Sustained improvements in MRI outcomes with abatacept following the withdrawal of all treatments in patients with early, progressive rheumatoid arthritis

Objectives: To assess structural damage progression with subcutaneous abatacept (ABA) in the Assessing Very Early Rheumatoid arthritis Treatment (AVERT) trial following abrupt withdrawal of all rheumatoid arthritis (RA) medication in patients achieving Disease Activity Score (DAS)-defined remission or low disease activity. Methods: Patients with early, active RA were randomised to ABA plus methotrexate (ABA/MTX) 125 mg/week, ABA 125 mg/week or MTX for 12 months. All RA treatments were withdrawn after 12 months in patients with DAS28 (C reactive protein (CRP)) <3.2. Adjusted mean changes from baseline in MRI-based synovitis, osteitis and erosion were calculated for the intention-to-treat population. Results: 351 patients were randomised and treated: ABA/MTX (n=119), ABA (n=116) or MTX (n=116). Synovitis and osteitis improved, and progression of erosion was statistically less with ABA/MTX versus MTX at month 12 (−2.35 vs −0.68, −2.58 vs −0.68, 0.19 vs 1.53, respectively; p<0.01 for each) and month 18 (−1.34 vs −0.49 −2.03 vs 0.34, 0.13 vs 2.0, respectively; p<0.01 for erosion); ABA benefits were numerically intermediate to those for ABA/MTX and MTX. Conclusions: Structural benefits with ABA/MTX or ABA may be maintained 6 months after withdrawal of all treatments in patients who have achieved remission or low disease activity

PsAID12 Provisionally Endorsed at OMERACT 2018 as Core Outcome Measure to Assess Psoriatic Arthritis-specific Health-related Quality of Life in Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE: The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) psoriatic arthritis (PsA) working group is developing a Core Outcome Measurement Set for PsA clinical trials [randomized controlled trials (RCT) and longitudinal observational studies (LOS)] using the OMERACT Filter 2.1 instrument selection algorithm. Our objective was to assess the Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease questionnaire (PsAID12) for the measurement of the core domain PsA-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL).METHODS: PsAID12 measurement property evidence gathered in a systematic literature review, and additional analyses conducted in LOS, were used to inform a consensus process. Analyses that had not been published were independently reviewed by the OMERACT technical advisory group. Data and process were presented, discussed in breakout groups, and voted on at the OMERACT conference (Terrigal, Australia, May 2018).RESULTS: PsAID12 fulfilled the green (good to go) OMERACT standards for domain match, feasibility, reliability, and construct/longitudinal construct validity. Discrimination and thresholds of meaning were amber (caution but good enough to go forward). The overall working group recommendation was amber/provisional endorsement of PsAID12 for measuring PsA-specific HRQOL in RCT and LOS. Of 96 participants who voted at the PsA OMERACT workshop, 87.5% (84) voted "yes" to endorse this recommendation; 14 of the 96 were patient research partners (PRP) and 93% of them (13) voted "yes"; 82 participants were not PRP and 87% of them (71) voted "yes."CONCLUSION: At OMERACT 2018, PsAID12 was the first patient-reported outcome measure provisionally endorsed as a core outcome measure for disease-specific HRQOL in PsA clinical trials. PsAID12 discrimination and improvement thresholds will be studied in future RCT.</p

PsAID12 Provisionally Endorsed at OMERACT 2018 as Core Outcome Measure to Assess Psoriatic Arthritis-specific Health-related Quality of Life in Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE: The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) psoriatic arthritis (PsA) working group is developing a Core Outcome Measurement Set for PsA clinical trials [randomized controlled trials (RCT) and longitudinal observational studies (LOS)] using the OMERACT Filter 2.1 instrument selection algorithm. Our objective was to assess the Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease questionnaire (PsAID12) for the measurement of the core domain PsA-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL). METHODS: PsAID12 measurement property evidence gathered in a systematic literature review, and additional analyses conducted in LOS, were used to inform a consensus process. Analyses that had not been published were independently reviewed by the OMERACT technical advisory group. Data and process were presented, discussed in breakout groups, and voted on at the OMERACT conference (Terrigal, Australia, May 2018). RESULTS: PsAID12 fulfilled the green (good to go) OMERACT standards for domain match, feasibility, reliability, and construct/longitudinal construct validity. Discrimination and thresholds of meaning were amber (caution but good enough to go forward). The overall working group recommendation was amber/provisional endorsement of PsAID12 for measuring PsA-specific HRQOL in RCT and LOS. Of 96 participants who voted at the PsA OMERACT workshop, 87.5% (84) voted yes to endorse this recommendation; 14 of the 96 were patient research partners (PRP) and 93% of them (13) voted yes ; 82 participants were not PRP and 87% of them (71) voted yes. CONCLUSION: At OMERACT 2018, PsAID12 was the first patient-reported outcome measure provisionally endorsed as a core outcome measure for disease-specific HRQOL in PsA clinical trials. PsAID12 discrimination and improvement thresholds will be studied in future RCT

