Concomitant prednisone may alleviate methotrexate side-effects in rheumatoid arthritis patients

Objectives: To evaluate whether addition of low-moderate dose prednisone to methotrexate (MTX) treatment can alleviate common MTX side-effects in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Methods: We performed a post-hoc analysis of the CAMERA-II trial which randomized (1:1) 236 early DMARD and prednisone naive RA patients to treatment with MTX + prednisone 10 mg daily, or MTX monotherapy during two years. MTX dose was increased using a treat-to-target approach. We used Generalized Estimating Equations to model the occurrence of common MTX side-effects and of any adverse event over time, controlling for disease activity and MTX dose over time and other possible predictors of adverse events. To assess whether a possible effect was prednisone-specific, we performed the same analysis in the U-ACT-EARLY trial, in which the addition of tocilizumab (TCZ) to MTX was compared to MTX monotherapy in a comparable setting. Results: MTX side-effects were reported at 5.9% of visits in the prednisone-MTX group, compared to 11.2% in the MTX monotherapy group. After controlling for MTX dose and disease activity over time, treatment duration, age, sex, and baseline transaminase levels, addition of prednisone significantly decreased the occurrence of MTX side-effects (OR: 0.54, CI: 0.38–0.77, p = 0.001). Specifically, the occurrence of nausea (OR 0.46, CI: 0.26–0.83, p = 0.009)) and elevated ALT/AST (OR 0.29, CI: 0.17–0.49, p < 0.001) was decreased. There was a trend towards fewer overall adverse events in the prednisone-MTX arm (OR: 0.89, CI: 0.72–1.11, p = 0.30). No difference in MTX side-effects was found between TCZ-MTX and MTX monotherapy in U-ACT-EARLY (OR 1.05, CI: 0.61–1.80, p = 0.87). Conclusion: Addition of 10 mg prednisone daily to MTX treatment in RA patients may ameliorate MTX side-effects, specifically nausea and elevated ALT/AST

Systemic glucocorticoid use and the occurrence of flares in psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES: The use of systemic glucocorticoids (SGCs) is traditionally discouraged in the treatment of PsA and psoriasis due to the risk of psoriatic flares. However, despite this recommendation, SGCs are frequently prescribed for these patients. In this study we reappraise the old paradigm that SGCs are contra-indicated in the treatment of PsA and psoriasis. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases was performed in November 2019 to identify articles on any SGC use compared with no use in the PsA and psoriasis population. Topical glucocorticoid treatment was excluded. Our two primary outcomes focused on the prescribing characteristics and the occurrence of any type of flare. RESULTS: Our search yielded 4922 articles, and of these 21 full-text articles were eligible for inclusion. There were 11 retro- and prospective cohorts involving a total of 4,171,307 patients. Of these, 6727 (37.82%) of the patients with PsA and 1 460 793 (35.17%) of the patients with psoriasis were treated with any type of SGC. Ten observational/interventional studies did not report an increased risk or occurrence of psoriatic flares related to SGC use. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that SGCs are frequently prescribed for PsA and psoriasis patients. The occurrence of psoriatic flares appears to be low upon SGC exposure. In patients with a clear indication for SGCs, e.g. in need of rapid anti-inflammatory therapy or bridging of therapies, the use of SGCs should be considered in view of the low risk of skin flaring. It remains of importance to weigh risks for short- and long-term SGC-related side effects in clinical decision making

Revisiting the use of remission criteria for rheumatoid arthritis by excluding patient global assessment: An individual meta-analysis of 5792 patients

Objectives: To determine the impact of excluding patient global assessment (PGA) from the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Boolean remission criteria, on prediction of radiographic and functional outcome of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: Meta-analyses using individual patient data from randomised controlled trials testing the efficacy of biological agents on radiographic and functional outcomes at ≥2 years. Remission states were defined by 4 variants of the ACR/EULAR Boolean definition: (i) tender and swollen 28-joint counts (TJC28/SJC28), C reactive protein (CRP, mg/dL) and PGA (0-10=worst) all ≤1 (4V-remission); (ii) the same, except PGA >1 (4V-near-remission); (iii) 3V-remission (i and ii combined; similar to 4V, but without PGA); (iv) non-remission (TJC28 >1 and/or SJC28 >1 and/or CRP >1). The most stringent class achieved at 6 or 12 months was considered. Good radiographic (GRO) and functional outcome (GFO) were defined as no worsening (ie, change in modified total Sharp score (ΔmTSS) ≤0.5 units and ≤0.0 Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index points, respectively, during the second year). The pooled probabilities of GRO and GFO for the different definitions of remission were estimated and compared. Results: Individual patient data (n=5792) from 11 trials were analysed. 4V-remission was achieved by 23% of patients and 4V-near-remission by 19%. The probability of GRO in the 4V-near-remission group was numerically, but non-significantly, lower than that in the 4V-remission (78 vs 81%) and significantly higher than that for non-remission (72%; difference=6%, 95% CI 2% to 10%). Applying 3V-remission could have prevented therapy escalation in 19% of all participants, at the cost of an additional 6.1%, 4.0% and 0.7% of patients having ΔmTSS >0.0, >0.5 and >5 units over 2 years, respectively. The probability of GFO (assessed in 8 trials) in 4V-near-remission (67%, 95% CI 63% to 71%) was significantly lower than in 4V-remission (78%, 74% to 81%) and similar to non-remission (69%, 66% to 72%). Conclusion: 4V-near-remission and 3V-remission have similar validity as the original 4V-remission definition in predicting GRO, despite expected worse prediction of GFO, while potentially reducing the risk of overtreatment. This supports further exploration of 3V-remission as the target for immunosuppressive therapy complemented by patient-oriented targets

