Atorvastatin is unlikely to prevent rheumatoid arthritis in high risk individuals: Results from the prematurely stopped STAtins to Prevent Rheumatoid Arthritis (STAPRA) trial

Objectives Persons at high risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) might benefit from a low-risk pharmacological intervention aimed at primary prevention. Previous studies demonstrated disease-modifying effects of statins in patients with RA as well as an association between statin use and a decreased risk of RA development. A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial investigated whether atorvastatin could prevent arthritis development in high-risk individuals. Methods Arthralgia patients with anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) >3 xULN or ACPA and rheumatoid factor, without (a history of) arthritis, were randomised to receive atorvastatin 40 mg daily or placebo for 3 years. The calculated sample size was 220 participants. The primary endpoint was clinical arthritis. Cox regression analysis was used to determine the effect of atorvastatin on arthritis development. Results Due to a low inclusion rate, mainly because of an unwillingness to participate, the trial was prematurely stopped. Data of the 62 randomised individuals were analysed. Median follow-up was 14 (inner quartiles 6-35) months. Fifteen individuals (24%) developed arthritis: 9/31 (29%) in the atorvastatin group; 6/31 (19%) in the placebo group: HR 1.40, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.95. Conclusions In this small set of randomised high-risk individuals, we did not demonstrate a protective effect of atorvastatin on arthritis development. The main reason for the low inclusion was unwillingness to participate; this may also impede other RA prevention trials. Further research to investigate and solve barriers for prevention trial participation is needed

Atorvastatin is unlikely to prevent rheumatoid arthritis in high risk individuals: Results from the prematurely stopped STAtins to Prevent Rheumatoid Arthritis (STAPRA) trial

Objectives Persons at high risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) might benefit from a low-risk pharmacological intervention aimed at primary prevention. Previous studies demonstrated disease-modifying effects of statins in patients with RA as well as an association between statin use and a decreased risk of RA development. A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial investigated whether atorvastatin could prevent arthritis development in high-risk individuals. Methods Arthralgia patients with anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) >3 xULN or ACPA and rheumatoid factor, without (a history of) arthritis, were randomised to receive atorvastatin 40 mg daily or placebo for 3 years. The calculated sample size was 220 participants. The primary endpoint was clinical arthritis. Cox regression analysis was used to determine the effect of atorvastatin on arthritis development. Results Due to a low inclusion rate, mainly because of an unwillingness to participate, the trial was prematurely stopped. Data of the 62 randomised individuals were analysed. Median follow-up was 14 (inner quartiles 6-35) months. Fifteen individuals (24%) developed arthritis: 9/31 (29%) in the atorvastatin group; 6/31 (19%) in the placebo group: HR 1.40, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.95. Conclusions In this small set of randomised high-risk individuals, we did not demonstrate a protective effect of atorvastatin on arthritis development. The main reason for the low inclusion was unwillingness to participate; this may also impede other RA prevention trials. Further research to investigate and solve barriers for prevention trial participation is needed

Effects of B-cell directed therapy on the preclinical stage of rheumatoid arthritis: The PRAIRI study

Objectives: We explored the effects of B-cell directed therapy in subjects at risk of developing autoantibodypositive rheumatoid arthritis (RA), who never experienced inflammatory arthritis before, and explored biomarkers predictive of arthritis development. Methods: Individuals positive for both anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies and rheumatoid factor but without arthritis were included in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to receive a single infusion of 1000 mg rituximab or placebo. Results: Eighty-one individuals received treatment and were followed up for a mean of 29.0 (0-54) months, during which 30/81 (37%) individuals developed arthritis. The observed risk of developing arthritis in the placebo-treated group was 40%, which was decreased by 55% (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.154 to 1.322) in the rituximab-treated group at 12 months. Rituximab treatment caused a delay in arthritis development of 12 months compared with placebo treatment at the point when 25% of the subjects had developed arthritis (p<0.0001). Erythrocyte sedimentation rate and the presence of anti-citrullinated α-enolase peptide 1 at baseline were significant predictors of arthritis development. Conclusions: A single infusion of 1000 mg rituximab significantly delays the development of arthritis in subjects at risk of developing RA, providing experimental evidence for the pathogenetic role of 7, prearthritis stage of autoantibodypositive RA

