Clinical features of gout in a cohort of Italian patients

Objective: To assess the clinical characteristics of gout and its diagnostic approach in a group of Italian patients. Methods: In a retrospective analysis, we evaluated 72 consecutive gouty patients examined in the years 2000-2007.We recorded demographic data, family history, comorbidities and disease characteristics (seasonality of the attacks, joints affected, serum uric acid concentration, and treatment). Result: 63/72 (87.5%) patients were men and 9 women, with mean age 61.9±13.7 years. 8/72 (11.1%) patients reported a familial history of gout. The first attack occurred mainly in the months of June, July and December. The first metatarsophalangeal joint was affected in 59.7% of patients and the hand in 25%. Treatment changed over the follow- up period, with a decreased use of NSAIDs (p<0.0001) and an increased use of colchicine (p=0.015) and allopurinol (p<0.0001). In 9 (12.5%) patients, joint aspiration was performed and monosodium urate crystals were found in synovial fluid or tophi. 42/72 (58.3%) patients fulfilled a minimum of 6 clinical criteria of the American College of Rheumatology, necessary for gout diagnosis. 47/72 (65.3%) patients, met the EULAR recommendations and had an 82% probability of being affected by gout. Conclusions: The diagnosis of gout is not always easy because of its changing clinical spectrum. Identification of MSU crystals in joint aspirates was obtained only in a minority of patients. In this setting the diagnosis with gout was often based on the observation of an acute intermittent monoarthritis involving mainly the first metatarsophlangeal joint, associated with hyperuricaemia and responsive to colchicine

Adalimumab and ABP 501 in the Treatment of a Large Cohort of Patients with Inflammatory Arthritis: A Real Life Retrospective Analysis

The recent introduction of ABP 501, an adalimumab biosimilar, in the treatment of rheumatic diseases was supported by a comprehensive comparability exercise with its originator. On the other hand, observational studies comparing adalimumab and ABP 501 in inflammatory arthritis are still lacking. The main aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of the treatment with adalimumab, both the originator and ABP 501, in a large cohort of patients affected by autoimmune arthritis in a real life setting. We retrospectively analysed the baseline characteristics and the retention rate in a cohort of patients who received at least a course of adalimumab (originator or ABP 501) from January 2003 to December 2020. We stratified the study population according to adalimumab use: naive to original (oADA), naive to ABP 501 (bADA) and switched from original to ABP 501 (sADA). The oADA, bADA and sADA groups included, respectively, 724, 129 and 193 patients. In each group, the majority of patients had a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis. The total observation period was 9805.6 patient-months. The 18-month retentions rate in oADA, bADA and sADA was, respectively, 81.5%, 84.0% and 88.0% (p &gt; 0.05). The factors influencing the adalimumab retention rate were an axial spondylarthritis diagnosis (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.70; p = 0.04), switch from oADA to ABP 501 (HR 0.53; p = 0.02) and year of prescription (HR 1.04; p = 0.04). In this retrospective study, patients naive to the adalimumab originator and its biosimilar ABP 501 showed the same retention rate. Patients switching from the originator to biosimilar had a higher retention rate, even though not statistically significant, when compared to naive

Apremilast retention rate in clinic practice:observations from an Italian multi-center study

Objective There are few real-world setting studies focused on apremilast efectiveness (i.e., retention rate) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The main aim of this retrospective observational study is the assessment of apremilast 3-year retention ratein real-world PsA patients. Moreover, the secondary objective is to report the reasons of apremilast discontinuation and thefactors related to treatment persistence. Methods In ffteen Italian rheumatological referral centers, all PsA consecutive patients who received apremilast were enrolled. Anamnestic data, treatment history, and PsA disease activity (DAPSA) at baseline were recorded. The Kaplan–Meier curve and the Coxanalysis computed the apremilast retention rate and treatment persistence-related risk factors. A p-value&lt;0.05 was considered statistically signifcant. Results The 356 enrolled patients (median age 60 [interquartile range IQR 52–67] yrs; male prevalence 42.7%) median observation period was 17 [IQR 7–34] months (7218 patients-months). The apremilast retention rate at 12, 24, and 36 months was, respectively, 85.6%, 73.6%, and 61.8%. The main discontinuation reasons were secondary inefcacy (34% of interruptions), gastro-intestinal intolerance (24%), and primary inefcacy (19%). Age and oligo-articular phenotype were related to treatment persistence (respectively hazard ratio 0.98 IQR 0.96–0.99; p=0.048 and 0.54 IQR 0.31–0.95; p=0.03). Conclusion Almost three-ffths of PsA patients receiving apremilast were still in treatment after 3 years. This study confrmed its efectiveness and safety profle. Apremilast appears as a good treatment choice in all oligo-articular PsA patients and in those ones burdened by relevant comorbiditi