Multi-classifier prediction of knee osteoarthritis progression from incomplete imbalanced longitudinal data

Conventional inclusion criteria used in osteoarthritis clinical trials are not very effective in selecting patients who would benefit from a therapy being tested. Typically majority of selected patients show no or limited disease progression during a trial period. As a consequence, the effect of the tested treatment cannot be observed, and the efforts and resources invested in running the trial are not rewarded. This could be avoided, if selection criteria were more predictive of the future disease progression. In this article, we formulated the patient selection problem as a multi-class classification task, with classes based on clinically relevant measures of progression (over a time scale typical for clinical trials). Using data from two long-term knee osteoarthritis studies OAI and CHECK, we tested multiple algorithms and learning process configurations (including multi-classifier approaches, cost-sensitive learning, and feature selection), to identify the best performing machine learning models. We examined the behaviour of the best models, with respect to prediction errors and the impact of used features, to confirm their clinical relevance. We found that the model-based selection outperforms the conventional inclusion criteria, reducing by 20-25% the number of patients who show no progression. This result might lead to more efficient clinical trials.Comment: 22 pages, 12 figures, 10 table

The impact of patient global assessment in the definition of remission as a predictor of long-term radiographic damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: protocol for an individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Remission is the target for management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and intensification of immunosuppressive therapy is recommended for those that do not achieve this status. Patient global assessment (PGA) is the single patient reported outcome considered in the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism remission criteria, but its use as target has been questioned. The primary aim of this study is to assess whether excluding PGA from the definition of disease remission changes the association of disease remission with long-term radiographic damage and physical function in patients with RA. METHODS: Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis using data from randomized controlled trials of biological and targeted synthetic agents, identified through ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed. Different remission states will be defined: (i) 4v-remission [tender (TJC28) and swollen 28-joint counts (SJC28) both≤1, C-reactive protein (CRP)≤1 (mg/dl), and PGA≤1 (0-10 scale)], (ii) 4v-near-remission (TJC28≤1, SJC28≤1, CRP≤1, and PGA>1), (iii) non-remission (TJC28>1 or SJC28>1 or CRP>1), all mutually exclusive, and (iv) 3v-remission (TJC28≤1, SJC28≤1, CRP≤1). Likelihood ratios will be used to descriptively compare whether meeting the 3v and 4v-remission criteria in a single visit (at 6 or 12 months) predicts good outcome in the second year (1-2y). Differences in the predictive value of PGA in the definition of remission will be assessed by comparing the three mutually exclusive disease states using logistic regression analysis. Good outcome is defined primarily by radiographic damage (no deterioration in radiographic scores, whatever the instrument used in each trial), and secondarily by functional disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire consistently ≤0.5 and no deterioration), and their combination ("overall good outcome"). Additional analyses will consider longer periods over which to (concurrently) define remission status and outcome (between 1-5y and 1-10y), different cut-offs to define good radiographic outcome (change ≤0.5, ≤3 and ≤5 in radiographic score), sustained remission and the influence of treatment and other clinical factors. DISCUSSION: If 4v-remission and 4v-near-remission are associated with a similar probability of good outcomes, particularly regarding structural damage, the 3v-remission (excluding PGA) could be adopted as the target for immunosuppressive therapy. Patients' perspectives would remain essential, but assessed separately from disease activity, using instruments adequate to guide adjunctive therapies. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, CRD42017057099

Development of a primary care screening algorithm for the early detection of patients at risk of primary antibody deficiency