Oral abstracts 1: SpondyloarthropathiesO1. Detecting axial spondyloarthritis amongst primary care back pain referrals

Background: Inflammatory back pain (IBP) is an early feature of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and its detection offers the prospect of early diagnosis of AS. However, since back pain is very common but only a very small minority of back pain sufferers have ASpA or AS, screening of back pain sufferers for AS is problematic. In early disease radiographs are often normal so that fulfilment of diagnostic criteria for AS is impossible though a diagnosis of axial SpA can be made if MRI evidence of sacroiliitis is present. This pilot study was designed to indicate whether a cost-effective pick up rate for ASpA/early AS could be achieved by identifying adults with IBP stratified on the basis of age. Methods: Patients aged between 18 and 45 years who were referred to a hospital physiotherapy service with back pain of more than 3 months duration were assessed for IBP. All were asked to complete a questionnaire based on the Berlin IBP criteria. Those who fulfilled IBP criteria were also asked to complete a second short questionnaire enquiring about SpA comorbidities, to have a blood test for HLA-B27 and CRP level and to undergo an MRI scan of the sacroiliac joints. This was a limited scan, using STIR, diffusion-weighted, T1 and T2 sequences of the sacroiliac joints to minimize time in the scanner and cost. The study was funded by a research grant from Abbott Laboratories Ltd. Results: 50 sequential patients agreed to participate in the study and completed the IBP questionnaire. Of these 27 (54%) fulfilled criteria for IBP. Of these, 2 patients reported a history of an SpA comorbidity - 1 psoriasis; 1 ulcerative colitis - and 3 reported a family history of an SpA comorbidity - 2 psoriasis; 1 Crohn's disease. 4 were HLA-B27 positive, though results were not available for 7. Two patients had marginally raised CRP levels (6, 10 -NR ≤ 5). 19 agreed to undergo MRI scanning of the sacroiliac joints and lumbar spine; 4 scans were abnormal, showing evidence of bilateral sacroiliitis on STIR sequences. In all cases the changes met ASAS criteria but were limited. Of these 4 patients 3 were HLA-B27 positive but none gave a personal or family history of an SpA-associated comorbidity and all had normal CRP levels. Conclusions: This was a pilot study yielding only limited conclusions. However, it is clear that: Screening of patients referred for physiotherapy for IBP is straightforward, inexpensive and quick. It appears that IBP is more prevalent in young adults than overall population data suggest so that targeting this population may be efficient. IBP questionnaires could be administered routinely during a physiotherapy assessment. HLA-B27 testing in this group of patients with IBP is a suitable screening tool. The sacroiliac joint changes identified were mild and their prognostic significance is not yet clear so that the value of early screening needs further evaluation. Disclosure statement: C.H. received research funding for this study from Abbott. A.K. received research funding for this study, and speaker and consultancy fees, from Abbott. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interes

BHPR research: qualitative1. Complex reasoning determines patients' perception of outcome following foot surgery in rheumatoid arhtritis

