Impact of tapering targeted therapies (bDMARDs or JAKis) on the risk of serious infections and adverse events of special interest in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or spondyloarthritis : a systematic analysis of the literature and meta-analysis

To systematically review the impact of tapering targeted therapies (bDMARDs or JAKis) on the risk of serious infections and severe adverse events (SAEs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) in remission or low disease activity (LDA) state. A meta-analysis based on a systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, until August 2019, as well as relevant databases of international conferences, was used to evaluate the risk difference (RD) at 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of incidence density of serious infections, SAEs, malignancies, cardiovascular adverse events (CV AEs), or deaths after tapering (dose reduction or spacing) compared to continuation of targeted therapies. Of the 1957 studies initially identified, 13 controlled trials (9 RA and 4 SpA trials) were included in the meta-analysis. 1174 patient-years were studied in the tapering group (TG) versus 1086 in the usual care group (UC). There were 1.7/100 patient-year (p-y) serious infections in TG versus 2.6/100 p-y in UC (RD (95% CI) 0.01 (0.00 to 0.02), p = 0.13) and 7.4/100 p-y SAEs in TG versus 6.7/100 p-y in UC (RD 0.00 (− 0.02 to 0.02), p = 0.82). The risk of malignancies, CV AEs, or deaths did not differ between the tapering and the usual care groups. Subgroup analysis (RA and SpA) detected no significant differences between the two groups. We could not show significant impact of tapering bDMARD or JAKi over continuation concerning the risk of serious infections, SAEs, malignancies, CV AEs, or deaths in RA and SpA patients in remission or LDA state

Exploring the disparity between inflammation and disability in the 10-year outcomes of people with rheumatoid arthritis

Objectives: To identify groups of people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with different disability trajectories over ten years, despite comparable levels of inflammation.Methods: Data for this analysis came from three European prospective cohort studies of people with RA (Norfolk Arthritis Register [NOAR], Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Network [ERAN], Étude et Suivi des Polyarthrites Indifférenciées Récentes [ESPOIR]). Participants were assessed regularly over 8 (ERAN) to 10 (NOAR/ESPOIR) years. Inclusion criteria were: recruited after 1/1/2000, <24 months baseline symptom duration, and disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]) and inflammation (two-component disease activity score [DAS28-2C]) recorded at baseline and one other follow-up. People in each cohort also completed patient reported outcome measures at each assessment (pain, fatigue, depression). Group-based trajectory models (GBTM) were used to identify distinct groups of people with similar HAQ and DAS28-2C trajectories over follow-up.Results: This analysis included 2500 people with RA (NOAR: 1000, ESPOIR: 766, ERAN: 734). People in ESPOIR were younger and included more women (mean [standard deviation] age: NOAR: 57.1 [14.6], ESPOIR: 47.6 [12.5], ERAN: 56.8 [13.8]; women: NOAR: 63.9%, ESPOIR: 76.9%, ERAN: 69.1%). Within each cohort, two pairs of trajectories that followed the hypothesised pattern (comparable DAS28-2C but different HAQ) were identified. Higher pain, fatigue and depression were associated with increased odds of being in the high HAQ trajectories. Conclusion: Excess disability is persistent in RA. Controlling inflammation may not be sufficient to alleviate disability in all people with RA, and effective pain, fatigue and mood management may be needed in some groups to improve long-term function

Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination in adults undergoing immunosuppressive treatment for inflammatory diseases - a longitudinal study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy are at increased risk of infection. Community-acquired pneumonia and invasive pneumococcal disease account for substantial morbidity and mortality in this population and may be prevented by vaccination. Ideally, immunization to pneumococcal antigens should take place before the start of immunosuppressive treatment. Often, however, the treatment cannot be delayed. Little is known about the efficacy of pneumococcal vaccines during immunosuppressive treatment. The objectives of this study were to determine the percentage of vaccine-naïve, immunosuppressed adults with inflammatory diseases seroprotected against Streptococcus pneumoniae and to assess factors associated with the immunogenicity, clinical impact and safety of 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV) in seronegative subjects. METHODS: This observational study included patients 18 years of age and older who were receiving prednisone ≥20 mg/day or other immunosuppressive drugs. Exclusion criteria were PPV administration in the previous 5 years, intravenous immunoglobulins and pregnancy. Serum immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody levels against six pneumococcal serotypes were measured. Seropositivity was defined as IgG of 0.5 μg/ml or greater for at least four of six serotypes. Seronegative patients received PPV, and seropositive patients were included as a comparison group. Vaccine response and tolerance were assessed after 4-8 weeks. Disease activity was evaluated on the basis of the Physician Global Assessment scores. Serology was repeated after 1 year, and information on any kind of infection needing medical attention was collected. Outcomes were the proportion of seropositivity and infections between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. RESULTS: Of 201 included patients, 35 received high-dose corticosteroids and 181 were given immunosuppressive drugs. Baseline seronegativity in 60 (30 %) patients was associated with corticotherapy and lower total IgG. After PPV, disease activity remained unchanged or decreased in 81 % of patients, and 87 % became seropositive. After 1 year, 67 % of vaccinated compared with 90 % of observed patients were seropositive (p &lt; 0.001), whereas the rate of infections did not differ between groups. Those still taking prednisone ≥10 mg/day tended to have poorer serological responses and had significantly more infections. CONCLUSIONS: PPV was safe and moderately effective based on serological response. Seropositivity to pneumococcal antigens significantly reduced the risk of infections. Sustained high-dose corticosteroids were associated with poor vaccine response and more infections

