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 > 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

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<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

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 < 0.01) and at 12 months (OR 0.911, 95% CI 0.883–0.939; p < 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

Discrimination, Reliability, Sensitivity, and Specificity of Robotic Surgical Proficiency Assessment With Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills and Binary Scoring Metrics: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: To compare binary metrics and Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) evaluations of training outcome assessments for reliability, sensitivity, and specificity. Background: GEARS–Likert-scale skills assessment are a widely accepted tool for robotic surgical training outcome evaluations. Proficiency-based progression (PBP) training is another methodology but uses binary performance metrics for evaluations. Methods: In a prospective, randomized, and blinded study, we compared conventional with PBP training for a robotic suturing, knot-tying anastomosis task. Thirty-six surgical residents from 16 Belgium residency programs were randomized. In the skills laboratory, the PBP group trained until they demonstrated a quantitatively defined proficiency benchmark. The conventional group were yoked to the same training time but without the proficiency requirement. The final trial was video recorded and assessed with binary metrics and GEARS by robotic surgeons blinded to individual, group, and residency program. Sensitivity and specificity of the two assessment methods were evaluated with area under the curve (AUC) and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. Results: The PBP group made 42% fewer objectively assessed performance errors than the conventional group (P &lt; 0.001) and scored 15% better on the GEARS assessment (P = 0.033). The mean interrater reliability for binary metrics and GEARS was 0.87 and 0.38, respectively. Binary total error metrics AUC was 97% and for GEARS 85%. With a sensitivity threshold of 0.8, false positives rates were 3% and 25% for, respectively, the binary and GEARS assessments. Conclusions: Binary metrics for scoring a robotic VUA task demonstrated better psychometric properties than the GEARS assessment. </jats:sec

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

Influence of Antisynthetase Antibodies Specificities on Antisynthetase Syndrome Clinical Spectrum TimeCourse

Introduction: Increased cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality is observed in inflammatory joint diseases (IJDs) such as rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis. However, the management of CV disease in these conditions is far from being well established.Areas covered: This review summarizes the main epidemiologic, pathophysiological, and clinical risk factors of CV disease associated with IJDs. Less common aspects on early diagnosis and risk stratification of the CV disease in these conditions are also discussed. In Europe, the most commonly used risk algorithm in patients with IJDs is the modified SCORE index based on the revised recommendations proposed by the EULAR task force in 2017.Expert opinion: Early identification of IJD patients at high risk of CV disease is essential. It should include the use of complementary noninvasive imaging techniques. A multidisciplinary approach aimed to improve heart-healthy habits, including strict control of classic CV risk factors is crucial. Adequate management of the underlying IJD is also of main importance since the reduction of disease activity decreases the risk of CV events. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may have a lesser harmful effect in IJD than in the general population, due to their anti-inflammatory effects along with other potential beneficial effects.This research was partially funded by FOREUM—Foundation for Research in Rheumatolog

Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago

Background: Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann's procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA. Methods: This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up. Results: 564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6&nbsp;years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P &lt; 0.001). 30-day mortality was higher in HP patients (13.7%), especially in case of bowel perforation and diffused peritonitis. 1-year follow-up showed no differences on ostomy reversal rate between HP and RPA. (P = 0.127). A backward likelihood logistic regression model showed that RPA was preferred in younger patients, having low ASA score (≤ 3), in case of large bowel obstruction, absence of colonic ischemia, longer time from admission to surgery, operating early at the day working hours, by a surgeon who performed more than 50 colorectal resections. Conclusions: After 100&nbsp;years since the first Hartmann's procedure, HP remains the most common treatment for left-sided colorectal emergencies. Treatment's choice depends on patient characteristics, the time of surgery and the experience of the surgeon. RPA should be considered as the gold standard for surgery, with HP being an exception