Search

ObjectivesThe human leukocyte antigen-shared epitope (HLA-SE) alleles and smoking are the most prominent genetic and environmental risk factors for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, at which pre-arthritis stage (asymptomatic/symptomatic) they exert their effect is unknown. We aimed to determine whether HLA-SE and smoking are involved in the onset of autoantibody positivity, symptoms (clinically suspect arthralgia (CSA)) and/or progression to clinical arthritis.MethodsWe performed meta-analyses on results from the literature on associations of HLA-SE and smoking with anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPAs) in the asymptomatic population. Next, we studied associations of HLA-SE and smoking with autoantibody positivity at CSA onset and with progression to clinical inflammatory arthritis (IA) during follow-up. Associations in ACPA-positive patients with CSA were validated in meta-analyses with other arthralgia cohorts. Analyses were repeated for rheumatoid factor (RF), anti-carbamylated protein antibodies (anti-CarP) and anti-acetylated protein antibodies (AAPA).ResultsMeta-analyses showed that HLA-SE is not associated with ACPA positivity in the asymptomatic population (OR 1.06 (95% CI:0.69 to 1.64)), whereas smoking was associated (OR 1.37 (95% CI: 1.15 to 1.63)). At CSA onset, both HLA-SE and smoking associated with ACPA positivity (OR 2.08 (95% CI: 1.24 to 3.49), OR 2.41 (95% CI: 1.31 to 4.43)). During follow-up, HLA-SE associated with IA development (HR 1.86 (95% CI: 1.23 to 2.82)), in contrast to smoking. This was confirmed in meta-analyses in ACPA-positive arthralgia (HR 1.52 (95% CI: 1.08 to 2.15)). HLA-SE and smoking were not associated with RF, anti-CarP or AAPA-positivity at CSA onset. Longitudinally, AAPA associated with IA development independent from ACPA and RF (HR 1.79 (95% CI: 1.02 to 3.16)), anti-CarP did not.ConclusionsHLA-SE and smoking act at different stages: smoking confers risk for ACPA and symptom development, whereas HLA-SE mediates symptom and IA development. These data enhance the understanding of the timing of the key risk factors in the development of RA.

Objective: To investigate the association between baseline disease activity and the occurrence of flares after adalimumab tapering or withdrawal in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in sustained remission. Methods: The PREDICTRA phase IV, randomised, double-blind (DB) study (ImPact of Residual Inflammation Detected via Imaging TEchniques, Drug Levels, and Patient Characteristics on the Outcome of Dose TaperIng of Adalimumab in Clinical Remission Rheumatoid ArThritis (RA) Patients) enrolled patients with RA receiving adalimumab 40 mg every other week who were in sustained remission ≥6 months. After a 4-week, open-label lead-in (OL-LI) period, patients were randomised 5:1 to DB adalimumab taper (every 3 weeks) or withdrawal (placebo) for 36 weeks. The primary endpoint was the association between DB baseline hand and wrist MRI-detected inflammation with flare occurrence. Results: Of 146 patients treated during the OL-LI period, 122 were randomised to taper (n=102) or withdrawal (n=20) arms. Patients had a mean 12.9 years of active disease and had received adalimumab for a mean of 5.4 years (mean 2.2 years in sustained remission). Overall, 37 (36%) and 9 (45%) patients experienced a flare in the taper and withdrawal arms, respectively (time to flare, 18.0 and 13.3 weeks). None of the DB baseline disease characteristics or adalimumab concentration was associated with flare occurrence after adalimumab tapering. Approximately half of the patients who flared regained clinical remission after 16 weeks of open-label rescue adalimumab. The safety profile was consistent with previous studies. Conclusions: Approximately one-third of patients who tapered adalimumab versus half who withdrew adalimumab experienced a flare within 36 weeks. Time to flare was numerically longer in the taper versus withdrawal arm. Baseline MRI inflammation was not associated with flare occurrence. Trial registration number: NCT02198651, EudraCT 2014-001114-26.

