Efficacy assessed in follow-ups of clinical trials: methodological conundrum

Increasingly, we see papers describing the long-term follow-up results of randomised clinical trials. Sometimes, like the article by Rantalaiho and colleagues in the previous issue of Arthritis Research & Therapy, the follow-up extends to more than 10 years. It is not uncommon that authors of such articles describe their results as a comparison of the original treatment groups in the original randomised clinical trial. Methodologically, such a comparison is fallible for several reasons. In this editorial, two important sources of bias that may jeopardise the results of such follow-up studies are discussed: confounding by indication and confounding by trial completion

The validity of a rheumatoid arthritis medical records-based index of severity compared with the DAS28

Outcome measures play an extremely important role in clinical trials and observational research. Outcome measures for rheumatoid arthritis cover a whole array of domains, ranging from measures describing the inflammatory process to measures describing the ultimate consequences of long-term disease, such as joint damage, physical function and quality of life. There is a scientific need to be able to quantify what is called the 'severity of rheumatoid arthritis', so that patients with rheumatoid arthritis can be clustered according to their propensity to develop an unfavourable outcome. It is a challenge to find an appropriate measure for severity. One attempt has been the development of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Medical Record-Based Index of Severity. This commentary elaborates on how such a measure of severity should be validated to determine whether it is appropriate for practical use

The performance of different classification criteria sets for spondyloarthritis in the worldwide ASAS-COMOSPA study

Background: In this study, we sought to compare the performance of spondyloarthritis (SpA) classification criteria sets in an international SpA cohort with patients included from five continents around the world. Methods: Data from the (ASAS) COMOrbidities in SPondyloArthritis (ASAS-COMOSPA) study were used. ASAS-COMOSPA is a multinational, cross-sectional study with consecutive patients diagnosed with SpA by rheumatologists worldwide. Patients were classified according to the European Spondyloarthropathy Study Group (ESSG), modified European Spondyloarthropathy Study Group (mESSG), Amor, modified Amor, Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) axial Spondyloarthritis (axSpA), ASAS peripheral spondyloarthritis (pSpA) and ClASsification criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis (CASPAR) criteria. Overlap between the classification criteria sets was assessed for patients with and without back pain. Furthermore, patients fulfilling different arms of the ASAS axSpA criteria (imaging arm, clinical arm, both arms) were compared on the presence of SpA features. Results: A total of 3942 patients (5 continents, 26 countries) were included. The mean age was 43.6 years, 65.0% were male, 56.2% were human leucocyte antigen B27-positive and 64.4% had radiographic sacroiliitis (based on modified New York criteria). Of the patients, 85.5% were classified by the ASAS SpA criteria (87.7% ASAS axSpA, 12.3% ASAS pSpA). Fulfilment of the Amor, ESSG and CASPAR criteria was present in 83.3%, 88.4% and 21.6% of patients, respectively. Of the patients with back pain (n = 3227), most were classified by all three of Amor, ESSG and ASAS axSpA criteria (71.4%). Patients fulfilling the imaging arm and the clinical arm of the ASAS axSpA criteria had similar presentations of SpA features. In patients without back pain, overlap between classification criteria sets was seen, although to a lesser extent. Conclusions: Most patients with a clinical diagnosis of axial SpA in the worldwide ASAS-COMOSPA study fulfil several classification criteria sets, and a substantial overlap between different criteria sets is seen, which suggests a high level of credibility of the criteria. Large inter-regional differences in the fulfilment of classification criteria were not found. Patients fulfilling the clinical arm were remarkably similar to patients fulfilling the imaging arm with respect to the presence of most SpA features

