Evaluation globale standardisée systématique des rhumatismes inflammatoires chroniques: intérêts et limites

Introduction: National and international recommendations call for an annual standardized systematic holistic review in the management of chronic inflammatory rheumatism (CIR). This includes an assessment of disease activity and severity, as well as patient education on the disease, knowledge of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments, adherence to treatment and screening for comorbidities. Our study aims to recall the definition of a holistic review (HR), to present the evidence of their effectiveness and to give an overview of HR practices in France. Methods: A literature review was conducted in the Pubmed database to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or meta-analyses reporting the efficacy of a multidisciplinary intervention in ICR or other chronic diseases. Two online surveys were sent to all rheumatology departments in France and to a sample of independent rheumatologists, with 34 and 19 questions respectively. These questionnaires were used to determine the profile of the responding center/rheumatologist, the existence of an HR and the obstacles or facilitators to its implementation. Results: Literature search yielded 872 articles, 24 of which were finally included: 16 RCTs and 8 meta-analyses. Only 3 articles concerned ICRs, including one meta-analysis of 10 RCTs in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Of these 3 studies, 2 RCTs in systemic lupus and systemic sclerosis showed a favorable impact of a multidisciplinary approach on SLEDAI and grip strength and mouth opening respectively, while the meta-analysis in RA showed no benefit on disability or disease activity.The questionnaire was answered by 72 centers and 186 rheumatologists. A third of the centers had already implemented a HR during an day hospitalization. 70 % of centers estimated that they managed more than 10 patients per month, devoting an average of 35 minutes of rheumatologist time and 90 minutes of cumulative time for all other healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in the program. Most of the HCPs involved were nurses (92 %), dieticians (56 %) and physiotherapists (56 %). The main obstacles to setting up a HR were the lack of paramedical resources, lack of economic value and lack of support from treating rheumatologists, while patient motivation was seen as a facilitating factor. Conclusion: Although HR is recommended, there is little evidence of its effectiveness in ICR. Only 36 % of responding centers have implemented such a program. This survey helps to identify the obstacles and facilitators, and to find solutions for extending this practice

Use of Auto-Injector for Methotrexate Subcutaneous Self-Injections: High Satisfaction Level and Good Compliance in SELF-I Study, a Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel Group Study

International audienceINTRODUCTION:The objective of the study was to compare compliance and acceptability of a new auto-injector (AI) versus syringe for administration of methotrexate (MTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).METHODS:We conducted a randomized, open-label, parallel group study comparing AI to pre-filled syringe (PFS). Adult patients with RA (ACR/EULAR 2010) receiving MTX (orally or by injection) for at least 3 months were allocated to AI or PFS for 6 months and then were allocated to AI for 6 further months. Two co-primary endpoints were defined at M6: percentage of patients with compliance at least 80%; change in functional capacity assessed by Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Secondary endpoints included quality of life (RaQoL), RA activity (DAS28), and acceptability. Local safety at injection site was assessed at each visit.RESULTS:Two-hundred and sixty-five patients were randomized. The main analysis was conducted on per protocol set (99 AI and 98 PFS). Compliance was 96.2% in AI and 98.9% in PFS. Good complier rates were 89.9% and 94.9%, thus a difference of - 5.0% (- 18.9%; 8.9%). HAQ remained stable in both groups. No difference was found on RaQoL, change in RA activity, and safety profile. Autonomy, acceptability, and patient satisfaction were better with AI, and patients having had the experience of both AI and PFS preferred AI (p < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS:Although this study did not demonstrate non-inferiority of AI versus PFS, compliance was excellent in the two groups, and AI, which was preferred by patients, is a valuable alternative to PFS for administration of MTX.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02553018

Is it necessary to weight by weight the dosage of MTX in RA patients? Results from observational analysis of baseline data of a phase III trial.

International audienc

Is it necessary to weight by weight the dosage of MTX in RA patients? Results from observational analysis of baseline data of a phase III trial.

International audienc

MTX optimization or adding bDMARD equally improve disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis: results from the prospective study STRATEGE

International audienceObjectives. The STRATEGE (Therapeutic Strategy in Patients Treated With Methotrexate for Rheumatoid Arthritis) study aimed to describe treatment strategies in current practice in RA biologic DMARD (bDMARD)-naïve patients with an inadequate response to MTX therapy, and to compare clinical efficacy of the different therapeutic strategies on disease activity after 6 months. Methods. The main inclusion criteria of this prospective, observational, multicentre study were confirmed RA diagnosis, treatment by MTX monotherapy and need for therapeutic management modification.Results. The 722 patients included had a mean (s.d.) RA duration of 5.3 (6.7) years, a mean DAS28 of 4.0 (1.1); they were all receiving MTX monotherapy, 68% oral, at a mean dose of 15.0 (4.1) mg/week. Two major strategies were identified: (i) MTX monotherapy dose and/or route optimization (72%) and (ii) bDMARD initiation ± MTX (16%). MTX dosing was modified for 70% of patients, maintained (dose and route) for 28% of patients and interrupted for 2%. bDMARDs were started when the MTX mean dose was 17.4 mg/week, 56% parenterally; MTX was maintained concomitantly for 96% of patients. Six-month follow-up results adjusted by propensity score showed that both options were equally successful in improving disease activity and physical function, with 63 and 68% of good-to-moderate EULAR responses, respectively.Conclusion. The STRATEGE study shows the importance of initial MTX treatment optimization before initiation of a biological treatment and emphasizes the importance of treat-to-target strategy

Is the widely-used score in axial spondyloarthritis, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, influenced by patients’ optimism? A cross-sectional study of 206 patients

International audienceThe Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) [1] is widely used to assess disease activity in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and initiate tumor necrosis factor α-inhibitor therapy [2]. Because BASDAI is a patient-reported outcome, and therefore subject to variability, there may be questions regarding the link between BASDAI results and pathogenesis of axSpA. Specifically, BASDAI score is partly explained by psychological distress (i.e., anxiety/depression) [3], which may be an issue when using it to decide on treatment strategies

Exploring remission concept in axial spondyloarthritis through the perception of rheumatologists using vignettes and priority ratings

International audienceObjectivesThe optimal treatment target in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is remission; however, a consensual definition of remission is lacking. Our objective was to explore rheumatologists’ perception of remission using vignette cases and a priority exercise.MethodsA cross-sectional survey of rheumatologists’ perceptions of remission in axSpA was performed in 2020 using (a) 36 vignette cases, with a single clinical picture and 3 varying parameters (axial pain [ranging from 2 to 5 on a 0–10 scale], fatigue [2–8], and morning stiffness [<15 min, 30 min or 1 h], assessed as remission yes/no; (b) prioritization of elements to consider for remission from a list of 12 items: BASDAI, ASDAS, elements of BASDAI and ASDAS including CRP, NSAIDs use, extra-articular manifestations (EAMs), and other explanations of symptoms e.g. fibromyalgia. Analyses were descriptive.ResultsOverall, 200 French rheumatologists participated in 2,400 vignette evaluations. Of these, 463 (19%) were classified as remission. The 6 vignette cases representing 56% of all remission cases had <15 min duration of morning stiffness and axial pain ≤3/10, regardless of fatigue levels. Prioritized items for remission were: morning stiffness (75%), EAMs (75%), NSAID use (71%), axial pain (68%), and CRP (66%).ConclusionsWhen conceptualizing remission in axSpA, rheumatologists took into account morning stiffness and axial pain as expected; the link between remission and fatigue was much weaker. Furthermore, rheumatologists also included EAMs and NSAID use in the concept of remission. Consensus is needed for definition of remission in axSpA