BACKGROUND: Primary antibody deficiencies (PAD) are characterized by a heterogeneous clinical presentation and low prevalence, contributing to a median diagnostic delay of 3-10 years. This increases the risk of morbidity and mortality from undiagnosed PAD, which may be prevented with adequate therapy. To reduce the diagnostic delay of PAD, we developed a screening algorithm using primary care electronic health record (EHR) data to identify patients at risk of PAD. This screening algorithm can be used as an aid to notify general practitioners when further laboratory evaluation of immunoglobulins should be considered, thereby facilitating a timely diagnosis of PAD. METHODS: Candidate components for the algorithm were based on a broad range of presenting signs and symptoms of PAD that are available in primary care EHRs. The decision on inclusion and weight of the components in the algorithm was based on the prevalence of these components among PAD patients and control groups, as well as clinical rationale. RESULTS: We analyzed the primary care EHRs of 30 PAD patients, 26 primary care immunodeficiency patients and 58,223 control patients. The median diagnostic delay of PAD patients was 9.5 years. Several candidate components showed a clear difference in prevalence between PAD patients and controls, most notably the mean number of antibiotic prescriptions in the 4 years prior to diagnosis (5.14 vs. 0.48). The final algorithm included antibiotic prescriptions, diagnostic codes for respiratory tract and other infections, gastro-intestinal complaints, auto-immune symptoms, malignancies and lymphoproliferative symptoms, as well as laboratory values and visits to the general practitioner. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we developed a screening algorithm based on a broad range of presenting signs and symptoms of PAD, which is suitable to implement in primary care. It has the potential to considerably reduce diagnostic delay in PAD, and will be validated in a prospective study. Trial registration The consecutive prospective study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov under NCT05310604

GaitSmart motion analysis compared to commonly used function outcome measures in the IMI-APPROACH knee osteoarthritis cohort

[Abstract] Background: There are multiple measures for assessment of physical function in knee osteoarthritis (OA), but each has its strengths and limitations. The GaitSmart® system, which uses inertial measurement units (IMUs), might be a user-friendly and objective method to assess function. This study evaluates the validity and responsiveness of GaitSmart® motion analysis as a function measurement in knee OA and compares this to Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36), 30s chair stand test, and 40m self-paced walk test. Methods: The 2-year Innovative Medicines Initiative-Applied Public-Private Research enabling OsteoArthritis Clinical Headway (IMI-APPROACH) knee OA cohort was conducted between January 2018 and April 2021. For this study, available baseline and 6 months follow-up data (n = 262) was used. Principal component analysis was used to investigate whether above mentioned function instruments could represent one or more function domains. Subsequently, linear regression was used to explore the association between GaitSmart® parameters and those function domains. In addition, standardized response means, effect sizes and t-tests were calculated to evaluate the ability of GaitSmart® to differentiate between good and poor general health (based on SF-36). Lastly, the responsiveness of GaitSmart® to detect changes in function was determined. Results: KOOS, SF-36, 30s chair test and 40m self-paced walk test were first combined into one function domain (total function). Thereafter, two function domains were substracted related to either performance based (objective function) or self-reported (subjective function) function. Linear regression resulted in the highest R2 for the total function domain: 0.314 (R2 for objective and subjective function were 0.252 and 0.142, respectively.). Furthermore, GaitSmart® was able to distinguish a difference in general health status, and is responsive to changes in the different aspects of objective function (Standardized response mean (SRMs) up to 0.74). Conclusion: GaitSmart® analysis can reflect performance based and self-reported function and may be of value in the evaluation of function in knee OA. Future studies are warranted to validate whether GaitSmart® can be used as clinical outcome measure in OA research and clinical practice

Do Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Have More Severe Skin Disease than Patients with Psoriasis Only? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Early identification of patients at risk of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is essential to facilitate early diagnosis and improve clinical outcomes. Severe cutaneous psoriasis has been proposed to be associated with PsA, but a recent assessment of the evidence is lacking. Therefore, in this systematic review, we address the association of psoriasis skin severity with the presence and development of PsA. Summary: We included articles from a review published in 2014 and supplemented these with recent literature by performing an additional systematic search to identify studies published between 1 January 2013 and 11 February 2021. A meta-analysis was performed when sufficient comparable evidence was available. Of 2,000 screened articles, we included 29 in the analysis, of which 16 were identified by our updated search. Nineteen studies reported psoriasis severity as psoriasis area and severity index (PASI), ten studies as body surface area (BSA), and two studies as "number of affected sites."Most studies show that more extensive skin disease is associated with the presence of PsA. The quantitative pooled analyses demonstrate higher PASI (mean difference [Δ] 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-2.89) and higher BSA (Δ5.31; 95% CI 1.78-8.83) in patients with PsA as compared to psoriasis patients without PsA. Results from prospective studies - that assess the risk of future development of PsA in psoriasis patients - were inconclusive. Key Messages: In patients with psoriasis, more severe skin involvement is associated with the presence of PsA, underpinning the importance of optimal dermatology-rheumatology collaboration in clinical care. There are insufficient data to support the use of psoriasis skin severity to predict the future development of PsA in psoriasis patients