Rapid and sustained improvements in health-related quality of life, fatigue, and other patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with certolizumab pegol plus methotrexate over 1 year: results from the RAPID 1 randomized controlled trial

Abstract Introduction The objective of this study was to assess the impact of certolizumab pegol (CZP) treatment on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), fatigue and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Patients with active RA (N = 982) were randomized 2:2:1 to subcutaneous CZP (400 mg at weeks 0, 2 and 4; followed by CZP 200 mg or 400 mg) plus methotrexate (MTX) every other week, or placebo (PBO) plus MTX. PRO assessments included HRQoL, fatigue, physical function, arthritis pain and disease activity. Adjusted mean changes from baseline in all PROs were obtained using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) applying last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation. The proportion of patients achieving clinically meaningful improvements in each PRO was obtained using logistic regression and by applying non-responder imputation to missing values after rescue medication or withdrawal. The correlations between PRO responses and clinical responses were also assessed by tetrachoric correlation using non-responder imputation. Results Patients treated with CZP plus MTX reported significant (P < 0.001), clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL at the first assessment (week 12); reductions in fatigue, disease activity and pain and improvements in physical function were reported at week 1. In particular, CZP-treated patients reported improvements in mental health. Mean changes from baseline in the SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS) at week 52 for CZP 200 mg and 400 mg plus MTX, and PBO plus MTX were 6.4, 6.4 and 2.1, respectively (P < 0.001). In addition, mental health and vitality scores in CZP-treated patients approached age- and gender-adjusted US population norms. Improvements in all PROs were sustained. Similar benefits were reported with both CZP doses. Changes in SF-36 MCS scores had the lowest correlation with disease activity scores (DAS28) and American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) response rates, while improvements in pain showed the highest correlation. Conclusions Treatment with CZP plus MTX resulted in rapid and sustained improvements in all PROs, indicating that the benefits of CZP extend beyond clinical efficacy endpoints into areas that are more relevant and meaningful for patients on a daily basis. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00152386

Tofacitinib or adalimumab versus placebo: patient-reported outcomes from OPAL Broaden-a phase III study of active psoriatic arthritis in patients with an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

Objectives: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with PsA refractory to ≥1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD-IR) and tumour necrosis factor inhibitor-naïve in a 12-month, phase III randomised controlled trial (OPAL Broaden [NCT01877668]). Methods: Patients (N=422) received tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks or placebo advancing to tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily at month 3. Least squares mean changes from baseline and percentages of patients reporting improvements ≥minimum clinically important differences (MCID); and scores ≥normative values in: Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (PtGA), Pain, Patient Global Joint and Skin Assessment (PGJS), Short Form-36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), EuroQol 5-Dimensions-3-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL) were determined. Nominal p values were cited without multiple comparison adjustments. Results: At month 3, PtGA, Pain, PGJS, FACIT-Fatigue, EQ-5D-3L, ASQoL and SF-36v2 Physical Component Summary (PCS), physical functioning (PF), bodily pain (BP) and vitality domain scores exceeded placebo with both tofacitinib doses (p≤0.05); SF-36v2 social functioning with 5 mg twice daily (p≤0.05). Percentages reporting improvements ≥MCID in PtGA, Pain, PGJS, FACIT-Fatigue, ASQoL and SF-36v2 PCS, PF, BP and general health scores exceeded placebo with both tofacitinib doses (p≤0.05) and were similar with adalimumab. Conclusion: csDMARD-IR patients with active PsA reported statistically and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs with tofacitinib compared with placebo at Month 3

Effect of tofacitinib on patient-reported outcomes in patients with active psoriatic arthritis and an inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in the phase III, randomised controlled trial: OPAL Beyond.