Neuropathic-like pain symptoms in inflammatory hand osteoarthritis lower quality of life and may not decrease under prednisolone treatment

Background: Pain is common in hand osteoarthritis (OA) and multiple types may occur. We investigated the prevalence, associated patient characteristics, influence on health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) and response to anti-inflammatory treatment of neuropathic-like pain in inflammatory hand OA. Methods: Data were analysed from a 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial investigating prednisolone treatment in 92 patients with painful inflammatory hand OA. Neuropathic-like pain was measured with the painDETECT questionnaire. Associations between baseline characteristics and baseline neuropathic-like pain were analysed with ordinal logistic regression, association of baseline neuropathic-like pain symptoms with baseline HR-QoL with linear regression, painDETECT and visual analogue scale (VAS) change from baseline to week 6 and interaction of painDETECT with prednisolone efficacy on VAS pain change from baseline to week 6 with generalized estimating equations (GEE). Results: Of 91 patients (79% female, mean age 64) with complete painDETECT data at baseline, 53% were unlikely to have neuropathic-like pain, 31% were indeterminate and 16% were likely to have neuropathic-like pain. Neuropathic-like pain was associated with female sex, less radiographic damage and more comorbidities. Patients with neuropathic-like pain had lower HR-QoL (PCS-6.5 [95% CI −10.4 to −2.6]) than those without. Neuropathic-like pain symptoms remained under prednisolone treatment and no interaction was seen between painDETECT and prednisolone efficacy on VAS pain. Conclusions: In this study, 16% of inflammatory hand OA patients had neuropathic-like pain. They were more often female, had more comorbidities and had lower QoL than those without. Neuropathic-like pain symptoms remained despite prednisolone treatment and did not seem to affect the outcome of prednisolone treatment. Significance: Pain is the dominant symptom in hand OA, with an unclear aetiology. In this study, we found that neuropathic-like pain may play a role in hand OA, that it showed associations with female sex, younger age and more comorbidities and that it lowered health-related quality of life in hand OA. Neuropathic-like pain in hand OA seems resistant to prednisolone therapy but did not seem to interfere with the treatment of inflammatory pain with prednisolone

Efficacy of a tight-control and treat-to-target strategy in axial spondyloarthritis: results of the open-label, pragmatic, cluster-randomised TICOSPA trial

International audienceObjectives: To compare the benefits of a tight-control/treat-to-target strategy (TC/T2T) in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with those of usual care (UC).Methods: Pragmatic, prospective, cluster-randomised, controlled, open, 1-year trial (NCT03043846). 18 centres were randomised (1:1). Patients met Axial Spondylo Arthritis International Society (ASAS) criteria for axSpA, had an Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) ≥2.1, received non-optimal treatment by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and were biologic-naive.Interventions: (1) TC/T2T: visits every 4 weeks and prespecified strategy based on treatment intensification until achieving target (ie, ASDAS <2.1); (2) UC: visits every 12 weeks and treatment at the rheumatologist's discretion.Main outcome: Percentage of patients with a ≥30% improvement on the ASAS-Health Index (ASAS-HI). Other efficacy outcomes and adverse events were recorded. A health economic evaluation was performed.Statistical analysis: Two-level mixed models were used to estimate efficacy outcomes. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for TC/T2T versus UC.Results: 160 patients were included (80/group). Mean (SD) age was 37.9 (11.0) years and disease duration was 3.7 (6.2) years; 51.2% were men. ASDAS at inclusion was 3.0 (0.7), and ASAS-HI was 8.6 (3.7). ASAS-HI improved by ≥30% in 47.3% of the TC/T2T arm and in 36.1% of those receiving UC (non-significant). All secondary efficacy outcomes were more frequent in the TC/T2T arm, although not all statistically significant. Safety was similar in both arms. From a societal perspective, TC/T2T resulted in an additional 0.04 QALY, and saved €472 compared with UC.Conclusion: TC/T2T was not significantly superior to UC for the primary outcome, while many secondary efficacy outcomes favoured it, had a similar safety profile and was favourable from a societal health economic perspective