Subtle changes in individual joints result in both positive and negative change scores in a patient: results from a clinical trial in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Radiographic progression in clinical trials is assessed by interpreting changes in total radiographic joint score, and the reliability of those scores depends on an evaluation of sum scores. It is not known how consistently changes in individual joints are identified by independent readers and in independent readings. Patients and 7255 single joints from 178 patients who participated in the Trial of Etanercept and Methothrexate with Radiographic Patient Outcomes (TEMPO) trial were evaluated. Every image was independently scored twice according to the Sharp-van der Heijde method by two independent readers, so that four scores per joint were available. Absolute agreement and consistency of negative and positive erosion change scores across readers and readings were compared on a per-joint level, as well as on a per-patient level. The number of joints showing a change for erosion was very low in this trial: 691/7255 analysed joints had at least one non-zero change score out of four readings. Absolute agreement between readings was remarkably poor: only 12 joints showed a consistently positive or negative change in all four readings. Change scores in opposite directions in the same joint across independent readings were rare (25 joints). Frequency of opposite joint scores in the same patient (mixed change patterns) was reader dependent. Substantial intra and interreader disagreement in scoring change in individual joints is common. Opposite joint scores in the same patient, however, are rare and reader dependent. Notwithstanding these subtle inconsistencies on the individual joint level, the total Sharp score is a useful and discriminatory outcome measur

The earlier, the better or the worse? Towards accurate management of patients with arthralgia at risk for RA

The favourable long-term results of early treatment in patients with classified rheumatoid arthritis have resulted in an increasing interest in the diseases phases preceding clinical arthritis. The hypothesis to test is that an intervention in these early phases may better prevent or reduce disease persistence than an intervention when arthritis has become clinically manifest. While several placebo-controlled trials are still ongoing, to date there is no firm evidence that this hypothesis truly holds. Therefore, it is important to reflect on the current status of arthralgia preceding clinical arthritis. Inherent to every new field of research, attitudes are conflicting, with opinions propagating innovation (based on the fear of undertreatment) on the one hand, and critical sounds pleading for more restraint (fear of overtreatment) on the other hand. In this Viewpoint, we will examine these divergent opinions, relate them to a preferred ultimate scenario and provide considerations for future studies and daily practice

A review through the lens of causal inference

Funding Information: Competing interests AS: Consulting/speaking fees from MSD, UCB, Novartis. SR: Research grant from MSD; Consultancy/speaking fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, UCB, Sanofi. DvdH: Consulting fees AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma Director of Imaging Rheumatology bv. RL: Consulting fees from AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB and is Director of Rheumatology Consultancy bv Publisher Copyright: ©Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is a chronic rheumatic disease characterised by inflammation predominantly involving the spine and the sacroiliac joints. In some patients, axial inflammation leads to irreversible structural damage that in the spine is usually quantified by the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (mSASSS). Available therapeutic options include biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), which have been proven effective in suppressing inflammation in several randomised controlled trials (RCT), the gold standard for evaluating causal treatment effects. RCTs are, however, unfeasible for testing structural effects in axSpA mainly due to the low sensitivity to change of the mSASSS. The available literature therefore mainly includes observational research, which poses serious challenges to the determination of causality. Here, we review the studies testing the effect of bDMARDs on spinal radiographic progression, making use of the principles of causal inference. By exploring the assumptions of causality under counterfactual reasoning (exchangeability, positivity and consistency), we distinguish between studies that likely have reported confounded treatment effects and studies that, on the basis of their design, have more likely reported causal treatment effects. We conclude that bDMARDs might, indirectly, interfere with spinal radiographic progression in axSpA by their effect on inflammation. Innovations in imaging are expected, so that placebo-controlled trials can in the future become a reality. In the meantime, causal inference analysis using observational data may contribute to a better understanding of whether disease modification is possible in axSpA.publishersversionpublishe

Ten years of METEOR (an international rheumatoid arthritis registry): development, research opportunities and future perspectives