Objectives: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were evaluated in patients with PsA with inadequate responses to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR) in a 6-month, phase III randomised controlled trial (OPAL Beyond [NCT01882439]). Methods: Patients (N=394) received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or placebo (advancing to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily at month 3). Least squares mean changes from baseline and percentages of patients reporting improvements ≥minimum clinically important differences and scores ≥normative values were determined in Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (PtGA), Pain, Patient Global Joint and Skin Assessment (PGJS), Short Form-36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), EuroQol 5-Dimensions-3-level (EQ-5D-3L), EQ-VAS and Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL). Nominal p values are without multiple comparison adjustments. Results: At month 3, PtGA, Pain, PGJS, SF-36v2 Physical Component Summary (PCS), physical functioning (PF), bodily pain (BP), vitality and social functioning (SF) domains, FACIT-Fatigue Total score, EQ-5D-3L pain/discomfort, EQ-VAS and ASQoL scores exceeded placebo with both tofacitinib doses (role physical [RP] with 10 mg twice daily only; p≤0.05). Patients reporting improvements ≥MCID (%) in PtGA, PGJS, Pain, ASQoL and SF-36v2 PCS, PF, RP, BP, SF (both tofacitinib doses) exceeded placebo (p≤0.05). Conclusion: TNFi-IR patients with PsA receiving tofacitinib reported statistically and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo over 3 months, which were maintained to month 6. Despite lower baseline scores, these improvements were similar to the csDMARD-IR TNFi-naive OPAL Broaden trial

GRAPPA-OMERACT initiative to standardise outcomes in psoriatic arthritis clinical trials and longitudinal observational studies

We read with interest the recent letter by Ramiro et al 1 reporting data from a systematic literature review on the measurement of enthesitis, dactylitis and nail disease in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) clinical trials. The authors highlight the great variety in the outcome measures chosen, cut points and the statistical analysis performed (percentage change, proportion resolved). We are pleased the authors have highlighted this problem and agree with their viewpoints on the clear lack of standardisation of domains and instruments in clinical trials evidenced by the data. Indeed this inconsistency of data reporting has led to significant heterogeneity in both physician-assessed and patient-reported outcomes particularly in the field of PsA. It is the domains of enthesitis, dactylitis, nail disease, as well as skin and axial disease, and the unique impact they subsequently have on physical function and quality of life for patients with PsA, that differentiate PsA from other types of inflammatory arthritis like rheumatoid arthritis. Therefore the accurate assessments of these disease manifestations are of vital importance in drug trials

Clinical trial discrimination of physical function instruments for psoriatic arthritis:A systematic review

OBJECTIVES: Physical function (PF) is a core domain to be measured in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), yet the discriminative performance of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for PF in RCTs has not been evaluated systematically. In this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the clinical trial discrimination of PF-PROMs in PsA RCTs. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Scopus databases in English to identify all original RCTs on biological and targeted synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) conducted in PsA. We assessed quality in each article using the OMERACT good method checklist. Effect sizes (ES) for the PF-PROMs were calculated and appraised using a priori hypotheses. Evidence supporting clinical trial discrimination for each PF-PROM was summarized to derive recommendations. RESULTS: 35 articles from 31 RCTs were included. Four PF-PROMs had data for evaluation: HAQ-Disability Index (DI), HAQ-Spondyloarthritis (S), and Short Form 36-item Health Survey Physical Component Summary (SF-36 PCS) and Physical Functioning domain (SF-36 PF). As anticipated, higher ES values were observed for intervention groups than the control groups. Across all studies, for HAQ-DI, the median ES were -0.73 and -0.24 for intervention and control groups, respectively. Whereas for SF-36 PCS, the median ES were 0.77 and 0.23. For intervention and control groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Clinical trial discrimination was supported for HAQ-DI and SF-36 PCS in PsA with low risk of bias; and for SF-36 PF and HAQ-S with some caution. More studies are required for HAQ-S

Measurement properties of radiographic outcome measures in Psoriatic Arthritis:A systematic review from the GRAPPA-OMERACT initiative

Background Structural damage is as an important outcome in the Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Domain Set and its assessment is recommended at least once in the development of a new drug. Objectives To conduct a systematic review (SR) to identify studies addressing the measurement properties of radiographic outcome instruments for structural damage in PsA and appraise the evidence through the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1 Framework Instrument Selection Algorithm (OFISA). Methods A SR was conducted using search strategies in EMBASE and MEDLINE to identify full-text English studies which aimed to develop or assess the measurement properties of radiographic outcome instruments in PsA. Determination of eligibility and data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers with input from a third to achieve consensus. Two reviewers assessed the methodology and results of eligible studies and synthesized the evidence using OMERACT methodology. Results Twelve articles evaluating radiographic instruments were included. The articles assessed nine peripheral (hands, wrists and/or feet) and six axial (spinal and/or sacroiliac joints) radiographic instruments. The peripheral radiographic instruments with some evidence for reliability, cross-sectional construct validity and longitudinal construct validity were the Ratingen and modified Sharp van der Heijde scores. No instruments had evidence for clinical trial discrimination or thresholds of meaning. There was limited evidence for the measurement properties of all identified axial instruments. Conclusion There are significant knowledge gaps in the responsiveness of peripheral radiographic instruments. Axial radiographic instruments require further validation, and the need to generate novel instruments and utilise other imaging modalities should be considered

