Educational needs and preferences of young European clinicians and physician researchers working in the field of rheumatology

Funding Information: CB: Grant BE 5191/1-1 of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.Objectives: To understand the educational needs and preferences of young clinicians and physician researchers in the field of rheumatology in Europe. Methods: An international online survey was performed as a joint venture of ESCET and EMEUNET. The survey assessed the acceptance of and the access to the current European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) educational portfolio, as well as the unmet educational needs and learning preferences among individuals below the age of 40 years working in rheumatology in Europe. Results: Among 568 European clinicians and physician researchers, 65% indicated that the existing EULAR educational portfolio adequately covers their educational needs. Within the EULAR portfolio, the online course on rheumatic diseases and the postgraduate course were the most appreciated. Participants were very much in favour of new educational courses on imaging techniques, and 63% of participants indicated a particular interest in musculoskeletal ultrasound. A strong interest in refresher (60%) and general review (55%) courses was observed. Lack of funding was considered the major obstacle to participating in existing EULAR programmes. Finally, participants showed diverse preferences regarding learning modalities with common interests in live courses and conferences. Conclusions: EULAR's training opportunities are well appreciated among young clinicians and physician researchers in rheumatology. The results from this survey will help to develop EULAR's future educational portfolio.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Les utilités EQ-5D et SF-6D dans la polyarthrite débutante

The explosion of drug development for rheumatoid arthritis and the revolution of early aggressive therapy for the disease have fuelled the search for better approaches to establish cost-effectiveness in early arthritis (EA), but consensus is lacking on the choice of utility instrument. We aimed to compare the EQ-5D and SF-6D, 2 indirect utility measures widely used to calculate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), in terms of their utility values, their performance and their determinants in a large prospective cohort of patients with EA. In conclusion, the EQ-5D and SF-6D are not interchangeable: their scales, distributions, reliability and responsiveness are different. There is systematic disagreement between the EQ-5D and SF-6D in EA especially in patients with worse clinical outcomes and more specifically with high functional disability. Several elements suggest that the SF-6D may be more appropriate for clinical trials of biologics in patients with EA: the bimodal distribution of the EQ-5D, its lower reliability and responsiveness for EA improvement than the SF-6D, its high variability in the estimation of the utility gains and thus QALYs gains and the problems raised by the meaning of a state labeled " worse than the death " (which is not the one from the patient)La notion d’instauration rapide d’un traitement efficace et agressif dans la polyarthrite débutante a renforcé la nécessité de disposer de mesures d’utilité validées afin d’optimiser l’évaluation médico-économique de ces traitements. Actuellement, il n’y a pas de consensus sur le choix du questionnaire multi-attributs à utiliser pour le calcul des utilités. L’objectif de cette thèse est donc d’étudier les niveaux, les performances et les déterminants des 2 outils indirects de mesure d’utilité (EQ-5D et SF-6D) dans la polyarthrite débutante, au travers des données de la cohorte ESPOIR, cohorte multicentrique française de polyarthrites débutantes. En conclusion, l’EQ-5D et le SF-6D ne sont pas interchangeables dans la polyarthrite débutante : ils ont des échelles, des distributions, une reproductibilité et une sensibilité au changement différentes. Ils ne donnent pas les mêmes résultats surtout quand les patients ont un mauvais état de santé et plus particulièrement une incapacité fonctionnelle importante. La distribution bimodale de l’EQ-5D, sa moins bonne reproductibilité, le fait qu’il soit moins sensible à l’amélioration, sa plus grande variabilité dans l’estimation du gain d’utilité et donc des QALYs, les problèmes soulevés par la signification d’un état « pire que la mort » (qui n’est pas celle du patient), favoriseraient plutôt l’utilisation du SF-6D dans les essais sur les nouvelles biothérapies dans la polyarthrite débutant

