Psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis in Norway : nationwide prevalence and use of biologic agents

Objective To estimate the prevalence of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and the use of biologic agents in these diseases in Norway. Methods From the Norwegian Patient Registry (NPR), we identified as PsA, axSpA and RA patients >= 18 years those with >= 2 recorded episodes with diagnostic coding for index disease (L40.5, M07.0-M07.3 for PsA; M45, M46.0, M46.1, M46.8 and M46.9 for axSpA; M05-M06 for RA). We calculated the point prevalence of PsA, axSpA and RA as per the 1(st) of January 2017 in the Norwegian adult population (age >= 18). Dispensed disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) prescriptions were obtained from the Norwegian Prescription Database and biologic DMARDs given in hospitals from the NPR. Results The point prevalence of PsA, axSpA, RA, and any of these diseases in total was 0.46%, 0.41%, 0.78%, and 1.56%, respectively. Among women, the prevalence of PsA, axSpA, and RA was 0.50%, 0.37%, and 1.10%, and among men 0.43%, 0.45%, and 0.46%, respectively. In 2017, 27.3% of RA patients, 25.7% of PsA patients and 35.1% of axSpA patients used biologic DMARDs. Treatment with biologics was more frequent in younger age groups in all three diseases, and became more infrequent especially after age >= 55 years. Conclusion In Norway, the combined prevalence of PsA, axSpA, and RA was over 1.5%. Reflecting the good overall access to highly effective but costly biologic treatments, more than a fourth of these patients used biologic agents, which corresponds to over 0.4% of Norwegian adult population.Peer reviewe

Educational needs and preferences of young European clinicians and physician researchers working in the field of rheumatology

Funding Information: CB: Grant BE 5191/1-1 of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.Objectives: To understand the educational needs and preferences of young clinicians and physician researchers in the field of rheumatology in Europe. Methods: An international online survey was performed as a joint venture of ESCET and EMEUNET. The survey assessed the acceptance of and the access to the current European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) educational portfolio, as well as the unmet educational needs and learning preferences among individuals below the age of 40 years working in rheumatology in Europe. Results: Among 568 European clinicians and physician researchers, 65% indicated that the existing EULAR educational portfolio adequately covers their educational needs. Within the EULAR portfolio, the online course on rheumatic diseases and the postgraduate course were the most appreciated. Participants were very much in favour of new educational courses on imaging techniques, and 63% of participants indicated a particular interest in musculoskeletal ultrasound. A strong interest in refresher (60%) and general review (55%) courses was observed. Lack of funding was considered the major obstacle to participating in existing EULAR programmes. Finally, participants showed diverse preferences regarding learning modalities with common interests in live courses and conferences. Conclusions: EULAR's training opportunities are well appreciated among young clinicians and physician researchers in rheumatology. The results from this survey will help to develop EULAR's future educational portfolio.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Effect of half-dose vs stable-dose conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs on disease flares in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission: the ARCTIC REWIND randomized clinical trial

This randomized trial compares the effects of half-dose conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) vs stable-dose csDMARDs on the risk of flares in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in sustained remission.Importance Sustained remission has become an achievable goal for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), but how to best treat patients in clinical remission remains unclear. Objective To assess the effect of tapering of csDMARDs, compared with continuing csDMARDs without tapering, on the risk of flares in patients with RA in sustained remission. Design, Setting, and Participants ARCTIC REWIND was a multicenter, randomized, parallel, open-label noninferiority study conducted in 10 Norwegian hospital-based rheumatology practices. A total of 160 patients with RA in remission for 12 months who were receiving stable csDMARD therapy were enrolled between June 2013 and June 2018, and the final visit occurred in June 2019. Interventions Patients were randomly assigned to half-dose csDMARDs (n = 80) or stable-dose csDMARDs (n = 80). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was the proportion of patients with a disease flare between baseline and the 12-month follow-up, defined as a combination of Disease Activity Score (DAS) greater than 1.6 (threshold for RA remission), an increase in DAS score of 0.6 units or more, and at least 2 swollen joints. A disease flare could also be recorded if both the patient and investigator agreed that a clinically significant flare had occurred. A risk difference of 20% was defined as the noninferiority margin. Results Of 160 enrolled patients (mean [SD] age, 55.1 [11.9] years; 66% female), 156 received the allocated therapy, of which 155 without any major protocol violations were included in the primary analysis population (77 receiving half-dose and 78 receiving stable-dose csDMARDs). Flare occurred in 19 patients (25%) in the half-dose csDMARD group compared with 5 (6%) in the stable-dose csDMARD group (risk difference, 18% [95% CI, 7%-29%]). Adverse events occurred in 34 patients (44%) in the half-dose group and 42 (54%) in the stable-dose group, none leading to study discontinuation. No deaths occurred. Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with RA in remission taking csDMARD therapy, treatment with half-dose vs stable-dose csDMARDs did not demonstrate noninferiority for the percentage of patients with disease flares over 12 months, and there were significantly fewer flares in the stable-dose group. These findings do not support treatment with half-dose therapy.Question In patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission taking conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), is reducing the csDMARDs to half dose noninferior to stable csDMARD dosage for the outcome of rheumatoid arthritis flares? Findings In this randomized clinical trial that included 160 patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission taking csDMARD therapy, treatment with half-dose vs stable-dose csDMARDs resulted in disease flares in 25% vs 6% over 12 months; this did not meet the noninferiority criterion of a 20% difference. There were significantly fewer patients with flares in the stable-dose group. Meaning These findings do not support the use of half-dose treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission taking csDMARDs.Pathophysiology and treatment of rheumatic disease