Initiating Evaluation of Composite Outcome Measures for Psoriatic Arthritis:2022 Updates From the GRAPPA-OMERACT Working Group

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) working group-comprising rheumatologists, dermatologists, methodologists, and patient research partners-provided updates at the GRAPPA 2022 annual meeting on its work to evaluate composite outcome measures for PsA. Ten composite outcome measures were considered. Initial steps were to define the population, the purpose of use, and the proposed pros and cons of the 10 candidate composite instruments for PsA. Preliminary Delphi exercises within the working group and GRAPPA stakeholders confirmed high priority for evaluating minimal disease activity (MDA); moderate priority for Disease Activity in PsA (DAPSA), American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI), 3 visual analog scale (VAS), and 4VAS; and low priority for Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), Psoriatic Arthritis Responder Criteria (PsARC), and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3). Further appraisal of candidate composite instruments is ongoing.</p

Development of a Disease Activity and Responder Index for Psoriatic Arthritis -- Report of the Psoriatic Arthritis Module at OMERACT 11

This module reflected work within the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) to develop and validate composite disease activity measures in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). At the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) 8 Meeting, a core set of domains to be assessed in randomized controlled trials (RCT) and longitudinal observational studies of PsA was agreed upon. At OMERACT 10, 5 proposed composite responder definitions for PsA were reviewed and discussed, including new data from the GRACE (GRAppa Composite Exercise) study. At OMERACT 11, ongoing retrospective analyses of RCT data using the 3 proposed measures (Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index, Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score, and Arithmetic Mean of the Desirability Function) were discussed in detail. There was agreement that developing composite outcome measures for use in RCT and longitudinal observational studies in PsA was important. Concerns were expressed regarding development of a single measure that encompassed diverse domains, such as joint counts, quality of life (QOL), and disability measures. It was emphasized that the use of any composite measure should include the ability to differentiate between activity in individual domains, such as enthesitis or psoriasis, such that the effect of each could be assessed independently. It was also agreed that patients would be systematically involved in further development and refinement of composite measures. Future plans include qualitative work with patients to explore their experience of disease activity and statistical modeling to explore how each of the proposed measures will perform in different disease subgroups.</jats:p

Evidence for Updating the Core Domain Set of Outcome Measures for Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Report from a Special Interest Group at OMERACT 2016

Objective. The current Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) Core Set was developed in 1997 to identify the outcome measures to be used in JIA clinical trials using statistical and consensus-based techniques, but without patient involvement. The importance of patient/parent input into the research process has increasingly been recognized over the years. An Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) JIA Core Set Working Group was formed to determine whether the outcome domains of the current core set are relevant to those involved or whether the core set domains should be revised.Methods. Twenty-four people from the United States, Canada, Australia, and Europe, including patient partners, formed the working group. Guided by the OMERACT Filter 2.0 process, we performed (1) a systematic literature review of outcome domains, (2) a Web-based survey (142 patients, 343 parents), (3) an idea-generation study (120 parents), (4) 4 online discussion boards (24 patients, 20 parents), and (5) a Special Interest Group (SIG) activity at the OMERACT 13 (2016) meeting.Results. A MEDLINE search of outcome domains used in studies of JIA yielded 5956 citations, of which 729 citations underwent full-text review, and identified additional domains to those included in the current JIA Core Set. Qualitative studies on the effect of JIA identified multiple additional domains, including pain and participation. Twenty-one participants in the SIG achieved consensus on the need to revise the entire JIA Core Set.Conclusion. The results of qualitative studies and literature review support the need to expand the JIA Core Set, considering, among other things, additional patient/parent-centered outcomes, clinical data, and imaging data