Rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic inflammatory joint disease, which can cause cartilage and bone damage as well as disability. Early diagnosis is key to optimal therapeutic success, particularly in patients with well-characterised risk factors for poor outcomes such as high disease activity, presence of autoantibodies, and early joint damage. Treatment algorithms involve measuring disease activity with composite indices, applying a treatment-to-target strategy, and use of conventional, biological, and newz non-biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. After the treatment target of stringent remission (or at least low disease activity) is maintained, dose reduction should be attempted. Although the prospects for most patients are now favourable, many still do not respond to current therapies. Accordingly, new therapies are urgently required. In this Seminar, we describe current insights into genetics and aetiology, pathophysiology, epidemiology, assessment, therapeutic agents, and treatment strategies together with unmet needs of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Developments in the clinical understanding of rheumatoid arthritis

The changes occurring in the field of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over the past decade or two have encompassed new therapies and, in particular, a new look at the clinical characteristics of the disease in the context of therapeutic improvements. It has been shown that composite disease activity indices have special merits in following patients, that disease activity governs the evolution of joint damage, and that disability can be dissected into several components – among them disease activity and joint damage. It has also been revealed that aiming at any disease activity state other than remission (or, at worst, low disease activity) is associated with significant progression of joint destruction, that early recognition and appropriate therapy of RA are important facets of the overall strategy of optimal clinical control of the disease, and that tight control employing composite scores supports the optimization of the therapeutic approaches. Finally, with the advent of novel therapies, remission has become a reality and the treatment algorithms encompassing all of the above-mentioned aspects will allow us to achieve the rigorous aspirations of today and tomorrow

Value of self-performed joint counts in rheumatoid arthritis patients near remission

INTRODUCTION: To determine the validity and reliability of patients' self-performed joint counts compared to joint counts by professional assessors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in different disease activity states. METHODS: In patients with established RA we determined the inter-rater reliability of joint counts performed by an independent evaluator and the patient using intraclass correlation (ICC), and agreement on activity in individual joints by kappa statistics. We also performed longitudinal analyses to assess consistency of assessments over time. Finally, we investigated the concordance of joint counts of different assessors in patients with different levels of disease activity. RESULTS: The reliability of patient self-performed joint counts was high when compared to independent objective assessment (ICC; 95%confidence interval (CI)) for the assessment of swelling (0.32; 0.15 to 0.46) and tenderness (0.75; 0.66 to 0.81), with higher agreement for larger joints (kappa: 0.57 and 0.45, respectively) compared to smaller joints (metacarpo-phalangeal joint (MCPs): 0.31 and 0.45; and proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPs): 0.22 and 0.47, for swelling and tenderness, respectively). Patients in remission according to the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI ≤ 3.3) showed better concordance of the joint counts (swollen joint count (SJC) ties 25/37, tender joint count (TJC) ties 26/37) compared to moderate/high disease activity states (SDAI > 11; MDA/HDA: SJC ties 9/72, TJC ties 21/72). Positive and negative predictive values regarding the presence of SDAI remission were reasonably good (0.86 and 0.95, respectively). A separate training session for patients did not improve the reliability of joint assessment. The results were consistent in the longitudinal analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Self-performed joint counts are particularly useful for monitoring in patients having attained remission, as these patients seem able to detect state of remission

Methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis is frequently effective, even if re-employed after a previous failure

Effectiveness of therapy with individual disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is limited, and the number of available DMARDs is finite. Therefore, at some stage during the lengthy course of RA, institution of traditional DMARDs that have previously been applied may have to be reconsidered. In the present study we investigated the effectiveness of re-employed methotrexate in patients with a history of previous methotrexate failure (original course). A total of 1,490 RA patients (80% female, 59% rheumatoid factor positive) were followed from their first presentation, yielding a total of 6,470 patient-years of observation. We identified patients in whom methotrexate was re-employed after at least one intermittent course of a different DMARD. We compared reasons for discontinuation, improvement in acute phase reactants, and cumulative retention rates of methotrexate therapy between the original course of methotrexate and its re-employment. Similar analyses were peformed for other DMARDs. Methotrexate was re-employed in 86 patients. Compared with the original courses, re-employment was associated with a reduced risk for treatment termination because of ineffectiveness (P = 0.02, by McNemar test), especially if the maximum methotrexate dose of the original course had been low (<12.5 mg/week; P = 0.02, by logistic regression). In a Cox regression model, re-employed MTX was associated with a significantly reduced hazard of treatment termination compared with the original course of methotrexate, adjusting for dose and year of employment (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.42–0.97; P = 0.04). These findings were not recapitulated in analyses of re-employment of other DMARDs. Re-employment of MTX despite prior inefficacy, but not re-employment of other DMARDs, is an effective therapeutic option, especially in those patients in whom the methotrexate dose of the original course was low

Remission by composite scores in rheumatoid arthritis: are ankles and feet important?