Osteoarthritis and functional disability: results of a cross sectional study among primary care patients in Germany

Contains fulltext : 52359.pdf ( ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to determine factors associated with functional disability in patients with OA. METHODS: 1250 questionnaires were distributed to OA outpatients from 75 general practices; 1021 (81.6%) were returned. Questionnaires included sociodemographic data, the short form of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale (AIMS2-SF), and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) to assess concomitant depression. A hierarchical stepwise multiple regression analysis with the AIMS2-SF dimension "lower body" as dependent was performed. RESULTS: Main factors associated with functional disability were depression symptoms, as reflected in a high score of the PHQ-9 (beta = 0.446; p < 0.0009), pain as reflected in the AIMS2-SF symptom scale (beta = 0.412; p = 0.001), and few social contacts (beta = 0.201; p < 0.042). A high body mass index was associated with lower functional ability (beta = 0.332; p = 0.005) whereas a higher educational level (beta = -0.279; p = 0.029) predicted less impairment. Increased age was a weak predictor (beta = 0.178; p = 0.001) of disability. With a p of 0.062 the radiological severity according to the grading of Kellgren and Lawrence slightly surpassed the required significance level for remaining in the final regression model. CONCLUSION: The results emphasize that psychological as well as physical factors need to be addressed similarly to improve functional ability of patients suffering from OA. More research with multifaceted and tailored interventions is needed to determine how these factors can be targeted appropriately

2022 update

Funding Information: This study was funded by European League Against Rheumatism. Publisher Copyright: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Objectives: To provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field. Methods: An international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item. Results: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3-6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations. Conclusions: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost.publishersversionepub_ahead_of_prin

Development of a brief multidisciplinary education programme for patients with osteoarthritis

Background Osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent progressive musculoskeletal disorder, leading to pain and disability. Patient information and education are considered core elements in treatment guidelines for OA; however, there is to our knowledge no evidence-based recommendation on the best approach, content or length on educational programmes in OA. Objective: to develop a brief, patient oriented disease specific multidisciplinary education programme (MEP) to enhance self-management in patients with OA. Method Twelve persons (80% female mean age 59 years) diagnosed with hand, hip or knee OA participated in focus group interviews. In the first focus group, six participants were interviewed about their educational needs, attitudes and expectations for the MEP. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and thereafter condensed. Based on results from focus group interviews, current research evidence, clinical knowledge and patients' experience, a multidisciplinary OA team (dietist, nurse, occupational therapist, pharmacist, physical therapist and rheumatologist) and a patient representative developed a pilot-MEP after having attended a work-shop in health pedagogics. Finally, the pilot-MEP was evaluated by a second focus group consisting of four members from the first focus group and six other experienced patients, before final adjustments were made. Results The focus group interviews revealed four important themes: what is OA, treatment options, barriers and coping strategies in performing daily activities, and how to live with osteoarthritis. Identified gaps between patient expectations and experience with the pilot-programme were discussed and adapted into a final MEP. The final MEP was developed as a 3.5 hour educational programme provided in groups of 6-9 patients. All members from the multidisciplinary team are involved in the education programme, including a facilitator who during the provision of the programme ensures that the individual questions are addressed. As part of an ongoing process, a patient representative regularly attends the MEP and gives feedback concerning content and perceived value. Conclusion A MEP has been developed to enhance self-management in patients with OA attending a multidisciplinary OA outpatient clinic. The effectiveness of the MEP followed by individual consultations with members of the multidisciplinary team is currently evaluated in a randomised controlled trial with respect to patient satisfaction and functioning