The perspective of people with axial spondyloarthritis regarding physiotherapy : room for the implementation of a more active approach

Objectives. Physiotherapy is recommended in the management of people with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), with new insights into its preferred content and dosage evolving. The aim of this study was to describe the use and preferences regarding individual and group physiotherapy among people with axSpA. Methods. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among people with axSpA living in The Netherlands (NL) and Switzerland (CH). Results. Seven hundred and thirteen people with axSpA participated (56.7% male, median age 55 years, median Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society Health Index score 4.2). Response rates were 45% (n¼206) in NL and 29% in CH (n¼507). Of these participants, 83.3% were using or had been using physiotherapy. Individual therapy only was used or had been used by 36.7%, a combination of individual plus land- and water-based group therapy by 29.1% and group therapy by only 5.3%. Fewer than half of the participants attending individual therapy reported active therapy (such as aerobic, muscle strength and flexibility exercises). Although the majority (75.9%) were not aware of the increased cardiovascular risk, participants showed an interest in cardiovascular training, either individually or in a supervised setting. If supervised, a majority, in CH (75.0%) more than in NL (55.7%), preferred supervision by a specialized physiotherapist. Conclusion. The majority of people with axSpA use or have used physiotherapy, more often in an individual setting than in a group setting. The content of individual therapy should be more active; in both therapy settings, aerobic exercises should be promoted. In particular, enabling people with axSpA to perform exercises independently would meet their needs and might enhance their daily physical activity

Health-related quality of life and functional ability in patients with early arthritis during remission steered treatment: results of the IMPROVED study

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to investigate patient reported outcomes (PROs) of functional ability and health related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with early (rheumatoid) arthritis during one year of remission steered treatment. METHODS: In this study, 610 patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or undifferentiated arthritis (UA) were treated with methotrexate (MTX) and tapered high dose of prednisone. Patients in early remission (Disease Activity Score (DAS) <1.6 after 4 months) tapered prednisone to zero and when in persistent remission, also tapered MTX. Patients not in early remission were randomized to either MTX + hydroxychloroquine + sulphasalazine + prednisone (arm 1) or to MTX + adalimumab (arm 2). Every 4 months, patients filled out the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and the McMaster Toronto Arthritis Patient Preference Questionnaire (MACTAR), the Short Form 36 (SF-36) and visual analogue scales (VAS). Change scores were compared between treatment groups. The association with achieving remission was analyzed using linear mixed models. RESULTS: During year 1, patients who achieved early remission had the most improvement in PROs with scores comparable to the general population. Patients in the randomization arms showed less improvement. Scores were comparable between the arms. There was a significant association between achieving remission and scores of HAQ, MACTAR and physical HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: In early arthritis, PROs of functional ability and HRQoL after one year of remission steered treatment reach normal values in patients who achieved early remission. In patients not in early remission, who were randomized to two strategy arms, PROs improved less, with similar scores in both treatment arms. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: ISRCTN11916566 and EudraCT2006-006186-1

Two-year results of disease activity score (DAS)-remission-steered treatment strategies aiming at drug-free remission in early arthritis patients (the IMPROVED-study)