ObjectivesWe sought to confirm in very early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA) a much greater superiority (30%) of first-line etanercept+methotrexate (ETN+MTX) over treat-to-target MTX (MTX-TT) than previously reported in ERA (14%); and explore whether ETN following initial MTX secures a comparable response to first-line ETN+MTX.MethodsPragmatic, open-label, randomised controlled trial of treatment-naïve ERA (≤12 months symptom), Disease Activity Score 28 joint (DAS28)-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) ≥3.2, rheumatoid factor (RF)+/−anticitrullinated peptide antibody (ACPA) positive or ultrasound power Doppler (PD) if RF and ACPA negative. Subjects were randomised 1:1 to ETN+MTX; or MTX-TT, escalated to ETN if week 24 DAS28-ESR ≥2.6 and intramuscular corticosteroid at protocolised time points. Primary endpoint of week 48 DAS28ESR remission with clinical and imaging secondary endpoints.ResultsWe randomised 120 patients, 60 to each arm (71% female, 73% RF/84% ACPA positive, median (IQR) symptom duration 20.3 (13.1, 30.8) weeks; mean (SD) DAS28 5.1 (1.1)). Remission rates with ETN+MTX and MTX-TT, respectively, were 38% vs 33% at week 24; 52% vs 38% at week 48 (ORs 1.6, 95% CI 0.8 to 3.5, p=0.211). Greater, sustained DAS28-ESR remission observed with ETN+MTX versus MTX-TT (42% and 27%, respectively; p=0.035). PD was fully suppressed by week 48 in over 90% in each arm. Planned exploratory analysis revealed OR 2.84, 95% CI 0.8 to 9.6) of achieving remission after 24 weeks of ETN administered first line compared with administered post-MTX.ConclusionsCompared with remission rates typically reported with first-line tumour necrosis factor inhabitor+MTX versus MTX-TT, we did not demonstrate a larger effect in very ERA. Neither strategy conferred remission in the majority of patients although ultrasound confirmed local inflammation suppression. Poorer ETN response following failure of MTX-TT is also suggested.Trial registration numberNCT02433184

ObjectivesTo provide an update of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations to account for the most recent developments in the field.MethodsAn international task force considered new evidence supporting or contradicting previous recommendations and novel therapies and strategic insights based on two systematic literature searches on efficacy and safety of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) since the last update (2016) until 2019. A predefined voting process was applied, current levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned and participants ultimately voted independently on their level of agreement with each of the items.ResultsThe task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 12 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GCs); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib). Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering on sustained clinical remission is provided. Cost and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs are addressed. Initially, MTX plus GCs and upon insufficient response to this therapy within 3 to 6 months, stratification according to risk factors is recommended. With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD or JAK inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD is recommended. On sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered, but not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were mostly high.ConclusionsThese updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on the management of RA with respect to benefit, safety, preferences and cost.

ObjectivesTo investigate whether patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can discontinue glucocorticoids (GC) after GC ‘bridging’ in the initial treatment step and to identify factors that may affect this.MethodsData from 7 clinical trial arms (with 1653 patients) that included a GC bridging schedule, previously identified in a systematic literature search, were combined in an individual patient data meta-analysis. Outcomes were GC use (yes/no) at predefined time points (1/3/6/12/18 months after bridging had ended), cumulative GC dose and continuous (≥3 months) GC use after bridging had ended. Age, sex, ACPA status, initial GC dose, duration of bridging schedule, oral versus parenteral GC administration and initial co-treatment were univariably tested with each outcome.ResultsThe probability of using GC 1 month after bridging therapy had ended was 0.18, decreasing to 0.07 from 6 until 18 months after bridging had ended. The probability of continuous GC use after bridging had ended was 0.18 at 1 year and 0.30 at 2 years of follow-up. In oral GC bridging studies only, the probabilities of later and continuous GC use and the cumulative GC doses were higher compared to the combined analyses with also parenteral GC bridging studies included. A higher initial dose and a longer GC bridging schedule were associated with higher cumulative GC doses and more patients on GC at 18 months after bridging had ended.ConclusionsBased on these RA clinical trial arms with an initial GC bridging schedule, the probability of subsequent ongoing GC use following bridging is low.