Les utilités EQ-5D et SF-6D dans la polyarthrite débutante

The explosion of drug development for rheumatoid arthritis and the revolution of early aggressive therapy for the disease have fuelled the search for better approaches to establish cost-effectiveness in early arthritis (EA), but consensus is lacking on the choice of utility instrument. We aimed to compare the EQ-5D and SF-6D, 2 indirect utility measures widely used to calculate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), in terms of their utility values, their performance and their determinants in a large prospective cohort of patients with EA. In conclusion, the EQ-5D and SF-6D are not interchangeable: their scales, distributions, reliability and responsiveness are different. There is systematic disagreement between the EQ-5D and SF-6D in EA especially in patients with worse clinical outcomes and more specifically with high functional disability. Several elements suggest that the SF-6D may be more appropriate for clinical trials of biologics in patients with EA: the bimodal distribution of the EQ-5D, its lower reliability and responsiveness for EA improvement than the SF-6D, its high variability in the estimation of the utility gains and thus QALYs gains and the problems raised by the meaning of a state labeled " worse than the death " (which is not the one from the patient)La notion d’instauration rapide d’un traitement efficace et agressif dans la polyarthrite débutante a renforcé la nécessité de disposer de mesures d’utilité validées afin d’optimiser l’évaluation médico-économique de ces traitements. Actuellement, il n’y a pas de consensus sur le choix du questionnaire multi-attributs à utiliser pour le calcul des utilités. L’objectif de cette thèse est donc d’étudier les niveaux, les performances et les déterminants des 2 outils indirects de mesure d’utilité (EQ-5D et SF-6D) dans la polyarthrite débutante, au travers des données de la cohorte ESPOIR, cohorte multicentrique française de polyarthrites débutantes. En conclusion, l’EQ-5D et le SF-6D ne sont pas interchangeables dans la polyarthrite débutante : ils ont des échelles, des distributions, une reproductibilité et une sensibilité au changement différentes. Ils ne donnent pas les mêmes résultats surtout quand les patients ont un mauvais état de santé et plus particulièrement une incapacité fonctionnelle importante. La distribution bimodale de l’EQ-5D, sa moins bonne reproductibilité, le fait qu’il soit moins sensible à l’amélioration, sa plus grande variabilité dans l’estimation du gain d’utilité et donc des QALYs, les problèmes soulevés par la signification d’un état « pire que la mort » (qui n’est pas celle du patient), favoriseraient plutôt l’utilisation du SF-6D dans les essais sur les nouvelles biothérapies dans la polyarthrite débutant

Indirect utility measures, EQ-5D and SF-6D, in early arthritis

La notion d’instauration rapide d’un traitement efficace et agressif dans la polyarthrite débutante a renforcé la nécessité de disposer de mesures d’utilité validées afin d’optimiser l’évaluation médico-économique de ces traitements. Actuellement, il n’y a pas de consensus sur le choix du questionnaire multi-attributs à utiliser pour le calcul des utilités. L’objectif de cette thèse est donc d’étudier les niveaux, les performances et les déterminants des 2 outils indirects de mesure d’utilité (EQ-5D et SF-6D) dans la polyarthrite débutante, au travers des données de la cohorte ESPOIR, cohorte multicentrique française de polyarthrites débutantes. En conclusion, l’EQ-5D et le SF-6D ne sont pas interchangeables dans la polyarthrite débutante : ils ont des échelles, des distributions, une reproductibilité et une sensibilité au changement différentes. Ils ne donnent pas les mêmes résultats surtout quand les patients ont un mauvais état de santé et plus particulièrement une incapacité fonctionnelle importante. La distribution bimodale de l’EQ-5D, sa moins bonne reproductibilité, le fait qu’il soit moins sensible à l’amélioration, sa plus grande variabilité dans l’estimation du gain d’utilité et donc des QALYs, les problèmes soulevés par la signification d’un état « pire que la mort » (qui n’est pas celle du patient), favoriseraient plutôt l’utilisation du SF-6D dans les essais sur les nouvelles biothérapies dans la polyarthrite débutanteThe explosion of drug development for rheumatoid arthritis and the revolution of early aggressive therapy for the disease have fuelled the search for better approaches to establish cost-effectiveness in early arthritis (EA), but consensus is lacking on the choice of utility instrument. We aimed to compare the EQ-5D and SF-6D, 2 indirect utility measures widely used to calculate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), in terms of their utility values, their performance and their determinants in a large prospective cohort of patients with EA. In conclusion, the EQ-5D and SF-6D are not interchangeable: their scales, distributions, reliability and responsiveness are different. There is systematic disagreement between the EQ-5D and SF-6D in EA especially in patients with worse clinical outcomes and more specifically with high functional disability. Several elements suggest that the SF-6D may be more appropriate for clinical trials of biologics in patients with EA: the bimodal distribution of the EQ-5D, its lower reliability and responsiveness for EA improvement than the SF-6D, its high variability in the estimation of the utility gains and thus QALYs gains and the problems raised by the meaning of a state labeled " worse than the death " (which is not the one from the patient

