performed. The number and size (volume) of osteophytes as well as bone erosions were documented. The relationship of osteophytes to bone erosions and to demographic and disease-specific data was evaluated by multiple logistic regression models.A total of 202 ACPA-positive RA patients were enrolled in the cross-sectional part of the study, and a total of 77 ACPA-positive RA patients were enrolled in the longitudinal analysis (interval of 1.5 years between baseline and follow-up assessment). The mean ± SD number of osteophytes per patient was 1.3 ± 2.3, and the mean ± SD osteophyte volume per patient was 2.6 ± 4.9 mm(3) . The total number of erosions was significantly correlated with the total number of osteophytes (P 0.001), and the total volume of erosions was significantly correlated with the total volume of osteophytes (P 0.001). Moreover, the number of osteophytes was related to age (P 0.001) and disease duration (P = 0.001), while the volume of osteophytes was related to age (P = 0.001), disease duration (P 0.001), and function as measured by the Health Assessment Questionnaire (P = 0.013). Multivariate regression analyses showed an independent association between osteophytes and erosions. In the longitudinal analysis, the mean number (P = 0.033) and volume (P 0.001) of osteophytes increased significantly in RA patients during their disease course.Age, disease duration, and bone erosions are associated with osteophytes, indicating development of secondary OA in patients with RA.

ObjectivesTo analyse the similarities and discrepancies between the official rheumatology specialty training programmes across Europe.MethodsA steering committee defined the main aspects of training to be assessed. In 2013, the rheumatology official training programmes were reviewed for each of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) countries and two local physicians independently extracted data on the structure of training, included competencies and assessments performed. Analyses were descriptive.Results41 of the 45 EULAR countries currently provide specialist training in rheumatology; in the remaining four rheumatologists are trained abroad. 36 (88%) had a single national curriculum, one country had two national curricula and four had only local or university-specific curricula. The mean length of training programmes in rheumatology was 45 (SD 19) months, ranging between 3 and 72 months. General internal medicine training was mandatory in 40 (98%) countries, and was performed prior to and/or during the rheumatology training programme (mean length: 33 (19) months). 33 (80%) countries had a formal final examination.ConclusionsMost European countries provide training in rheumatology, but the length, structure, contents and assessments of these training programmes are quite heterogeneous. In order to promote excellence in standards of care and to support physicians’ mobility, a certain degree of harmonisation should be encouraged.

Tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) is a major inducer for inflammation and bone loss. Here, we investigated whether interleukin (IL)-17 plays a role in TNF-α-mediated inflammation and bone resorption. Human TNF-α transgenic (hTNFtg) mice were treated with a neutralizing anti-IL-17A antibody and assessed for inflammation, cartilage and bone damage. T-cell transcription factors and lymphokine patterns were measured in the LNs. IL-17A inhibition in the absence of IL-1 was also evaluated by treating hTNFtg/IL-1(-/-) mice with an IL-17A neutralizing antibody. IL-17A neutralization had only minor effects on TNF-α-induced inflammation but effectively reduced local and systemic bone loss by blocking osteoclast differentiation in vivo. Effects were based on a shift to bone-protective T-cell responses such as enhanced Th2 differentiation, IL-4 and IL-12 expression and Treg cell numbers. Whereas inflammation in hTNFtg/IL-1(-/-) mice was highly sensitive to IL-17A blockade, no shift in the T-cell lineages and no additional benefit on bone mass were observed in response to IL-17A neutralization. We thus conclude that IL-17A is a key mediator of TNF-α-induced bone loss by closely interacting with IL-1 in blocking bone protective T-cell responses.