Search

Background: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination is recommended for non-immunised patients with rheumatic diseases starting biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). There is some evidence that HBV vaccination is effective in patients under conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), but it is currently unclear whether this also applies to bDMARDs., Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of HBV vaccination in patients with inflammatory arthritides treated with bDMARDs., Methods: A prospective cohort with inflammatory arthritides treated with bDMARDs, negative for anti-HBs and anti-HBc and never vaccinated for HBV was recruited. Engerix B was administered at 0, 1 and 6 months and anti-HBs was reassessed ≥1 month after last dose. Response was defined as anti-HBs≥10 IU/L and compared against vaccinated healthy controls. Disease flare, serious adverse events and immune-related disorders not previously present were recorded., Results: 62 patients, most treated with TNF inhibitors (TNFi), and 38 controls were recruited. Most patients were taking csDMARDs (67.7%) and were in remission/low disease activity (59.4%). Only 20/62 patients (32.3%) had a positive response to vaccination, in comparison to 36/38 age-matched controls (94.7%, p<0.001). Response was seen in 19/51 patients treated with TNFi (37.3%) and in 1/11 (9.1%) patients treated with non-TNFi (p=0.07), including 1/6 treated with tocilizumab (16.7%). Among TNFi, response rates ranged from 4/22 (18.2%) for infliximab to 8/14 (57.1%) for etanercept. No relevant safety issues were identified., Conclusions: HBV vaccination response in patients with rheumatic diseases treated with bDMARDs was poorer than expected. Our data reinforce the recommendation for vaccination prior to starting bDMARDs., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) treatment is aimed at inducing remission to prevent joint destruction and disability. However, it is unclear what is the long-term impact on health-related outcomes of the timing of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) initiation in JIA. Our aim was to evaluate the long-term impact of the time between JIA onset and the initiation of a bDMARD in achieving clinical remission, on physical disability and health-related quality of life (HRQoL)., Methods: Adult JIA patients registered in the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register (Reuma.pt) and ever treated with bDMARD were included. Data regarding socio-demographic, JIA-related characteristics, disease activity, physical disability (HAQ-DI), HRQoL (SF-36), and treatments were collected at the last visit. Patients were divided into 3 groups (≤ 2 years, 2-5 years, or > 5 years), according to the time from disease onset to bDMARD initiation. Regression models were obtained considering remission on/off medication, HAQ-DI, SF-36, and joint surgeries as outcomes and time from disease onset to bDMARD start as an independent variable., Results: Three hundred sixty-one adult JIA patients were evaluated, with a median disease duration of 20.3 years (IQR 12.1; 30.2). 40.4% had active disease, 35.1% were in remission on medication, and 24.4% were in drug-free remission; 71% reported some degree of physical disability. Starting a bDMARD > 5 years after disease onset decreased the chance of achieving remission off medication (OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.06, 0.92; p = 0.038). Patients who started a bDMARD after 5 years of disease onset had a higher HAQ and worse scores in the physical component, vitality, and social function domains of SF-36, and more joint surgeries when compared to an earlier start., Conclusion: Later initiation of bDMARDs in JIA is associated with a greater physical disability, worse HRQoL, and lower chance of drug-free remission in adulthood., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Objectives: The primary endpoint of the pivotal phase III study of infliximab (IFX) s.c. demonstrated non-inferiority of s.c. to i.v. IFX, based on 28-joint DAS-CRP (DAS28-CRP) improvement at week (W) 22 (NCT03147248). This post-hoc analysis investigated whether numerical differences in efficacy outcomes at W30/54 were statistically significant, using conservative imputation methods., Methods: Patients with active RA and inadequate response to MTX received IFX i.v. 3 mg/kg at W0 and W2 (induction) and were randomized (1:1) to IFX s.c. 120 mg every 2 weeks or i.v. 3 mg/kg every 8 weeks thereafter (maintenance). Patients randomized to IFX i.v. switched to IFX s.c. from W30-54. This post-hoc analysis compared efficacy outcomes for s.c. and i.v. groups pre-switch (W30) and post-switch (W54) using last observation carried forward (LOCF) and non-responder imputation (NRI) methods., Results: Of 343 randomized patients, 165 (IFX s.c.) and 174 (IFX i.v.) were analysed. At W30, significantly improved outcomes were identified with s.c. vs i.v. IFX for DAS28-CRP/DAS28-ESR/Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)/Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) scores (LOCF); ACR/good EULAR responses, DAS28-CRP/Boolean remission, and DAS28-CRP/DAS28-ESR/CDAI/SDAI low disease activity and remission (LOCF and/or NRI); and minimal clinically important difference in HAQ score (LOCF and NRI). After switching to IFX s.c. from IFX i.v., fewer significant between-group differences were identified at W54., Conclusion: IFX s.c. showed improved efficacy at W30 compared with IFX i.v., and the reduced between-group difference in efficacy outcomes at W54 after switching supports the results suggesting benefits of IFX s.c. compared with IFX i.v. at W30., Trial Registration: ClincialTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03147248, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03147248., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Objectives: To provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field., Methods: An international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item., Results: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3-6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations., Conclusions: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Rheumatic diseases are associated with an increase in overall risks of tuberculosis (TB). The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency of TB and the frequency of latent TB infection (LTBI), in clinical practice, for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients from high and low risk of TB incidence endemic countries., Methods: This is an international, multicenter, cross-sectional, observational study of data collection from Brazil and Registry of Portugal at REUMA.PT. The inclusion criteria were patients with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) with age ≤ 18 years who underwent screening for Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection [tuberculin skin test (TST) and/or interferon gamma release assay (IGRA)]. Chest X-rays and history of exposure to TB were also assessed., Results: 292 JIA patients were included; mean age 14.3 years, mean disease duration 7.5 years, 194 patients (66.4%) performed only TST, 14 (4.8%) only IGRA and 84 (28.8%) both. The frequency of LTBI (10.6%) and TB was similar between the two countries. The reasons for TB screening were different; in Brazil it was performed more often at JIA onset while in Portugal it was performed when starting Disease Modified Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (DMARD) treatment (p < 0.001). Isoniazid therapy was prescribed in 40 (13.7%) patients (31 with LTBI and 9 with epidemiologic risks and/or due to contact with sick people). Only three patients (1%) developed active TB., Conclusion: We found nearly 10% of patients with LTBI, a small percentage of patients with treatment due to epidemiologic risks and only 1% with active TB. Distinct reasons and screening methods for LTBI were observed between the two countries., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: To update the recommendations for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs and tsDMARDs), endorsed by the Portuguese Society of Rheumatology (SPR)., Methods: These treatment recommendations were formulated by Portuguese rheumatologists taking into account previous recommendations, new literature evidence and consensus opinion. At a national meeting, in a virtual format, three of the ten previous recommendations were re-addressed and discussed after a more focused literature review. A first draft of the updated recommendations was elaborated by a team of SPR rheumatologists from the SPR rheumatoid arthritis study group, GEAR. The resulting document circulated among all SPR rheumatologists for discussion and input. The level of agreement with each of all the recommendations was anonymously voted online by all SPR rheumatologists., Results: These recommendations cover general aspects such as shared decision, treatment objectives, systematic assessment of disease activity and burden and its registry in Reuma.pt. Consensus was also achieved regarding specific aspects such as initiation of bDMARDs and tsDMARDs, assessment of treatment response, switching and definition of persistent remission., Conclusion: These recommendations may be used for guidance of treatment with bDMARDs and tsDMARDs in patients with RA. As more evidence becomes available and more therapies are licensed, these recommendations will be updated.

Background and Objective: The number of older patients with rheumatoid arthritis is increasing, but data on drug effectiveness and safety in these patients are scarce. This study assessed the effectiveness and safety of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in older patients with rheumatoid arthritis., Methods: This prospective cohort study was based on data recorded in the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register (Reuma.pt). Treatment persistence, European League Against Rheumatism response at 6 and 12 months, and adverse events were compared between adult (age < 65 years), old (age 65-74 years), and very old (age ≥ 75 years) patients., Results: In total, 2401 patients were included, of which 379 were old and 83 were very old. Older patients had higher disease activity at baseline (Disease Activity Score 28: 5.5 in adults, 5.7 in old patients, and 6 in very old patients; p = 0.02) and more comorbidities, with patients aged 65-74 years beginning biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs later in the course of rheumatoid arthritis. Treatment persistence was similar in the three patient groups (p = 0.07). The European League Against Rheumatism response rates were comparable in the three groups at 6 months (81.6% of adults, 75.2% of old patients, and 81.8% of very old patients; p = 0.19), and inferior in old patients at 12 months. The proportion of patients who experienced adverse events was also similar in the three groups (21% of adults, 22.5% of old patients, and 22.9% of very old patients; p = 0.76), but the rate of serious adverse events was higher in old patients (1.94/100 patient-years) and very old patients (4.29/100 patient-years) compared with 1.03/100 patient-years in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (p < 0.05)., Conclusions: Adults, old patients, and very old patients with rheumatoid arthritis benefit similarly from biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatments, although older patients have more active disease at baseline and more comorbidities. However, it is necessary to consider the risk of serious adverse events in older patients when prescribing a biologic.

Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases refractory to conventional disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs)have been treated with biologics for the last two decades. It is also known that patients under biotechnological therapy present a higher risk of developing Tuberculosis (TB).Portugal has now a TB incidence classified as low. National recommendations advise on latent TB screening before the beginning of the biological therapy. This screening consists in the detection of risk factors and/or signs and symptoms of latent TB through clinical history, physical examination, chest X-ray, tuberculin skin test and Interferon Gamma Release Assay (IGRA) test. We describe five clinical cases of patients who underwent biotechnological therapy at our Hospital after 2006 and developed TB.

Background: Remission/ low disease activity (LDA) are the main treatment goals in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Two tools showing the ability to predict golimumab treatment outcomes in patients with RA were published., Objectives: To estimate the real-world accuracy of two quantitative tools created to predict RA remission and low disease activity., Methods: Multicenter, observational study, using data from the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register (Reuma.pt), including biologic naïve RA patients who started an anti-TNF as first-line biologic and with at least 6 months of follow-up. The accuracy of two matrices tools was assessed by likelihood-ratios (LR), sensitivity (SN), specificity (SP), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and area under the ROC curve (AUC)., Results: 674 RA patients under first-line anti-TNF (266 etanercept, 186 infliximab, 131 adalimumab, 85 golimumab, 6 certolizumab pegol) were included. The median (IQR) age was 53.4 (44.7-61.1) years and the median disease duration was 7.7 (3.7-14.6) years. The majority were female (72%). Most patients were RF and/or ACPA positive (75.5%) and had erosive disease (54.9%); 58.6% had comorbidities. At 6-months, 157 (23.3%) patients achieved remission (DAS28 ESR < 2.6) and 269 (39.9%) LDA (DAS28 ESR ≤ 3.2). Area under the curve for remission in this real-world sample was 0.756 [IC 95% (0.713-0.799)] and for LDA was 0.724 [IC 95% (0.686 -0.763)]. The highest LR (8.23) for remission state was obtained at a cut-off ≥ 67%, with high specificity (SP) (99.6%) but low sensitivity (SN) (3.2%). A better balance of SN and SP (65.6% and 73.9%, respectively) was observed for a cut-off >30%, with a LR of 2.51, PPV of 43.3% and NPV of 87.6%., Conclusion: In this population, the accuracy of the prediction tool was good for remission and LDA. Our results corroborate the idea that these matrix tools could be helpful to select patients for anti-TNF therapy.

Objective: To assess longterm effectiveness of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) registered in the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register, exposed to at least 1 TNFi, prospectively followed between 2001 and 2017., Methods: Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed for first-, second-, and third-line TNFi. Responses included European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria, Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), minimal disease activity (MDA), and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) at 3 and 6 months. Baseline predictors of discontinuation and response were studied using Cox and multivariable multinomial/logistic regression models., Results: The 750 patients with PsA showed drug retention of 4.1 ± 3.4 years (followup 5.8 ± 3.8 yrs) for first TNFi. Switching to a second (189 patients) or third (50 patients) TNFi further decreased survival by 1.1 years. Female sex, higher baseline 28-joint count Disease Activity Score, and infliximab were predictors of first TNFi discontinuation. After 6 months of the first TNFi, 48.7% of patients achieved a good EULAR criteria response and 20.9% were in DAPSA remission. There were 11.4% in MDA, and 56.4% had a good ASDAS. Responses to the second TNFi were significantly inferior compared to responses to the first TNFi. Female sex and higher baseline Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index were negatively associated with good EULAR response at 3 months, and obesity decreased the chance of response at 6 months., Conclusion: In this study, switching to a second or third TNFi was associated with significantly lower drug survival and response rates for patients with axial and peripheral PsA subtypes. More successful therapeutic approaches will require considering the effect of sex and obesity on TNFi effectiveness.