Background: Foot surgery is common in patients with RA but research into surgical outcomes is limited and conceptually flawed as current outcome measures lack face validity: to date no one has asked patients what is important to them. This study aimed to determine which factors are important to patients when evaluating the success of foot surgery in RA Methods: Semi structured interviews of RA patients who had undergone foot surgery were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of interviews was conducted to explore issues that were important to patients. Results: 11 RA patients (9 ♂, mean age 59, dis dur = 22yrs, mean of 3 yrs post op) with mixed experiences of foot surgery were interviewed. Patients interpreted outcome in respect to a multitude of factors, frequently positive change in one aspect contrasted with negative opinions about another. Overall, four major themes emerged. Function: Functional ability & participation in valued activities were very important to patients. Walking ability was a key concern but patients interpreted levels of activity in light of other aspects of their disease, reflecting on change in functional ability more than overall level. Positive feelings of improved mobility were often moderated by negative self perception ("I mean, I still walk like a waddling duck”). Appearance: Appearance was important to almost all patients but perhaps the most complex theme of all. Physical appearance, foot shape, and footwear were closely interlinked, yet patients saw these as distinct separate concepts. Patients need to legitimize these feelings was clear and they frequently entered into a defensive repertoire ("it's not cosmetic surgery; it's something that's more important than that, you know?”). Clinician opinion: Surgeons' post operative evaluation of the procedure was very influential. The impact of this appraisal continued to affect patients' lasting impression irrespective of how the outcome compared to their initial goals ("when he'd done it ... he said that hasn't worked as good as he'd wanted to ... but the pain has gone”). Pain: Whilst pain was important to almost all patients, it appeared to be less important than the other themes. Pain was predominately raised when it influenced other themes, such as function; many still felt the need to legitimize their foot pain in order for health professionals to take it seriously ("in the end I went to my GP because it had happened a few times and I went to an orthopaedic surgeon who was quite dismissive of it, it was like what are you complaining about”). Conclusions: Patients interpret the outcome of foot surgery using a multitude of interrelated factors, particularly functional ability, appearance and surgeons' appraisal of the procedure. While pain was often noted, this appeared less important than other factors in the overall outcome of the surgery. Future research into foot surgery should incorporate the complexity of how patients determine their outcome Disclosure statement: All authors have declared no conflicts of interes

Oral Abstracts 7: RA ClinicalO37. Long-Term Outcomes of Early RA Patients Initiated with Adalimumab Plus Methotrexate Compared with Methotrexate Alone Following a Targeted Treatment Approach

Background: This analysis assessed, on a group level, whether there is a long-term advantage for early RA patients treated with adalimumab (ADA) + MTX vs those initially treated with placebo (PBO) + MTX who either responded to therapy or added ADA following inadequate response (IR). Methods: OPTIMA was a 78- week, randomized, controlled trial of ADA + MTX vs PBO + MTX in MTX-naïve early (<1 year) RA patients. Therapy was adjusted at week 26: ADA + MTX-responders (R) who achieved DAS28 (CRP) <3.2 at weeks 22 and 26 (Period 1, P1) were re-randomized to withdraw or continue ADA and PBO + MTX-R continued randomized therapy for 52 weeks (P2); IR-patients received open-label (OL) ADA + MTX during P2. This post hoc analysis evaluated the proportion of patients at week 78 with DAS28 (CRP) <3.2, HAQ-DI <0.5, and/or ΔmTSS ≤0.5 by initial treatment. To account for patients who withdrew ADA during P2, an equivalent proportion of R was imputed from ADA + MTX-R patients. Results: At week 26, significantly more patients had low disease activity, normal function, and/or no radiographic progression with ADA + MTX vs PBO + MTX (Table 1). Differences in clinical and functional outcomes disappeared following additional treatment, when PBO + MTX-IR (n = 348/460) switched to OL ADA + MTX. Addition of OL ADA slowed radiographic progression, but more patients who received ADA + MTX from baseline had no radiographic progression at week 78 than patients who received initial PBO + MTX. Conclusions: Early RA patients treated with PBO + MTX achieved comparable long-term clinical and functional outcomes on a group level as those who began ADA + MTX, but only when therapy was optimized by the addition of ADA in PBO + MTX-IR. Still, ADA + MTX therapy conferred a radiographic benefit although the difference did not appear to translate to an additional functional benefit. Disclosures: P.E., AbbVie, Merck, Pfizer, UCB, Roche, BMS—Provided Expert Advice, Undertaken Trials, AbbVie—AbbVie sponsored the study, contributed to its design, and participated in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data, and in the writing, reviewing, and approval of the final version. R.F., AbbVie, Pfizer, Merck, Roche, UCB, Celgene, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis—Research Grants, Consultation Fees. S.F., AbbVie—Employee, Stocks. A.K., AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB—Research Grants, Consultation Fees. H.K., AbbVie—Employee, Stocks. S.R., AbbVie—Employee, Stocks. J.S., AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Centocor-Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Pfizer (Wyeth), MSD (Schering-Plough), Novo-Nordisk, Roche, Sandoz, UCB—Research Grants, Consultation Fees. R.V., AbbVie, BMS, GlaxoSmithKline, Human Genome Sciences, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma—Consultation Fees, Research Support. Table 1.Week 78 clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes in patients who received continued ADA + MTX vs those who continued PBO + MTX or added open-label ADA following an inadequate response ADA + MTX, n/N (%)a PBO + MTX, n/N (%)b Outcome Week 26 Week 52 Week 78 Week 26 Week 52 Week 78 DAS28 (CRP) <3.2 246/466 (53) 304/465 (65) 303/465 (65) 139/460 (30)*** 284/460 (62) 300/460 (65) HAQ-DI <0.5 211/466 (45) 220/466 (47) 224/466 (48) 150/460 (33)*** 203/460 (44) 208/460 (45) ΔmTSS ≤0.5 402/462 (87) 379/445 (86) 382/443 (86) 330/459 (72)*** 318/440 (72)*** 318/440 (72)*** DAS28 (CRP) <3.2 + ΔmTSS ≤0.5 216/462 (47) 260/443 (59) 266/443 (60) 112/459 (24)*** 196/440 (45) 211/440 (48)*** DAS28 (CRP) <3.2 + HAQ-DI <0.5 + ΔmTSS ≤0.5 146/462 (32) 168/443 (38) 174/443 (39) 82/459 (18)*** 120/440 (27)*** 135/440 (31)** aIncludes patients from the ADA Continuation (n = 105) and OL ADA Carry On (n = 259) arms, as well as the proportional equivalent number of responders from the ADA Withdrawal arm (n = 102). bIncludes patients from the MTX Continuation (n = 112) and Rescue ADA (n = 348) arms. Last observation carried forward: DAS28 (CRP) and HAQ-DI; Multiple imputations: ΔmTSS. ***P < 0.001 and **iP < 0.01, respectively, for differences between initial treatments from chi-squar