Temporal Trends in Vertebral Size and Shape from Medieval to Modern-Day

Human lumbar vertebrae support the weight of the upper body. Loads lifted and carried by the upper extremities cause significant loading stress to the vertebral bodies. It is well established that trauma-induced vertebral fractures are common especially among elderly people. The aim of this study was to investigate the morphological factors that could have affected the prevalence of trauma-related vertebral fractures from medieval times to the present day. To determine if morphological differences existed in the size and shape of the vertebral body between medieval times and the present day, the vertebral body size and shape was measured from the 4th lumbar vertebra using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and standard osteometric calipers. The modern samples consisted of modern Finns and the medieval samples were from archaeological collections in Sweden and Britain. The results show that the shape and size of the 4th lumbar vertebra has changed significantly from medieval times in a way that markedly affects the biomechanical characteristics of the lumbar vertebral column. These changes may have influenced the incidence of trauma- induced spinal fractures in modern populations

How do patient-reported outcome measures affect treatment intensification and patient satisfaction in the management of psoriatic arthritis? A cross sectional study of 503 patients

Objectives The AsseSSing Impact in pSoriatic Treatment (ASSIST) study investigated prescribing in routine PsA care and whether the patient-reported outcome—PsA Impact of Disease questionnaire (PsAID-12)—impacted treatment. This study also assessed a range of patient and clinician factors and their relationship to PsAID-12 scoring and treatment modification. Methods Patients with PsA were selected across the UK and Europe between July 2021 and March 2022. Patients completed the PsAID questionnaire and the results were shared with their physician. Patient characteristics, disease activity, current treatment methods, treatment strategies, medication changes and patient satisfaction scores were recorded. Results A total of 503 patients were recruited. Some 36.2% had changes made to treatment, and 88.8% of these had treatment escalation. Overall, the mean PsAID-12 score was higher for patients with treatment escalation; increase in PSAID-12 score is associated with increased odds of treatment escalation (odds ratio 1.58; P < 0.0001). However, most clinicians reported that PsAID-12 did not impact their decision to escalate treatment, instead supporting treatment reduction decisions. Physician’s assessment of disease activity had the most statistically significant effect on likelihood of treatment escalation (odds ratio 2.68, per 1-point score increase). Escalation was more likely in patients not treated with biologic therapies. Additional factors associated with treatment escalation included: patient characteristics, physician characteristics, disease activity and disease impact. Conclusion This study highlights multiple factors impacting treatment decision-making for individuals with PsA. PsAID-12 scoring correlates with multiple measures of disease severity and odds of treatment escalation. However, most clinicians reported that the PsAID-12 did not influence treatment escalation decisions. Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID) scoring could be used to increase confidence in treatment de-escalation

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2019 update

Objectives: To provide an update of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations to account for the most recent developments in the field. Methods: An international task force considered new evidence supporting or contradicting previous recommendations and novel therapies and strategic insights based on two systematic literature searches on efficacy and safety of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) since the last update (2016) until 2019. A predefined voting process was applied, current levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned and participants ultimately voted independently on their level of agreement with each of the items. Results: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 12 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GCs); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib). Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering on sustained clinical remission is provided. Cost and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs are addressed. Initially, MTX plus GCs and upon insufficient response to this therapy within 3 to 6 months, stratification according to risk factors is recommended. With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD or JAK inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD is recommended. On sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered, but not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were mostly high. Conclusions: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on the management of RA with respect to benefit, safety, preferences and cost