OBJECTIVES: Ten years ago, the METEOR tool was developed to simulate treatment-to-target and create an international research database. The development of the METEOR tool and database, research opportunities and future perspectives are described. METHODS: The METEOR tool is a free, online, internationally available tool in which daily practice visits of all rheumatoid arthritis patients visiting a rheumatologist can be registered. In the tool, disease characteristics, patient- and physician-reported outcomes and prescribed treatment could be entered. These can be subsequently displayed in powerful graphics, facilitating treatment decisions and patient-physician interactions. An upload facility is also available, by which data from local electronic health record systems or registries can be integrated into the METEOR database. This is currently being actively used in, among other countries, the Netherlands, Portugal and India. RESULTS: Since an increasing number of hospitals use electronic health record systems, the upload facility is being actively used by an increasing number of sites, enabling them to benefit from the benchmark and research opportunities of METEOR. Enabling a connection between local registries and METEOR is a well established but time-consuming process for which an IT-specialist of METEOR and the local registry are necessary. However, once this process has been finished, data can be uploaded regularly and relatively easily according to a pre-specified format. The METEOR database currently contains data from >39,000 patients and >200,000 visits, from 32 different countries and is ever increasing. Continuous efforts are being undertaken to increase the quality of data in the database. CONCLUSIONS: Since METEOR was founded 10 years ago, many rheumatologists worldwide have used the METEOR tool to follow-up their patients and improve the quality of care they provide to their patients. Combined with uploaded data, this has led to an extensive growth of the database. It now offers a unique opportunity to study daily practice care and to perform research regarding cross-country differences in a large, worldwide setting, which could provide important knowledge about disease and its treatment in different geographic and clinical settings

Resource utilisation and direct costs in patients with recently diagnosed fibromyalgia who are offered one of three different interventions in a randomised pragmatic trial

The purpose of this study is to understand the course of costs over a 2-year period in a cohort of recently diagnosed fibromyalgia (FM) patients receiving different treatment strategies. Following the diagnosis, patients were randomly assigned to a multidisciplinary programme (MD), aerobic exercise (AE) or usual care (UC) without being aware of alternative interventions. Time between diagnosis and start of treatment varied between patients. Resource utilisation, health care costs and costs for patients and families were collected through cost diaries. Mixed linear model analyses (MLM) examined the course of costs over time. Linear regression was used to explore predictors of health care costs in the post-intervention period. Two hundred three participants, 90 % women, mean (SD) age 41.7 (9.8) years, were included in the cohort. Intervention costs per patient varied from €864 to 1392 for MD and were €121 for AE. Health care costs (excluding intervention costs) decreased after diagnosis, but before the intervention in each group, and increased again afterwards to the level close to the diagnostic phase. In contrast, patient and family costs slightly increased over time in all groups without initial decrease immediately after diagnosis. Annualised health care costs post-intervention varied between €1872 and 2310 per patient and were predicted by worse functioning and high health care costs at diagnosis. In patients with FM, health care costs decreased following the diagnosis by a rheumatologist. Offering patients a specific intervention after diagnosis incurred substantial costs while having only marginal effects on cost

The feasibility and efficacy of a multidisciplinary intervention with aftercare meetings for fibromyalgia

The objective of this study is to examine the feasibility and long-term results of a 12-week multidisciplinary part-time daycare intervention with five aftercare meetings in fibromyalgia (FM) patients. One hundred and five patients diagnosed with FM started with a multidisciplinary intervention and were assessed for feasibility, functional status (Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire [FIQ]), and quality of life (EuroQol-5D [EQ-5D]) until 9 months after completion. The program consisted of sociotherapy, physiotherapy, psychotherapy, and creative arts therapy. Drop-out rate was 4.8%. The attendance rate of 100 patients who completed the 12-week program and five aftercare meetings was high (97.4%), just like patient and therapist satisfaction (8.2 on a 10 points scale). After the 12-week program, statistically significant improvement was seen in both FIQ and EQ-5D. This improvement was maintained after 9 months of follow-up. On average, moderate improvements were observed. Our 12-week multidisciplinary part-time daycare intervention with five aftercare meetings for FM patients is feasible and it is indicated that it can lead to sustained improvement in functional status and quality of life