Test-retest reliability of outcome measures: data from three trials in radiographic and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis

Objectives Aim of this study was to assess test-retest reliability of candidate instruments for the mandatory domains of the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis international Society (ASAS)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology core set for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Methods Screening and baseline data from COAST-V, COAST-X and RAPID-axSpA was used to evaluate test-retest reliability of each candidate instrument for the mandatory domains (disease activity, pain, morning stiffness, fatigue, physical function, overall functioning and health). A maximum time interval of 28 days between both visits was used for inclusion in this study. Test-retest reliability was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Bland and Altman plots provided mean difference and 95% limits of agreement, which were used to calculate the smallest detectable change (SDC). Data were analysed for radiographic and non-radiographic axSpA separately. Results Good reliability was found for Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ICC 0.79, SDC 0.6), C reactive protein (ICC 0.72-0.79, SDC 12.3-17.0), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (ICC 0.87, SDC 1.1) and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (ICC Physical Component Summary 0.81, SDC 4.7, Mental Component Summary 0.80, SDC 7.3). Moderate reliability was found for Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (ICC 0.72, SDC 1.1), patient global assessment (ICC 0.58, SDC 1.5), total back pain (ICC 0.64, SDC 1.3), back pain at night (ICC 0.67, SDC 1.3), morning stiffness (ICC 0.52-0.63, SDC 1.5-2.2), fatigue (ICC 0.65, SDC 1.3) and ASAS-Health Index (ICC 0.74, SDC 2.5). Reliability and SDC for the radiographic and non-radiographic axSpA subgroups were similar. Conclusion Overall reliability was good, and comparable levels of reliability were found for patients with radiographic and non-radiographic axSpA, even though most instruments were developed for radiographic axSpA. Composite measures showed higher reliability than single-item measures in assessing disease activity in patients with axSpA.Pathophysiology and treatment of rheumatic disease

Risk and prognosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: a systematic literature review to inform EULAR recommendations

Objectives: Perform a systematic literature review (SLR) on risk and prognosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). Methods: Literature was searched up to 31 May 2021, including (randomised) controlled trials and observational studies with patients with RMD. Pending quality assessment, data extraction was performed and risk of bias (RoB) was assessed. Quality assessment required provision of (1) an appropriate COVID-19 case definition, and (2a) a base incidence (for incidence data) or (2b) a comparator, >10 cases with the outcome and risk estimates minimally adjusted for age, sex and comorbidities (for risk factor data). Results: Of 5165 records, 208 were included, of which 90 passed quality assessment and data were extracted for incidence (n=42), risk factor (n=42) or vaccination (n=14). Most studies had unclear/high RoB. Generally, patients with RMDs do not face more risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 (n=26 studies) or worse prognosis of COVID-19 (n=14) than individuals without RMDs. No consistent differences in risk of developing (severe) COVID-19 were found between different RMDs (n=19). Disease activity is associated with worse COVID-19 prognosis (n=2), possibly explaining the increased risk seen for glucocorticoid use (n=13). Rituximab is associated with worse COVID-19 prognosis (n=7) and possibly Janus kinase inhibitors (n=3). Vaccination is generally immunogenic, though antibody responses are lower than in controls. Vaccine immunogenicity is negatively associated with older age, rituximab and mycophenolate. Conclusion: This SLR informed the July 2021 update of the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology recommendations for the management of RMDs in the context of SARS-CoV-2

Two different invitation approaches for consecutive rounds of a Delphi survey led to comparable final outcome

Objectives: There are two different approaches to involve participants in consecutive rounds of a Delphi survey: (1) invitation to every round independent of response to the previous round ("all-rounds'') and (2) invitation only when responded to the previous round ("respondents-only''). This study aimed to investigate the effect of invitation approach on the response rate and final outcome of a Delphi survey.Study Design and Setting: Both experts (N = 188) and patients (N = 188) took part in a Delphi survey to update the core outcome set (COS) for axial spondyloarthritis. A study with 1:1 allocation to two experimental groups (ie, "all-rounds'' [N = 187] and "respondents-only'' [N = 189]) was built-in.Results: The overall response rate was lower in the "respondents-only group'' (46%) compared to the "all-rounds group'' (61%). All domains that were selected for inclusion in the COS by the "respondents-only group'' were also selected by the "all-rounds group.'' Additionally, the four most important domains were identical between groups after the final round, with only minor differences in the other domains.Conclusion: Inviting panel members who missed a round to a subsequent round will lead to a better representation of opinions of the originally invited panel and reduces the chance of false consensus, while it does not influence the final outcome of the Delphi. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.Pathophysiology and treatment of rheumatic disease

Coping with rheumatic stressors (CORS) questionnaire: Spanish translation and cross-cultural adaptation

