Rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic inflammatory joint disease, which can cause cartilage and bone damage as well as disability. Early diagnosis is key to optimal therapeutic success, particularly in patients with well-characterised risk factors for poor outcomes such as high disease activity, presence of autoantibodies, and early joint damage. Treatment algorithms involve measuring disease activity with composite indices, applying a treatment-to-target strategy, and use of conventional, biological, and newz non-biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. After the treatment target of stringent remission (or at least low disease activity) is maintained, dose reduction should be attempted. Although the prospects for most patients are now favourable, many still do not respond to current therapies. Accordingly, new therapies are urgently required. In this Seminar, we describe current insights into genetics and aetiology, pathophysiology, epidemiology, assessment, therapeutic agents, and treatment strategies together with unmet needs of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) in the assessment of inflammatory activity of rheumatoid arthritis patients in remission.

Abstract Background: Soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) is a biomarker increasingly used for the assessment of systemic inflammation. We aimed to evaluate suPAR for the assessment of inflammatory activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in remission. Methods: In our cross-sectional study we measured plasma suPAR and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels as well as erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) in 120 RA patients at various stages of disease activity and 29 healthy age-matched controls. Results: suPAR, CRP and ESR values were higher in RA patients compared to healthy individuals. When suPAR levels were analyzed according to DAS28 scores of RA patients, suPAR level in the subgroup with DAS282.6, but still higher than in controls [4.45 (3.33-5.56) ng/mL vs. 3.66 (3.10-4.67) ng/mL vs. 2.80 (2.06-3.42) ng/mL, p<0.0001, median (interquartile range)]. In contrast, CRP and ESR values were comparable in the subgroup with DAS28</=2.6 and in healthy individuals. We further analyzed the correlation between the number of tender and/or swollen joints and suPAR levels in RA patients in remission. suPAR values were significantly higher in patients with four tender and/or swollen joints than in patients with 2-3 or 0-1 tender and/or swollen joints. Conclusions: While CRP and ESR values indicate remission of the chronic inflammatory process in RA, suPAR values are still elevated compared to healthy individuals. suPAR might be particularly valuable in the recognition of inflammatory activity in patients who are in remission according to DAS28 scores but have symptoms of tender and/or swollen joints

Treating rheumatic patients with a malignancy

Management of patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease and a history of (or even a current) malignant disease poses some particular challenges. As direct evidence of the risk of (recurrent or de novo) malignancy in patients with a history of malignant disease is scarce, such a risk may be estimated indirectly from the principal carcinogenicity of the respective drug to be used or (also indirectly) from cancer reactivation data from the transplant literature. In general, cancer risk is increased in patients receiving combination immunosuppressive treatment, but the risk in patients receiving individual drugs (with the exception of alkylating agents) remains entirely unclear. Indirect evidence supports the intuitive concept that the risk of cancer decreases over time after a successful cancer treatment. The only two studies in rheumatic patients with a cancer history were small and have not been able to show an increase in cancer reactivation. The risk of reactivation also depends on the site and location of the prior malignancy. In conclusion, the decision to treat a patient with a history of cancer immunosuppressively should be shared by the rheumatologist and the oncologist. Once the decision is established, such patients need intensive and close monitoring

Developments in the clinical understanding of rheumatoid arthritis

The changes occurring in the field of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over the past decade or two have encompassed new therapies and, in particular, a new look at the clinical characteristics of the disease in the context of therapeutic improvements. It has been shown that composite disease activity indices have special merits in following patients, that disease activity governs the evolution of joint damage, and that disability can be dissected into several components – among them disease activity and joint damage. It has also been revealed that aiming at any disease activity state other than remission (or, at worst, low disease activity) is associated with significant progression of joint destruction, that early recognition and appropriate therapy of RA are important facets of the overall strategy of optimal clinical control of the disease, and that tight control employing composite scores supports the optimization of the therapeutic approaches. Finally, with the advent of novel therapies, remission has become a reality and the treatment algorithms encompassing all of the above-mentioned aspects will allow us to achieve the rigorous aspirations of today and tomorrow

Mavrilimumab, a fully human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor α monoclonal antibody: long-term safety and efficacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Objective: Mavrilimumab, a human monoclonal antibody, targets granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor alpha. We report mavrilimumab long-term safety and efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis patients in two phase IIb studies (1071, 1107) and open-label extension (OLE; NCT01712399). Methods: In 1071, patients with disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-inadequate responses received mavrilimumab 30, 100, 150 mg, or placebo every other week (eow), plus methotrexate. In 1107, patients with anti-tumor necrosis factor agent- and/or DMARD-inadequate responses received mavrilimumab 100 mg eow or golimumab 50 mg every 4 weeks, plus methotrexate. Patients entering the OLE received mavrilimumab 100 mg eow plus methotrexate. Mavrilimumab long-term safety and efficacy were assessed. Results: In total, 442 patients received mavrilimumab (14/245 patients from 1071, 9/70 from 1107, 52/397 from OLE discontinued mavrilimumab treatment throughout the studies). The cumulative safety exposure was 899 patient-years (PY); the median duration of mavrilimumab treatment was 2.5 (range 0.1–3.3) years. Most common treatment-emergent adverse events were nasopharyngitis (n=69, 7.68/100 PY), bronchitis (n=51, 5.68/100 PY). At Weeks 74/104: 3.5%/6.2% patients showed reduction in forced expiratory volume in 1 second; 2.9%/3.4% patients showed reduction in forced vital capacity, respectively (&gt;20% reduction from baseline to &lt;80% predicted). Most pulmonary changes were transient and only infrequently associated with adverse events. Mavrilimumab 100 mg eow demonstrated sustained efficacy; 65.0% and 40.6% patients achieved Disease Activity Score 28–C-reactive protein &lt;3.2 and &lt;2.6, respectively at Week 122. Conclusion: Mavrilimumab long-term treatment maintained response and was well-tolerated with no TEAE incidence increase. Safety data were comparable with both phase IIb qualifying studies

Disease activity level, remission and response in established rheumatoid arthritis: Performance of various criteria sets in an observational cohort, treated with anti-TNF agents

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Most composite indices of disease activity and response criteria in RA have been validated and compared in clinical trials rather than routine care. We therefore wanted to compare the performance of the DAS28, SDAI and CDAI activity indices, their activity states, their response criteria, and also compare with the ACR response criteria in an observational clinical setting.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Agreement between the criteria sets was investigated using κ statistics in a non-randomized cohort of 1789 RA patients from southern Sweden, starting their first course of anti-TNF-treatment. Mean disease duration was 12 years. Completer analysis was used.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Agreement between high, moderate and low activity states was moderate or substantial, with κ = 0.5 or better for all criteria. Agreement between SDAI and CDAI disease states was > 90% in these categories with κ > 0.8. DAS28 original and modified cut point remission had good agreement (κ = 0.91). Agreement between responses was substantial at the overall/ACR20 level (about 95%, κ = 0.7 or better) for all criteria. By contrast, agreement was poor between moderate and high level responses.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Disease activity states according to the various indices perform similarly and show substantial agreement at all levels except remission. Agreement between SDAI and CDAI states is excellent. Response criteria, applied at the individual patient level, are hard to interpret and show poor agreement, except at the lowest level of response. Thus, they should not be applied uncritically in clinical practice.</p