Current treatment strategies aim to achieve clinical remission in order to prevent the long-term consequences of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Several composite indices are available to assess remission. All of them include joint counts as the assessment of the major 'organ' involved in RA, but some employ reduced joint counts, such as the 28-joint count, which excludes ankles and feet

Acute phase reactants add little to composite disease activity indices for rheumatoid arthritis: validation of a clinical activity score

INTRODUCTION: Frequent assessments of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity allow timely adaptation of therapy, which is essential in preventing disease progression. However, values of acute phase reactants (APRs) are needed to calculate current composite activity indices, such as the Disease Activity Score (DAS)28, the DAS28-CRP (i.e. the DAS28 using C-reactive protein instead of erythrocyte sedimentation rate) and the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI). We hypothesized that APRs make limited contribution to the SDAI, and that an SDAI-modification eliminating APRs – termed the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI; i.e. the sum of tender and swollen joint counts [28 joints] and patient and physician global assessments [in cm]) – would have comparable validity in clinical cohorts. METHOD: Data sources comprised an observational cohort of 767 RA patients (average disease duration 8.1 ± 10.6 years), and an independent inception cohort of 106 patients (disease duration 11.5 ± 12.5 weeks) who were followed prospectively. RESULTS: Our clinically based hypothesis was statistically supported: APRs accounted only for 15% of the DAS28, and for 5% of the SDAI and the DAS28-CRP. In both cohorts the CDAI correlated strongly with DAS28 (R = 0.89–0.90) and comparably to the correlation of SDAI with DAS28 (R = 0.90–0.91). In additional analyses, the CDAI when compared to the SDAI and the DAS28 agreed with a weighted kappa of 0.70 and 0.79, respectively, and comparably to the agreement between DAS28 and DAS28-CRP. All three scores correlated similarly with Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) scores (R = 0.45–0.47). The average changes in all scores were greater in patients with better American College of Rheumatology response (P < 0.0001, analysis of variance; discriminant validity). All scores exhibited similar correlations with radiological progression (construct validity) over 3 years (R = 0.54–0.58; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: APRs add little information on top (and independent) of the combination of clinical variables included in the SDAI. A purely clinical score is a valid measure of disease activity and will have its greatest merits in clinical practice rather than research, where APRs are usually always available. The CDAI may facilitate immediate and consistent treatment decisions and help to improve patient outcomes in the longer term

Interpretation of DAS28 and its components in the assessment of inflammatory and non-inflammatory aspects of rheumatoid arthritis

Background: DAS28 is interpreted as the inflammatory disease activity of RA. Non-inflammatory pain mechanisms can confound assessment. We aimed to examine the use of DAS28 components or DAS28-derived measures that have been published as indices of non-inflammatory pain mechanisms, to inform interpretation of disease activity. Methods: Data were used from multiple observational epidemiology studies of people with RA. Statistical characteristics of DAS28 components and derived indices were assessed using baseline and follow up data from British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Registry participants [1] commencing anti-TNF therapy (n = 10813), or [2] changing between non-biologic DMARDs (n=2992), [3] Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Network participants (n=813), and [4] participants in a cross-sectional study exploring fibromyalgia and pain thresholds (n=45). Repeatability was tested in 34 patients with active RA. Derived indices were the proportion of DAS28 attributable to patient-reported components (DAS28-P), tender-swollen difference and tender:swollen ratio. Pressure pain detection threshold (PPT) was used as an index of pain sensitisation. Results: DAS28, tender joint count, visual analogue scale, DAS28-P, tender-swollen difference and tender:swollen ratio were more strongly associated with pain, PPT and fibromyalgia status than were swollen joint count or erythrocyte sedimentation rate. DAS28-P, tender-swollen difference and tender:swollen ratio better predicted pain over 1 year than did DAS28 or its individual components. Conclusions: DAS28 is strongly associated both with inflammation and with patient-reported outcomes. DAS28-derived indices such as tender-swollen difference are associated with non-inflammatory pain mechanisms, can predict future pain and should inform how DAS28 is interpreted as an index of inflammatory disease activity in RA

Validity of a three-variable juvenile arthritis disease activity score in children with new-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis

&lt;p&gt;Objectives To investigate the validity and feasibility of the Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (JADAS) in the routine clinical setting for all juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) disease categories and explore whether exclusion of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) from JADAS (the ‘JADAS3’) influences correlation with single markers of disease activity.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Methods JADAS-71, JADAS-27 and JADAS-10 were determined at baseline for an inception cohort of children with JIA in the Childhood Arthritis Prospective Study. JADAS3-71, JADAS3-27 and JADAS3-10 were determined using an identical formula but with exclusion of ESR. Correlation of JADAS with JADAS3 and single measures of disease activity/severity were determined by category.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Results Of 956 eligible children, sufficient data were available to calculate JADAS-71, JADAS-27 and JADAS-10 at baseline in 352 (37%) and JADAS3 in 551 (58%). The median (IQR) JADAS-71, JADAS-27 and JADAS-10 for all 352 children was 11 (5.9–18), 10.4 (5.7–17) and 11 (5.9–17.3), respectively. Median JADAS and JADAS3 varied significantly with the category (Kruskal–Wallis p=0.0001), with the highest values in children with polyarticular disease patterns. Correlation of JADAS and JADAS3 across all categories was excellent. Correlation of JADAS71 with single markers of disease activity/severity was good to moderate, with some variation across the categories. With the exception of ESR, correlation of JADAS3-71 was similar to correlation of JADAS-71 with the same indices.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Conclusions This study is the first to apply JADAS to all categories of JIA in a routine clinical setting in the UK, adding further information about the feasibility and construct validity of JADAS. For the majority of categories, clinical applicability would be improved by exclusion of the ESR.&lt;/p&gt