Background: Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases (RMDs) substantially impact the lives of patients, with complex associations between disease severity and self-perceived health status. In this regard, the Coping with Rheumatic Stressors (CORS) questionnaire was developed to measure how patients with RMDs cope with stressors such as pain, limitations or dependency. The CORS is not currently available in Spanish, and therefore the adaptation of this instrument is needed.Objective: First, to cross-culturally adapt the CORS into Spanish for Spain. Secondly, to test the conceptual equivalence of the translated version in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Methods: A translation of the CORS into Spanish was performed adhering to the forward-backward procedure described by Beaton. Two translators produced independent forward translations of the item content, response options, and instructions of the CORS into Spanish. Both versions were harmonized in a consensual version. Another translator back-translated the synthesized version into Dutch. A scientific committee including all the translators, one methodologist and a rheumatologist, held a meeting and reached consensus on discrepancies to develop a final draft version of the Spanish CORS. Then, a field test with cognitive debriefing was conducted, involving a sample of 10 patients with axSpA. Results: The translation process of the CORS was completed after the discussion of some discrepancies throughout the process. The first translation was done without major complications. Back-translation presented some discrepancies. These led to minor modifications in the wording in one response option and 15 questionnaire items. The scientific committee agreed upon a final version of the questionnaire. Cognitive debriefing, led to minor modifications; for example, three respondents indicated that one of the statements in the instructions was syntactically complex ("indique cuan a menudo usted ha llevado a cabo dicho comportamiento") which led to its adjustment. The process indicated that the final CORS Spanish questionnaire was clear and understandable to all patients.Conclusions: The Spanish version of the CORS showed good cross-cultural validity and good face validity according to the field test. Before the Spanish CORS is implemented, further validation is in progress to test the psychometric properties of the instrument in patients with axSpA.Pathophysiology and treatment of rheumatic disease

Validation of methods for converting the original Disease Activity Score (DAS) to the DAS28

© The Author(s) 2018.The Disease Activity Score (DAS) is integral in tailoring the clinical management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and is an important measure in clinical research. Different versions have been developed over the years to improve reliability and ease of use. Combining the original DAS and the newer DAS28 data in both contemporary and historical studies is important for both primary and secondary data analyses. As such, a methodologically robust means of converting the old DAS to the new DAS28 measure would be invaluable. Using data from The Early RA Study (ERAS), a sub-sample of patients with both DAS and DAS28 data were used to develop new regression imputation formulas using the total DAS score (univariate), and using the separate components of the DAS score (multivariate). DAS were transformed to DAS28 using an existing formula quoted in the literature, and the newly developed formulas. Bland and Altman plots were used to compare the transformed DAS with the recorded DAS28 to ascertain levels of agreement. The current transformation formula tended to overestimate the true DAS28 score, particularly at the higher end of the scale. A formula which uses all separate components of the DAS was found to estimate the scores with a higher level of precision. A new formula is proposed that can be used by other early RA cohorts to convert the original DAS to DAS28.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

Induction of sustained clinical remission in early axial spondyloarthritis following certolizumab pegol treatment: 48-week outcomes from C-OPTIMISE

INTRODUCTION: Achievement of remission is a key treatment goal for patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). C-OPTIMISE assessed achievement of sustained clinical remission in patients with axSpA, including radiographic (r) and non-radiographic (nr) axSpA, during certolizumab pegol (CZP) treatment, and subsequent maintenance of remission following CZP dose continuation, dose reduction or withdrawal. Here, we report outcomes from the first 48 weeks (induction period) of C-OPTIMISE, during which patients received open-label CZP. METHODS: C-OPTIMISE (NCT02505542) was a two-part, multicenter, phase 3b study in adult patients with early axSpA (r-/nr-axSpA), including a 48-week open-label induction period followed by a 48-week maintenance period. Patients with active adult-onset axSpA, < 5 years' symptom duration, and fulfilling Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society classification criteria, were included. During the induction period, patients received a loading dose of CZP 400 mg at weeks 0, 2, and 4, followed by CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to week 48. The main outcome of the 48-week induction period was the achievement of sustained clinical remission (defined as an Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score [ASDAS] < 1.3 at week 32 and < 2.1 at week 36 [or vice versa], and < 1.3 at week 48). RESULTS: In total, 736 patients (407 with r-axSpA, 329 with nr-axSpA) were enrolled into the study. At week 48, 43.9% (323/736) of patients achieved sustained remission, including 42.8% (174/407) of patients with r-axSpA and 45.3% (149/329) with nr-axSpA. Patients also demonstrated substantial improvements in axSpA symptoms, MRI outcomes and quality of life measures. Adverse events occurred in 67.9% (500/736) of patients, of which 6.0% (44/736) were serious. CONCLUSIONS: Over 40% of patients with early axSpA achieved sustained remission during 48 weeks of open-label CZP treatment. Additionally, patients across the axSpA spectrum demonstrated substantial improvements in imaging outcomes and quality of life following treatment. No new safety signals were identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02505542

Identification of clinical phenotypes of peripheral involvement in patients with spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis: a cluster analysis in the worldwide ASAS-PerSpA study