Efficacité et tolérance des infiltrations de corticoïdes dans les tendinopathies de l épaule et du coude (méta-analyse des essais contrôlés et randomisés)

L objectif de ce travail était d évaluer l efficacité et la tolérance des infiltrations de corticoïdes dans les tendinopathies de l épaule et du coude. Une revue systématique de la littérature a été conduite en utilisant les bases de données Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library jusqu en avril 2008. Tous les essais contrôlés randomisés rapportant l efficacité sur la douleur et/ou la fonction, et/ou ka tolérance des infiltrations de corticoïdes, versus placebo, AINS ou physiothérapie chez les patients souffrant de tendinopahies de l épaule et du coude ont été sélectionnés. Les effect-size (ES) poolés ont été calculés par méta-analyse. 20 essais ont été analysés : 744 patients traités par infiltrations et 987 par comparateur ; 618 épaules et 1113 coudes. Les analyses poolées ont montré une efficacité des corticoïdes à court terme versus les comparateurs poolés à la fois pour la douleur et la fonction : ES douleur à la semaine 1-3 = 1.18 (IC 95% = 0.27 à 2.09), à la semaine 4-8 = 1.30 (0.55 à 2.04). Les analyses en sous-groupes ont donné des résultats similaires quelque soit l articulation impliquée, le type de corticoïde et le type de comparateur, excepté pour les AINS où la supériorité à court terme des infiltrations est non significative. Les principaux effets secondaires ont été une augmentation transitoire de la douleur (10.7% des infiltrations) et des modifications cutanées. Dans le traitement des tendinopathies de l épaule et du coude, les infiltrations de corticoïdes sont bien tolérées et plus efficaces à court terme que les autres traitements poolés, mais d efficacité similaire aux AINS. Aucun bénéfice à long terme n a été mis en évidence.PARIS6-Bibl.Pitié-Salpêtrie (751132101) / SudocPARIS-BIUM (751062103) / SudocSudocFranceF

Evidence of the symptomatic and structural efficacy of methotrexate in daily practice as the first disease-modifying drug in rheumatoid arthritis despite its suboptimal use: results from the ESPOIR early synovitis cohort.

International audienceOBJECTIVE: To describe the use of MTX in early arthritis (EA) in daily clinical practice and to evaluate its 6-month symptomatic efficacy and 12-month structural efficacy. METHODS: Patients included in the French observational ESPOIR cohort were assessed. Evaluation of the symptomatic and structural efficacy was performed by generalized linear regression after adjustment on propensity score (PS) in the group of patients receiving at least 3 months of MTX vs the ones receiving any other treatment except LEF, SSZ or TNF inhibitors. RESULTS: Within the first 6 months of follow-up of 777 EA patients, 59% received a DMARD, which was MTX in 68% (N = 313) of patients. The mean dose of MTX was 12.7 ± 3.8 mg/week. Only 53.7% of the patients received folic acid supplementation. MTX was initiated in patients with more active and severe disease. At 6 months, in unadjusted analysis, patients starting MTX had a significantly higher DAS-28 (3.58 vs 3.23; P = 0.001) and a significantly higher HAQ (0.60 vs. 0.48; P = 0.01) compared with controls. After adjustment by PS, there were no significant differences. Adjustment for the PS also revealed a statistically significant decrease in the radiological progression at 12 months in the MTX group [total Sharp-van der Heijde score (SHS), 1.05 ± 0.29 vs 2.02 ± 0.29, P = 0.025]. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the symptomatic and structural efficacy of MTX in EA in daily practice despite the non-optimal use of MTX, including low doses and infrequent concomitant folic acid supplementation