Predictors of DAPSA Response in Psoriatic Arthritis Patients Treated with Apremilast in a Retrospective Observational Multi-Centric Study (2023-02-07)

Background: To date, only a few real-world-setting studies evaluated apremilast effectiveness in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The aims of this retrospective observational study are to report long-term Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) response of apremilast in PsA patients and to analyze the predictors of clinical response. Methods: All PsA consecutive patients treated with apremilast in fifteen Italian rheumatological referral centers were enrolled. Anamnestic data, treatment history, and PsA disease activity (DAPSA) at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months were recorded. The Mann–Whitney test and chi-squared tests assessed the differences between independent groups, whereas the Wilcoxon matched pairs signed-rank test assessed the differences between dependent samples. Logistic regressions verified if there were factors associated with achievement of DAPSA low disease activity or remission at 6 and 12 months. Results: DAPSA low disease activity or remission rates at 6 and 12 months were observed, respectively, in 42.7% (n = 125) and 54.9% (n = 161) patients. Baseline DAPSA was inversely associated with the odds of achieving low disease activity or remission at 6 months (odds ratio (OR) 0.841, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.804–0.879; p &lt; 0.01) and at 12 months (OR 0.911, 95% CI 0.883–0.939; p &lt; 0.01). Conclusions: Almost half of the PsA patients receiving apremilast achieved DAPSA low disease activity or remission at 6 and 12 months. The only factor associated with achievement of low disease activity or remission at both 6 and 12 months was baseline DAPSA

Baseline Ultrasound Assessment Improves the Response to Apremilast in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: Results from a Multicentre Study

ound: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) phenotypes show different responses to the many available drugs. For a tailored medicine, it is important to choose the most effective treatment according to patients’ characteristics. Apremilast is recommended in PsA with moderate activity. In clinical practice, the most suitable PsA patients for apremilast are those affected by the peripheral oligoarticular arthritis. However, it is not so straightforward to definitely identify this phenotype. Musculoskeletal ultrasound (MUS) is a good tool for detecting the joints actually involved by PsA. The aim of this study is to verify if MUS assessment is useful in selecting the best PsA responders to apremilast. Methods: The following data of all consecutive PsA patients from 15 centres were recorded: anamnestic data, disease activity, PsA phenotype, apremilast treatment duration and reason of suspension. MUS assessment before apremilast treatment was the criteria which clustered patients in two groups. Apremilast retention rate estimate the drug’s effectiveness. The Cox analysis revealed the risk factors associated with treatment persistence. Mann-Whitney U and Chi-squared tests assessed the intergroup differences. Results: Only 40% of 356 patients (M:F: 152/204; median age 60 yrs) received MUS examination. In MUS group the moderate disease (median DAPSA 22.9 vs 26.9; p=0.0006) and the oligo-articular phenotype (63.6% vs 36.1%, p&lt;0.0001) were more common. The retention rate was higher in MUS group (HR 0.55 IC95% 0.32-0.94; p=0.03). Conclusion: In apremilast treated PsA patients, baseline MUS assessment is related to an increased retention rate. MUS may identify patients’ characteristics favourable to apremilast response