Background: Early suppression of disease activity in (rheumatoid) arthritis (RA) patients may result in drug-free remission and prevent damage. We assessed 2-year clinical and radiological outcomes of two disease activity score (DAS)-remission-steered treatment strategies in early arthritis patients.Methods: Patients (n = 610) with early RA or undifferentiated arthritis (UA) were treated with methotrexate (MTX) and tapered high dose of prednisone. Patients in early remission (44/53 joints DAS <1.6) after 4 months tapered and stopped medication. Patients who did not achieve early DAS-remission were randomized to either MTX plus hydroxychloroquine plus sulphasalazine plus low dose prednisone (arm 1) or to MTX + adalimumab (arm 2). At four-monthly intervals, medication was tapered and stopped if DAS was <1.6 but restarted, increased or switched if DAS was ≥1.6. Proportions of (drug-free) DAS-remission (DFR) after 2 years and Sharp-van der Heijde scores (SHS) were analyzed separately for the treatment strategies and patients with RA and UA.Results: After 2 years, 301/610 (49 %) patients were in DAS-remission and 131/610 (21 %) in DFR. In the early remission group 241/387 patients (62 %) were in DAS-remission and 111/387 (29 %) DFR. In arm 1 22/83 (27 %) and in arm 2 24/78 (31 %) were in DAS-remission, and 6/83 (7 %) and 7/78 (9 %), respectively, were in DFR. RA and UA patients achieved DAS-remission in comparable percentages (RA: 234/479 (49 %), UA: 64/122 (52 %), p = 0.25). More UA patients achieved DFR (41/122 (34 %)) compared to RA patients (89/479 (19 %), p<0.001). Mean (SD) DAS over time was 1.74 (0.58) across all patients, and median (IQR) SHS progression was 0 (0–0).Conclusions: After 2 years remission-steered treatment in early RA and UA patients, DAS-remission and DFR percentages were relatively low. Patients who achieved early remission more often achieved (drug-free) remission after 2 years than patients who needed additional treatment steps in the randomization arms, and more UA than RA patients achieved DFR. Overall, disease activity and radiologic damage progression in all patients were well suppressed.Trial registration: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN11916566 Registered 07/11/2006 and EudraCT number 2006-06186-16 Registered 16/07/2007

The Features of the Synovium in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis According to the 2010 ACR/EULAR Classification Criteria

OBJECTIVES: It has been shown in early arthritis cohorts that the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) enable an earlier diagnosis, perhaps at the cost of a somewhat more heterogeneous patient population. We describe the features of synovial inflammation in RA patients classified according to these new criteria. METHODS: At baseline, synovial tissue biopsy samples were obtained from disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve early RA patients (clinical signs and symptoms <1 year). Synovial tissue was analyzed for cell infiltration, vascularity, and expression of adhesion molecules. Stained sections were evaluated by digital image analysis. Patients were classified according to the two different sets of classification criteria, autoantibody status, and outcome. FINDINGS: Synovial tissue of 69 RA patients according to 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria was analyzed: 56 patients who fulfilled the criteria for RA at baseline and 13 who were initially diagnosed as undifferentiated arthritis but fulfilled criteria for RA upon follow up. The synovium at baseline was infiltrated by plasma cells, macrophages, and T cells as well as other cells, and findings were comparable to those when patients were selected based on the 1987 ACR criteria for RA. There was no clear cut difference in the characteristics of the synovium between RA patients initially diagnosed as undifferentiated arthritis and those who already fulfilled classification criteria at baseline. CONCLUSION: The features of synovial inflammation are similar when the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria are used compared to the 1987 ACR criteria

Frequency of joint inflammation is associated with local joint damage progression in rheumatoid arthritis despite long-term targeted treatment

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) frequency of local joint inflammation is associated with radiographic joint damage progression in that joint. METHODS: Data from 473 patients with RA and available radiographs from the BeSt study were used. Patients were treated to target (Disease Activity Score of ≤2.4) for a median of 10 years. At each study visit every 3 months, joints were assessed for swelling and tenderness. Radiographs of hands and feet were made yearly. A generalised linear mixed model was used to assess the association between the percentage of study visits at which clinical inflammation was observed in a joint (cumulative inflammation) and radiographic joint damage in that same joint. Clinical inflammation was primarily defined as joint swelling (with or without joint tenderness). For secondary analyses, we also investigated joint tenderness without joint swelling. Damage was measured as the percentage of the maximum possible Sharp-Van der Heijde score in a particular joint. RESULTS: Cumulative local joint swelling was associated with local progression of radiographic damage in the same joint (β=0.14, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.15). This association was also found in a subset of joints that were swollen at least once. Cumulative local joint tenderness without concurrent local joint swelling was less strongly associated with local radiographic joint damage progression (β=0.04, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In RA, long-term cumulative local joint inflammation is associated with joint damage progression in the same joint

Can we achieve true drug-free remission in patients with RA?