Subcutaneous cardiac rhythm monitors: state of the art review

INTRODUCTION: Subcutaneous cardiac rhythm monitors (SCRMs) provide continuous ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring for surveillance of known and identification of infrequent arrhythmias. SCRMs have proven to be helpful for the evaluation of unexplained symptoms and correlation with intermittent cardiac arrhythmias. Successful functioning of SCRM is dependent on accurate detection and successful transmission of the data to the device clinic. As the use of SCRM is steadily increasing, the amount of data that requires timely adjudication requires substantial resources. Newer algorithms for accurate detection and modified workflow systems have been proposed by physicians and the manufacturers to circumvent the issue of data deluge. AREAS COVERED: This paper provides an overview of the various aspects of ambulatory rhythm monitoring with SCRMs including indications, implantation techniques, programming strategies, troubleshooting for issue of false positive and intermittent connectivity and strategies to circumvent data deluge. EXPERT COMMENTARY: SCRM is an invaluable technology for prolonged rhythm monitoring. The clinical benefits from SCRM hinge on accurate arrhythmia detection, reliable transmission of the data and timely adjudication for possible intervention. Further improvement in SCRM technology is needed to minimize false positive detection, improve connectivity to the central web-based server and devise strategies to minimize data deluge

Ixekizumab improves patient-reported outcomes up to 52 weeks in bDMARD-naïve patients with active psoriatic arthritis (SPIRIT-P1).