Efficacy and safety of biological DMARDs modulating B cells in primary Sjögren's syndrome: Systematic review and meta-analysis

International audienceOBJECTIVE: In this review, we summarise the clinical efficacy and safety of B-cell targeted therapies for primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS). METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane. Only articles reporting controlled or prospective studies of b-DMARDs modulating B cells in treatment of pSS were selected. The highest-quality studies were selected for meta-analysis. The primary outcome of interest was clinical efficacy at week 24 on fatigue, dryness, Schirmer test, salivary flow rate and the full ESSDAI score including biological domain. For the efficacy criteria used, the difference between rituximab and placebo groups was expressed as mean difference (MD). RESULTS: Eighteen articles (13 of rituximab, 3 of belimumab, 1 of epratuzumab and 1 of baminercept) were identified for detailed evaluation. 4 controlled randomised trials of rituximab treatment vs. placebo involving 300 patients were included for quantitative analysis. No significant differences were observed between groups in the meta-analysis of mean improvements between baseline and week 24 in fatigue VAS [MD -3,24 95% CI (-30,21 to 23,72)], oral dryness VAS [MD -8,41 95% CI (-35,06 to 18,24)], salivary flow rate [MD 0,04 95% CI (-0,03 to 0,11)] and Schirmer test [MD 0,35 95% CI (-2,13 to 2,82)]. Rituximab was relatively safe compared to placebo. CONCLUSION: Our review shows that rituximab is not effective in pSS with the designs and outcomes proposed in the trials. Controlled randomised trials are needed to prove the efficacy of belimumab and epratuzumab in this indication. The randomised controlled trial evaluating baminercept failed to achieve its primary endpoint

MTX optimization or adding bDMARD equally improve disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis: results from the prospective study STRATEGE

International audienceObjectives. The STRATEGE (Therapeutic Strategy in Patients Treated With Methotrexate for Rheumatoid Arthritis) study aimed to describe treatment strategies in current practice in RA biologic DMARD (bDMARD)-naïve patients with an inadequate response to MTX therapy, and to compare clinical efficacy of the different therapeutic strategies on disease activity after 6 months. Methods. The main inclusion criteria of this prospective, observational, multicentre study were confirmed RA diagnosis, treatment by MTX monotherapy and need for therapeutic management modification.Results. The 722 patients included had a mean (s.d.) RA duration of 5.3 (6.7) years, a mean DAS28 of 4.0 (1.1); they were all receiving MTX monotherapy, 68% oral, at a mean dose of 15.0 (4.1) mg/week. Two major strategies were identified: (i) MTX monotherapy dose and/or route optimization (72%) and (ii) bDMARD initiation ± MTX (16%). MTX dosing was modified for 70% of patients, maintained (dose and route) for 28% of patients and interrupted for 2%. bDMARDs were started when the MTX mean dose was 17.4 mg/week, 56% parenterally; MTX was maintained concomitantly for 96% of patients. Six-month follow-up results adjusted by propensity score showed that both options were equally successful in improving disease activity and physical function, with 63 and 68% of good-to-moderate EULAR responses, respectively.Conclusion. The STRATEGE study shows the importance of initial MTX treatment optimization before initiation of a biological treatment and emphasizes the importance of treat-to-target strategy