Pathophysiology and treatment of rheumatic disease

Comparison of treatment strategies in early rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND: In patients with early rheumatoid arthritis, initial combination therapies provide earlier clinical improvement and less progression of joint damage after 1 year compared with initial monotherapies (as demonstrated in the BeSt study). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the initial clinical and radiographic efficacy of combination therapies could be maintained during the second year of follow-up in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled clinical trial with blinded assessors. SETTING: 18 peripheral and 2 university medical centers in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: 508 patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis. INTERVENTION: Sequential monotherapy (group 1), step-up combination therapy (group 2), initial combination therapy with tapered high-dose prednisone (group 3), or initial combination therapy with infliximab (group 4). Trimonthly treatment adjustments were made to achieve low disease activity. MEASUREMENTS: Primary end points were functional ability (Health Assessment Questionnaire) and Sharp-van der Heijde score for radiographic joint damage. RESULTS: Groups 3 and 4 had more rapid clinical improvement during the first year; all groups improved further to a mean functional ability score of 0.6 (overall, P = 0.257) and 42% were in remission (overall, P = 0.690) during the second year. Progression of joint damage remained better suppressed in groups 3 and 4 (median scores of 2.0, 2.0, 1.0, and 1.0 in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively [P = 0.004]). After 2 years, 33%, 31%, 36%, and 53% of patients in groups 1 through 4, respectively, were receiving single-drug therapy for initial treatment. There were no significant differences in toxicity. LIMITATIONS: Patients and physicians were aware of the allocated group, and the assessors were blinded. CONCLUSIONS: Currently available antirheumatic drugs can be highly effective in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis in a setting of tight disease control. Initial combination therapies seem to provide earlier clinical improvement and less progression of joint damage, but all treatment strategies eventually showed similar clinical improvements. In addition, combination therapy can be withdrawn successfully and less treatment adjustments are needed than with initial monotherapie

Gradual tapering TNF inhibitors versus conventional synthetic DMARDs after achieving controlled disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: first-year results of the randomised controlled TARA study

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of two tapering strategies after achieving controlled disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), during 1 year of follow-up. METHODS: In this multicentre single-blinded (research nurses) randomised controlled trial, patients with RA were included who achieved controlled disease, defined as a Disease Activity Score (DAS) ≤ 2.4 and a Swollen Joint Count (SJC) ≤ 1, treated with both a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) and a TNF inhibitor. Eligible patients were randomised into gradual tapering csDMARDs or TNF inhibitors. Medication was tapered if the RA was still under control, by cutting the dosage into half, a quarter and thereafter it was stopped. Primary outcome was proportion of patients with a disease flare, defined as DAS > 2.4 and/or SJC > 1. Secondary outcomes were DAS, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ5D) and functional ability (Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index [HAQ-DI]) after 1 year and over time. RESULTS: A total of 189 patients were randomly assigned to tapering csDMARDs (n = 94) or tapering anti-TNF (n = 95). The cumulative flare rates in the csDMARD and anti-TNF tapering group were, respectively, 33 % (95% CI,24% to 43 %) and 43 % (95% CI, 33% to 53 % (p = 0.17). Mean DAS, HAQ-DI and EQ-5D did not differ between tapering groups after 1 year and over time. CONCLUSION: Up to 9 months, flare rates of tapering csDMARDs or TNF inhibitors were similar. After 1 year, a non-significant difference was found of 10 % favouring csDMARD tapering. Tapering TNF inhibitors was, therefore, not superior to tapering csDMARDs. From a societal perspective, it would be sensible to taper the TNF inhibitor first, because of possible cost reductions and less long-term side effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR2754