Objective

Patients and physicians commonly differ in their assessments of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) activity. Clinically meaningful discordance thresholds or validation of their ability to predict functional outcomes are lacking. We explored whether an unbiased, person-centred latent profile analysis (LPA) approach could classify cases based on patient global assessment (PtGA) and physician global assessment (MDGA) assessments of RA activity. We further examined whether the LPA groups displayed greater differences in clinical outcomes compared with traditional threshold-based groups. Finally, we evaluated whether LPA yielded higher explanatory power for clinical outcomes.

Methods

LPA was performed in 618 patients with established RA from a single centre. A threshold-based discordance definition was used as a comparator, with patients classified into concordant (PtGA-MDGA within ± 3 cm), positively discordant (PtGA-MDGA ≥3 cm) and negatively discordant groups (PtGA-MDGA ≤-3 cm).

Results

LPA yielded five distinct groups: low PtGA/low MDGA (35.9%), moderate PtGA/moderate MDGA (18.6%), high PtGA/high MDGA (14.7%), high PtGA/low MDGA (23.3%) and low PtGA/high MDGA (7.4%). Groups differed across clinical, physical function, pain, fatigue, health-related quality of life, work productivity and activity impairment outcomes (p<0.001). Concordance groups, in particular, displayed marked heterogeneity in outcomes depending on the magnitude of disease activity reported, with the low/low group faring the best (p<0.001). The LPA solution demonstrated superior explanatory power for all outcomes (p<0.001).

Conclusions

We confirmed the validity and advantages of LPA in characterising the relationship between PtGA and MDGA over a conventional threshold-based definition. LPA yielded optimally distinct, clinically meaningful and cohesive groupings, demonstrating superior explanatory power for disease-related outcomes of interest.

Objective

This study was designed to evaluate the determinants of patient and physician global assessments (PtGA and MDGA, respectively) of disease activity, their discordance and change over 2 years in Hispanics with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We further examined the impact of discordance and its persistence on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and work productivity on final visit.

Methods

We studied 536 Hispanics with established RA from a single centre. PtGA and MDGA were measured annually on 10 cm visual analogue scales and discordance was defined as absolute difference between them ≥3 cm. Associations between predictors and outcomes of interest were evaluated using multivariable regression and analysis of covariance for cross-sectional and longitudinal data, respectively.

Results

Independent predictors of baseline PtGA were pain, fatigue, depression, general health perceptions and tender joint count. MDGA was predicted by swollen joint count, tender joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, fatigue and depression. Both PtGA and MDGA improved over time (all p<0.001). Discordance was observed in 43% at baseline, with fair stability over 2 years. Higher (worse) patient ratings were most prevalent; their presence at any time and increasing persistence predicted lower physical and mental HRQOL, decreased work productivity and more activity impairment at 2-year follow-up (all p<0.001).

Conclusions

Determinants of PtGA, MDGA and changes over 2 years were disparate in Hispanics with RA yielding significant discordance. Higher patient ratings at any time contributed to worse HRQOL, work productivity and activity impairment on final visit.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical guidelines offer little guidance for treatment selection following inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). A molecular signature response classifier (MSRC) was validated to predict tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) inadequate response. The decision impact of MSRC results on biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) selection was evaluated. METHODS: This is an analysis of AIMS, a longitudinal, prospective database of patients with RA tested using the MSRC. This study assessed selection of b/tsDMARDs class after MSRC testing by surveying physicians, the rate of b/tsDMARD prescriptions aligning with MSRC results, and the percentage of physicians utilizing MSRC results for decision-making. RESULTS: Of 1018 participants, 70.7% (720/1018) had treatment selected after receiving MSRC results. In this MSRC-informed cohort, 75.6% (544/720) of patients received a b/tsDMARD aligned with MSRC results, and 84.6% (609/720) of providers reported using MSRC results to guide treatment selection. The most prevalent reason reported (8.2%, 59/720) for not aligning treatment selection with MSRC results from the total cohort was health insurance coverage issues. CONCLUSION: This study showed that rheumatologists reported using the MSRC test to guide b/tsDMARD selection for patients with RA. In most cases, MSRC test results appeared to influence clinical decision-making according to physician self-report. Wider adoption of precision medicine tools like the MSRC could support rheumatologists and patients in working together to achieve optimal outcomes for RA.

Introduction

As patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receive treatment with anti-tumour necrosis factors over several years, it is important to evaluate their long-term safety and efficacy. The objective of this study was to examine the safety and benefits of certolizumab pegol (CZP)+methotrexate (MTX) treatment for almost 5 years in patients with RA.

Methods

Patients who completed the 24-week Rheumatoid Arthritis Prevention of Structural Damage (RAPID) 2 randomized controlled trial (RCT; NCT00160602), or who were American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 non-responders at Week 16, entered the open-label extension (OLE; NCT00160641). After ≥6 months treatment with CZP 400 mg every two weeks (Q2W), dose was reduced to 200 mg Q2W, the approved maintenance dose. Safety data are presented from all patients who received ≥1 dose CZP (Safety population, n=612). Efficacy data are presented to Week 232 for the intent-to-treat (ITT, n=492) and Week 24 CZP RCT Completer (n=342) populations, and through 192 weeks of dose-reduction for the Dose-reduction population (patients whose CZP dose was reduced to 200 mg, n=369). Radiographic progression (modified total Sharp score change from RCT baseline >0.5) to Week 128 is reported for the Week 24 CZP Completers.