Objective: To report patient-reported outcomes of patients with PsA treated with ixekizumab up to 52 weeks. Methods: In SPIRIT-P1, biologic-naïve patients with active PsA were randomized to ixekizumab 80 mg every 4 weeks (IXEQ4W; N = 107) or every 2 weeks (IXEQ2W; N = 103) following a 160 mg starting dose, adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks (ADA; N = 101) or placebo (PBO; N = 106) during the initial 24-week double-blind treatment period. At week 24 (week 16 for inadequate responders), ADA (8-week washout before starting ixekizumab) and PBO patients were re-randomized to IXEQ2W or IXEQ4W. Patients receiving ixekizumab at week 24 received the same dose during the extension period (EP) to week 52. Patients completed measures including the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Itch Numeric Rating Scale, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2, European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions Visual Analogue Scale and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Specific Health Problem. Results: The IXEQ4W, IXEQ2W and ADA groups reported significant improvements in DLQI at week 24; 22% (PBO), 53% (IXEQ4W), 63% (IXEQ2W) and 54% (ADA) of patients reported DLQI scores of 0/1. The IXEQ4W, IXEQ2W and ADA groups reported significant improvements in Itch Numeric Rating Scale, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2 physical component summary and some domain scores, and European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions Visual Analogue Scale at weeks 12 and 24; and in three of four Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Specific Health Problem domains at week 24. Results are also presented through week 52 for the EP. Conclusion: In biologic-naïve patients with active PsA, ixekizumab significantly improved skin symptoms, health-related quality of life and work productivity. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01695239; EU Clinical Trials Register, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu, EudraCT2011-002326-49

Ixekizumab Improves Patient-Reported Outcomes Up to 52 Weeks in bDMARD-Naive Patients with Active Psoriatic Arthritis (SPIRIT-P1)

Objective: To report patient-reported outcomes of patients with PsA treated with ixekizumab up to 52 weeks. Methods: In SPIRIT-P1, biologic-naive patients with active PsA were randomized to ixekizumab 80 mg every 4 weeks (IXEQ4W; N = 107) or every 2 weeks (IXEQ2W; N = 103) following a 160 mg starting dose, adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks (ADA; N = 101) or placebo (PBO; N = 106) during the initial 24-week double-blind treatment period. At week 24 (week 16 for inadequate responders), ADA (8-week washout before starting ixekizumab) and PBO patients were re-randomized to IXEQ2W or IXEQ4W. Patients receiving ixekizumab at week 24 received the same dose during the extension period (EP) to week 52. Patients completed measures including the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Itch Numeric Rating Scale, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2, European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions Visual Analogue Scale and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Specific Health Problem. Results: The IXEQ4W, IXEQ2W and ADA groups reported significant improvements in DLQI at week 24; 22% (PBO), 53% (IXEQ4W), 63% (IXEQ2W) and 54% (ADA) of patients reported DLQI scores of 0/1. The IXEQ4W, IXEQ2W and ADA groups reported significant improvements in Itch Numeric Rating Scale, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2 physical component summary and some domain scores, and European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions Visual Analogue Scale at weeks 12 and 24; and in three of four Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Specific Health Problem domains at week 24. Results are also presented through week 52 for the EP. Conclusion: In biologic-naive patients with active PsA, ixekizumab significantly improved skin symptoms, health-related quality of life and work productivity. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01695239; EU Clinical Trials Register, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu, EudraCT2011-002326-49

Abatacept in the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis: results of a six-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II trial

To assess the safety and efficacy of abatacept, a selective T cell costimulation modulator, in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In this 6-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II study, 170 PsA patients with a psoriasis target lesion (TL) ≥2 cm who had previously taken disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents, were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive placebo or abatacept at doses of 3 mg/kg, 10 mg/kg, or 30/10 mg/kg (2 initial doses of 30 mg/kg, followed by 10 mg/kg) on days 1, 15, and 29 and then once every 28 days thereafter. The primary end point was the American College of Rheumatology 20% criteria for improvement (ACR20 response) on day 169. Other key end points were magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scores for joint erosion, osteitis, and synovitis, scores on the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) health survey, the investigator's global assessment of psoriasis, the TL score, and the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score. Proportions of patients achieving an ACR20 response were 19%, 33%, 48%, and 42% in the placebo, the abatacept 3 mg/kg, the abatacept 10 mg/kg, and the abatacept 30/10 mg/kg groups, respectively. Compared with placebo, improvements were significantly higher for the abatacept 10 mg/kg (P = 0.006) and 30/10 mg/kg (P = 0.022) groups, but not for 3 mg/kg group (P = 0.121). All abatacept regimens resulted in improved MRI, HAQ, and SF-36 scores, with 10 mg/kg showing the greatest improvements. Improvements in the TL and PASI scores were observed in all abatacept arms; a response according to the investigator's global assessment was seen only with 3 mg/kg of abatacept. The safety profiles were similar among the treatment arms. The results of this study suggest that 10 mg/kg of abatacept, the approved dosage for rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis, may be an effective treatment option for Ps