Long-Term Retention Rate of Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: An Italian Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Tofacitinib (TOFA) was the first Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) to be approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, data on the retention rate of TOFA therapy are still far from definitive. Objective: The goal of this study is to add new real-world data on the TOFA retention rate in a cohort of RA patients followed for a long period of time. Methods: A multicenter retrospective study of RA subjects treated with TOFA as monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) was conducted in 23 Italian tertiary rheumatology centers. The study considered a treatment period of up to 48 months for all included patients. The TOFA retention rate was assessed with the Kaplan–Meier method. Hazard ratios (HRs) for TOFA discontinuation were obtained using Cox regression analysis. Results: We enrolled a total of 213 patients. Data analysis revealed that the TOFA retention rate was 86.5% (95% CI: 81.8–91.5%) at month 12, 78.8% (95% CI: 78.8–85.2%) at month 24, 63.8% (95% CI: 55.1–73.8%) at month 36, and 59.9% (95% CI: 55.1–73.8%) at month 48 after starting treatment. None of the factors analyzed, including the number of previous treatments received, disease activity or duration, presence of rheumatoid factor and/or anti-citrullinated protein antibody, and presence of comorbidities, were predictive of the TOFA retention rate. Safety data were comparable to those reported in the registration studies. Conclusions: TOFA demonstrated a long retention rate in RA in a real-world setting. This result, together with the safety data obtained, underscores that TOFA is a viable alternative for patients who have failed treatment with csDMARD and/or biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs). Further large, long-term observational studies are urgently needed to confirm these results

Influence of safety warnings on the prescribing attitude of JAK 2inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis in Italy

The Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) tofacitinib (TOFA), baricitinib (BARI), upadacitinib (UPA) and 74 filgotinib (FILGO) are effective drugs for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. However, the US 75 Food &amp; Administration (FDA) raised concerns on the safety of TOFA after its approval. This 76 prompted the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to issue two safety warnings for limiting TOFA 77 use then extended in a third warning to all Jaki in patients at high risk of developing serious adverse 78 events (SAE). These included thrombosis, major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and cancer. Thepurpose of this work was to analyze how the first two safety warnings from EMA affected the pre- 80 scribing of Jaki by rheumatologists in Italy. All patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had been 81 prescribed JAKi for the first time in a 36-month period from July 1, 2019, to June 30, 2022 were con- 82 sidered. Data were obtained from the medical records of 29 Italian tertiary referral rheumatology 83 centers. Patients were divided into three groups of 4 months each, depending on whether the JAKi 84 prescription had occurred before the EMA's first safety alert (July 1-October 31, 2019, Group 1), 85 between the first and second alerts (November 1, 2019-February 29, 2020, Group 2), or between the 86 second and third alerts (March 1, 2021-June 30, 2021, Group 3). Percentage and absolute changes in 87 patients prescribed the individual JAKi were analyzed. Differences among the three Groups of pa- 88 tients in demographic and clinical characteristics were also assessed. A total of 864 patients were 89 prescribed a JAKi during the entire period considered. Of these, 343 were identified in Group 1, 233 90 in Group 2 and 288 in Group 3. An absolute reduction of 32% was observed in the number of patients 91 prescribed a JAKi between Group 1 and Group 2 and 16% between Group 1 and Group 3. In contrast, 92 there was a 19% increase in the prescription of a JAKi in patients between Group 2 and Group 3. In 93 the first Group, BARI was the most prescribed drug (227 prescriptions, 66.2% of the total), followed 94 by TOFA (115, 33.5%) and UPA (1, 0.3%). In the second Group, the most prescribed JAKi was BARI 95 (147, 63.1%), followed by TOFA (65, 27.9%) and UPA (33, 11.5%). In the third Group, BARI was still 96 the most prescribed JAKi (104 prescriptions, 36.1%), followed by UPA (89, 30.9%), FILGO (89, 21.5%) 97 and TOFA (33, 11.5%). The number of patients prescribed TOFA decreased significantly between 98 Group 1 and Group 2 and between Group 2 and Group 3 (p ˂ 0.01). Patients who were prescribed 99 BARI decreased significantly between Group 1 and Group 2 and between Group 2 and Group 3 (p 100 ˂ 0.01). In contrast, patients prescribed UPA increased between Group 2 and Group 3 (p ˂ 0.01). 101 These data suggest that the warnings issued for TOFA were followed by a reduction in total JAKi 102 prescriptions. However, the more selective JAKi (UPA and FILGO) were perceived by prescribers 103 as favorable in terms of risk/benefit ratio and their use gradually increased at the expense of the 104 other molecules