A Snapshot on the On-Label and Off-Label Use of the Interleukin-1 Inhibitors in Italy among Rheumatologists and Pediatric Rheumatologists: A Nationwide Multi-Center Retrospective Observational Study.

Background: Interleukin (IL)-1 inhibitors have been suggested as possible therapeutic options in a large number of old and new clinical entities characterized by an IL-1 driven pathogenesis. Objectives: To perform a nationwide snapshot of the on-label and off-label use of anakinra (ANA) and canakinumab (CAN) for different conditions both in children and adults. Methods: We retrospectively collected demographic, clinical, and therapeutic data from both adult and pediatric patients treated with IL-1 inhibitors from January 2008 to July 2016. Results: Five hundred and twenty-six treatment courses given to 475 patients (195 males, 280 females; 111 children and 364 adults) were evaluated. ANA was administered in 421 (80.04%) courses, CAN in 105 (19.96%). Sixty-two (32.1%) patients had been treated with both agents. IL-1 inhibitors were employed in 38 different indications (37 with ANA, 16 with CAN). Off-label use was more frequent for ANA than CAN (p < 0.0001). ANA was employed as first-line biologic approach in 323 (76.7%) cases, while CAN in 37 cases (35.2%). IL-1 inhibitors were associated with corticosteroids in 285 (54.18%) courses and disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in 156 (29.65%). ANA dosage ranged from 30 to 200 mg/day (or 1.0-2.0 mg/kg/day) among adults and 2-4 mg/kg/day among children; regarding CAN, the most frequently used posologies were 150mg every 8 weeks, 150mg every 4 weeks and 150mg every 6 weeks. The frequency of failure was higher among patients treated with ANA at a dosage of 100 mg/day than those treated with 2 mg/kg/day (p = 0.03). Seventy-six patients (14.4%) reported an adverse event (AE) and 10 (1.9%) a severe AE. AEs occurred more frequently after the age of 65 compared to both children and patients aged between 16 and 65 (p = 0.003 and p = 0.03, respectively). Conclusions: IL-1 inhibitors are mostly used off-label, especially ANA, during adulthood. The high frequency of good clinical responses suggests that IL-1 inhibitors are used with awareness of pathogenetic mechanisms; adult healthcare physicians generally employ standard dosages, while pediatricians are more prone in using a weight-based posology. Dose adjustments and switching between different agents showed to be effective treatment strategies. Our data confirm the good safety profile of IL-1 inhibitors

Defining criteria for disease activity states in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis based on the systemic Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score

Objective To develop and validate cutoff values in the systemic Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score 10 (sJADAS10) that distinguish the states of inactive disease (ID), minimal disease activity (MiDA), moderate disease activity (MoDA), and high disease activity (HDA) in children with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA), based on subjective disease state assessment by the treating pediatric rheumatologist. Methods The cutoffs definition cohort was composed of 400 patients enrolled at 30 pediatric rheumatology centers in 11 countries. Using the subjective physician rating as an external criterion, 6 methods were applied to identify the cutoffs: mapping, calculation of percentiles of cumulative score distribution, Youden index, 90% specificity, maximum agreement, and ROC curve analysis. Sixty percent of the patients were assigned to the definition cohort and 40% to the validation cohort. Cutoff validation was conducted by assessing discriminative ability. Results The sJADAS10 cutoffs that separated ID from MiDA, MiDA from MoDA, and MoDA from HDA were ≤ 2.9, ≤ 10, and > 20.6. The cutoffs discriminated strongly among different levels of pain, between patients with or without morning stiffness, and between patients whose parents judged their disease status as remission or persistent activity/flare or were satisfied or not satisfied with current illness outcome. Conclusion The sJADAS cutoffs revealed good metrologic properties in both definition and validation cohorts, and are therefore suitable for use in clinical trials and routine practice

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