Results

In the RCT, 619 patients were randomized to CZP+MTX (n=492) or placebo+MTX (n=127). Overall, 567 patients (91.6%) entered the OLE: 447 CZP and 120 placebo patients. Of all randomized patients, 358 (57.8%) were ongoing at Week 232. Annual drop-out rates during the first four years ranged from 8.4-15.0%. Event rates per 100 patient-years were 163.0 for adverse events (AEs) and 15.7 for serious AEs. Nineteen patients (3.1%) had fatal AEs (incidence rate=0.8). Clinical improvements in the RCT were maintained to Week 232 in the CZP Completers: mean Disease Activity Score 28 (Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) change from baseline was -3.4 and ACR20/50/70 responses 68.4%/47.1%/25.1% (non-responder imputation). Similar improvements observed in the ITT were maintained following dose-reduction. 73.2% of CZP Completers had no radiographic progression at Week 128.

Conclusions

In patients with active RA despite MTX therapy, CZP was well tolerated, with no new safety signals identified. CZP provided sustained improvements in clinical outcomes for almost 5 years.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00160602 and NCT00160641 . Registered 8 September 2005.

Objective

To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and corticosteroid use in patients with moderate to severely active SLE enrolled in two international, multicentre, randomized controlled trials of epratuzumab (ALLEVIATE-1 and -2) and a long-term extension study (SL0006).

Methods

Ninety ALLEVIATE patients (43% BILAG A, mean BILAG score 13.2) were randomized to receive 360 mg/m(2) (n = 42) or 720 mg/m(2) (n = 11) epratuzumab or placebo (n = 37), plus standard of care, in 12-week cycles. Corticosteroid use, patient and physician global assessments of disease activity (PtGA and PGA) and 36-item Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form (SF-36) results were recorded at baseline and every 4 weeks. Both trials were prematurely discontinued due to a drug supply interruption; patients followed for ≥6 months were analysed. Twenty-nine patients continued in SL0006, with interim analysis at a median exposure of 120 (range 13-184) weeks.

Results

At week 12, proportions of patients with a PGA ≥20% above baseline or with a PtGA improvement greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important difference were higher in the epratuzumab arms than the placebo arm. PGA and PtGA improvements were sustained but did not reach statistical significance. At week 24, mean cumulative corticosteroid doses with epratuzumab 360 and 720 mg/m(2) were 1051 and 1973 mg less than placebo (P = 0.034 and 0.081, respectively). At week 48, SF-36 scores approached or exceeded US age- and gender-matched norms in five domains with the 360 mg/m(2) treatment. Improvements were maintained in SL0006 over ∼2 years.

Conclusion

Epratuzumab treatment produced clinically meaningful and sustained improvements in PGA, PtGA and HRQOL and reductions in corticosteroid doses.

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.

OBJECTIVES: To establish a framework by which experts define disease subsets in systemic sclerosis associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD). METHODS: A conceptual framework for subclinical, clinical and progressive ILD was provided to 83 experts, asking them to use the framework and classify actual SSc-ILD patients. Each patient profile was designed to be classified by at least four experts in terms of severity and risk of progression at baseline; progression was based on 1-year follow-up data. A consensus was reached if ≥75% of experts agreed. Experts provided information on which items were important in determining classification. RESULTS: Forty-four experts (53%) completed the survey. Consensus was achieved on the dimensions of severity (75%, 60 of 80 profiles), risk of progression (71%, 57 of 80 profiles) and progressive ILD (60%, 24 of 40 profiles). For profiles achieving consensus, most were classified as clinical ILD (92%), low risk (54%) and stable (71%). Severity and disease progression overlapped in terms of framework items that were most influential in classifying patients (forced vital capacity, extent of lung involvement on high resolution chest CT [HRCT]); risk of progression was influenced primarily by disease duration. CONCLUSIONS: Using our proposed conceptual framework, international experts were able to achieve a consensus on classifying SSc-ILD patients along the dimensions of disease severity, risk of progression and progression over time. Experts rely on similar items when classifying disease severity and progression: a combination of spirometry and gas exchange and quantitative HRCT.

Rationale

Clinical trial design in interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) has been hampered by lack of consensus on appropriate outcome measures for reliably assessing treatment response. In the setting of connective tissue diseases (CTDs), some measures of ILD disease activity and severity may be confounded by non-pulmonary comorbidities.

Methods

The Connective Tissue Disease associated Interstitial Lung Disease (CTD-ILD) working group of Outcome Measures in Rheumatology-a non-profit international organisation dedicated to consensus methodology in identification of outcome measures-conducted a series of investigations which included a Delphi process including >248 ILD medical experts as well as patient focus groups culminating in a nominal group panel of ILD experts and patients. The goal was to define and develop a consensus on the status of outcome measure candidates for use in randomised controlled trials in CTD-ILD and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF).

Results

A core set comprising specific measures in the domains of lung physiology, lung imaging, survival, dyspnoea, cough and health-related quality of life is proposed as appropriate for consideration for use in a hypothetical 1-year multicentre clinical trial for either CTD-ILD or IPF. As many widely used instruments were found to lack full validation, an agenda for future research is proposed.

Conclusion

Identification of consensus preliminary domains and instruments to measure them was attained and is a major advance anticipated to facilitate multicentre RCTs in the field.