OBJECTIVE: To identify clusters of peripheral involvement according to the specific location of peripheral manifestations (ie, arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis) in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) including psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and to evaluate whether these clusters correspond with the clinical diagnosis of a rheumatologist. METHODS: Cross-sectional study with 24 participating countries. Consecutive patients diagnosed by their rheumatologist as PsA, axial SpA or peripheral SpA were enrolled. Four different cluster analyses were conducted: one using information on the specific location from all the peripheral manifestations, and a cluster analysis for each peripheral manifestation, separately. Multiple correspondence analyses and k-means clustering methods were used. Distribution of peripheral manifestations and clinical characteristics were compared across the different clusters. RESULTS: The different cluster analyses performed in the 4465 patients clearly distinguished a predominantly axial phenotype (cluster 1) and a predominantly peripheral phenotype (cluster 2). In the predominantly axial phenotype, hip involvement and lower limb large joint arthritis, heel enthesitis and lack of dactylitis were more prevalent. In the predominantly peripheral phenotype, different subgroups were distinguished based on the type and location of peripheral involvement: a predominantly involvement of upper versus lower limbs joints, a predominantly axial enthesitis versus peripheral enthesitis, and predominantly finger versus toe involvement in dactylitis. A poor agreement between the clusters and the rheumatologist's diagnosis as well as with the classification criteria was found. CONCLUSION: These results suggest the presence of two main phenotypes (predominantly axial and predominantly peripheral) based on the presence and location of the peripheral manifestations

Prevalence and distribution of peripheral musculoskeletal manifestations in spondyloarthritis including psoriatic arthritis: results of the worldwide, cross-sectional ASAS-PerSpA study

Objectives To characterise peripheral musculoskeletal involvement in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) including psoriatic arthritis (PsA), across the world. Methods Cross-sectional study with 24 participating countries. Patients with a diagnosis of axial SpA (axSpA), peripheral SpA (pSpA) or PsA according to their rheumatologist were included. The investigators were asked which diagnosis out of a list of six (axSpA, PsA, pSpA, inflammatory bowel disease-associated SpA, reactive arthritis or juvenile SpA (Juv-SpA)) fitted the patient best. Peripheral manifestations (ie, peripheral joint disease, enthesitis, dactylitis and root joint disease), their localisation and treatments were evaluated. Results A total of 4465 patients were included (61% men, mean age 44.5 years) from four geographic areas: Latin America (n=538), Europe plus North America (n=1677), Asia (n=975) and the Middle East plus North Africa (n=1275). Of those, 78% had ever suffered from at least one peripheral musculoskeletal manifestation; 57% had peripheral joint disease, 44% had enthesitis and 15% had dactylitis. Latin American had far more often peripheral joint disease (80%) than patients from other areas. Patients with PsA had predominantly upper limb and small joint involvement (52%). Hip and shoulder involvement was found in 34% of patients. The prevalence of enthesitis ranged between 41% in patients with axSpA and 65% in patients with Juv-SpA. Dactylitis was most frequent among patients with PsA (37%). Conclusion These results suggest that all peripheral features can be found in all subtypes of SpA, and that differences are quantitative rather than qualitative. In a high proportion of patients, axial and peripheral manifestations coincided. These findings reconfirm SpA clinical subtypes are descendants of the same underlying disease, called SpA.Pathophysiology and treatment of rheumatic disease

Identification of clinical phenotypes of peripheral involvement in patients with spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis: a cluster analysis in the worldwide ASAS-PerSpA study

Objective To identify clusters of peripheral involvement according to the specific location of peripheral manifestations (ie, arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis) in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) including psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and to evaluate whether these clusters correspond with the clinical diagnosis of a rheumatologist. Methods Cross-sectional study with 24 participating countries. Consecutive patients diagnosed by their rheumatologist as PsA, axial SpA or peripheral SpA were enrolled. Four different cluster analyses were conducted: one using information on the specific location from all the peripheral manifestations, and a cluster analysis for each peripheral manifestation, separately. Multiple correspondence analyses and k-means clustering methods were used. Distribution of peripheral manifestations and clinical characteristics were compared across the different clusters. Results The different cluster analyses performed in the 4465 patients clearly distinguished a predominantly axial phenotype (cluster 1) and a predominantly peripheral phenotype (cluster 2). In the predominantly axial phenotype, hip involvement and lower limb large joint arthritis, heel enthesitis and lack of dactylitis were more prevalent. In the predominantly peripheral phenotype, different subgroups were distinguished based on the type and location of peripheral involvement: a predominantly involvement of upper versus lower limbs joints, a predominantly axial enthesitis versus peripheral enthesitis, and predominantly finger versus toe involvement in dactylitis. A poor agreement between the clusters and the rheumatologist's diagnosis as well as with the classification criteria was found. Conclusion These results suggest the presence of two main phenotypes (predominantly axial and predominantly peripheral) based on the presence and location of the peripheral manifestations.Pathophysiology and treatment of rheumatic disease