Search

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tocilizumab (TCZ) monotherapy in biologic-naïve patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) versus patients with previous biologic exposure in a real-world setting.Non-controlled clinical-trial, 32-week prospective multicenter study including RA patients with moderate-severe disease activity starting TCZ in monotherapy who had a prior inadequate response or were intolerant to methotrexate (MTX). Effectiveness according to EULAR response evaluated at 24-week and safety at 32-weekwere assessed.Of the 93 were enrolled of whom 84 (90%) were eligible for the effectiveness analysis. Biologic-naïve patients (n=46, 54.8%) were younger (51.5 versus 57.9) with shorter disease duration (6.4 versus 13.3) but presented similar comorbidities in comparison with non-naïve patients. DAS28 remission was achieved in a higher percentage in the group of patients with prior biological treatment. 89 adverse events (AE) were recorded in 50 patients, most of them non-serious AE (non-SAE) (86.3%).In a real world setting, TCZ exhibit similar effectiveness and safety in monotherapy in patients with RA regardless previous exposure to other biologic therapies. This study provides additional and valuable real-world findings on the use of TCZ in patients with RA.

To describe the methodology of REAPSER (Spanish Registry of Recent-onset Psoriatic Arthritis), its strengths and limitations. The aim of this study is to identify prognostic factors for the clinical and radiographic course in a cohort of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) diagnosed within 2years of symptom evolution.Multicenter, observational and prospective study (with 2-year follow-up including annual visits). Baseline visit intended to reflect patient situation before the disease course was modified by treatments prescribed in rheumatology departments. Patients were invited to participate consecutively in one of their routine visits to the rheumatologist. 211 patients were included. Following data were collected: sociodemographic variables; employment situation; family history; personal history and comorbidities; anthropometric data; lifestyle; use of healthcare services; clinical situation at the time of PsA diagnosis; joint involvement and spinal pain; pain and overall assessment; enthesitis, dactylitis and uveitis; skin and nail involvement; functional situation and quality of life; radiographic evaluation; analytical determinations; treatment; axial and peripheral flare-ups.The REAPSER study includes a cohort of patients with recent-onset PsA, before the disease course was modified by disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs prescribed in rheumatology departments. Exhaustive information collected in each visit is expected to be an important data source for future analysis.

Objective (1) To analyse the implementation of multidisciplinary care models in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients, (2) To define minimum and excellent standards of care. Methods A survey was sent to clinicians who already performed multidisciplinary care or were in the process of undertaking it, asking: (1) Type of multidisciplinary care model implemented; (2) Degree, priority and feasibility of the implementation of quality standards in the structure, process and result for care. In 6 regional meetings the results of the survey were presented and discussed, and the ultimate priority of quality standards for care was defined. At a nominal meeting group, 11 experts (rheumatologists and dermatologists) analysed the results of the survey and the regional meetings. With this information, they defined which standards of care are currently considered as minimum and which are excellent. Results The simultaneous and parallel models of multidisciplinary care are those most widely implemented, but the implementation of quality standards is highly variable. In terms of structure it ranges from 22% to 74%, in those related to process from 17% to 54% and in the results from 2% to 28%. Of the 25 original quality standards for care, 9 were considered only minimum, 4 were excellent and 12 defined criteria for minimum level and others for excellence. Conclusions The definition of minimum and excellent quality standards for care will help achieve the goal of multidisciplinary care for patients with PAs, which is the best healthcare possible.

Objectives To identify priorities among comorbidities in axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA) and recommend how to follow them from an eminently practical perspective. Methods A multidisciplinary group was selected (10 rheumatologists—6 of them experts in AxSpA—, 2 general practitioners, an internist, a cardiologist, a gastroenterologist and a psychologist). In a first discussion meeting, the scope and users were established and a list of comorbidities was voted based on frequency and impact. The panellists had to defend the inclusion of each comorbidity/item in the document with consistent arguments. Four panellists and two methodologists developed systematic reviews on controversial topics. In a second meeting, the results of the reviews and the arguments concerning the items to be included were presented. After the meeting, the final document was drafted. Results The final document includes two checklists, one for health professionals and another for patients; they incorporate cardiovascular risk, renal comorbidities, gastrointestinal risk, lifestyle, risk of infections and vaccinations, pulmonary involvement, concomitant medication, psycho-affective disorders, osteoporosis, and risk of fracture. In addition, the document reflects the arguments favouring the inclusion of each item and how to record the items for subsequent collection. The panel considered it also appropriate to likewise establish «practices to avoid» applicable to comorbidity in AxSpA. Conclusions Two checklists and a list of situations to avoid were generated to facilitate the management of comorbidities in AxSpA. In a future step, their utility and acceptance will be tested by a broad group of users that includes doctors, patients and nurses.