Objectives: To assess the efficacy of golimumab in combination with methotrexate (MTX) versus MTX monotherapy in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) dactylitis., Methods: Multicentre, investigator-initiated, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-design phase 3b trial in 11 Portuguese rheumatology centres. Patients with PsA along with active dactylitis and naive to MTX and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were randomly assigned to golimumab or placebo, both in combination with MTX. The primary endpoint was Dactylitis Severity Score (DSS) change from baseline to week 24. Key secondary endpoints included DSS and Leeds Dactylitis Index (LDI) response, and changes from baseline in the LDI and MRI dactylitis score. Analysis was by intention-to-treat for the primary endpoint., Results: Twenty-one patients received golimumab plus MTX and 23 MTX monotherapy for 24 weeks. One patient from each arm discontinued. Patient inclusion was halted at 50% planned recruitment due to a favourable interim analysis. Median baseline DSS was 6 in both arms. By week 24, patients treated with golimumab plus MTX exhibited significantly greater improvements in DSS relative to MTX monotherapy (median change of 5 vs 2 points, respectively; p=0.026). In the golimumab plus MTX arm, significantly higher proportions of patients achieved at least 50% or 70% improvement in DSS and 20%, 50% or 70% improvement in LDI in comparison to MTX monotherapy., Conclusions: The combination of golimumab and MTX as first-line bDMARD therapy is superior to MTX monotherapy for the treatment of PsA dactylitis., Trial Registration Number: NCT02065713., Competing Interests: Competing interests: EVS, FPS, JLG, LT, PAR and HC received grants from MSD. JEF received grants or personal fees from MSD, Abbvie, Biogen, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB and Sanofi. IBM received grants or personal fees from Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Boerhinger Ingelheim, BMS, Abbvie, Lilly, GSK, Pfizer and UCB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Biotechnologicals are an invaluable resource in the treatment of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) non-responsive or intolerant to conventional therapies. However, they are the main driver for increase in direct costs and represent a significant economic burden to healthcare systems worldwide. Since biosimilars are similar and more affordable versions of previously licenced biotechnologicals, they are expected to contribute to healthcare system sustainability and reduce inequities in treatment access. The landmark approval of CT-P13 as the first infliximab biosimilar paved the way for new infliximab but also etanercept, adalimumab and rituximab biosimilars. In Europe, North America and some countries of Asia, development is strictly regulated and only those presenting a totality-of-evidence dossier with highly similar physicochemical, biological and clinical performances are endorsed by regulatory agencies as biosimilars. The current article addresses the importance of biosimilar medicines in the treatment of IRD, as well as their innovative development and regulatory pathways, clinical evidence of similarity and challenges that may undermine their widespread use and success., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Biosimilar drugs are intended to be as effective as the originator product but with a lower cost to healthcare systems. In our center we promoted a switch from originator infliximab (IFXor) to biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13). We analyzed efficacy, safety, immunogenicity and cost savings of switching. Eligible patients were adults with the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondyloarthritis (SpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) on therapy with IFXor for at least 6 months and with stable disease activity. Efficacy was measured considering change from baseline in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) for RA and PsA and in Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) for SpA. Disease worsening was considered when an increase of 1.2 from baseline in DAS28 or an increase of 1.1 in ASDAS occurred. Serum IFX levels (sIFX) were dichotomized as therapeutic (between 3-6 µg/mL), low (< 3 µg/mL), and high (> 6 µg/mL). Anti-drug antibody (ADA) levels were dichotomized into detectable (> 10 ng/ml) or non-detectable (< 10 ng/ml). A cost analysis was done based on the purchasing prices of the 2 drugs at our center. During a period of 1 year switch to CT-P13 was performed in 60 patients for non-medical reasons. We had a total of 36 patients with SpA, 16 with RA and 8 with PsA. Disease activity was stable over the observation period and similar to the values observed with IFXor. Median follow-up time was 15 months during which 5 patients stopped CT-P13. Forty two switchers had blood samples collected before and after switch. A total of 27 patients had unaltered sIFX levels and ADA status during follow up. Three patients had detectable ADA at baseline, with low sIFX levels. After switch, ADAs became negative in 2 of those patients, and the other patient kept detectable ADA levels. ADAs became positive in 5 patients after switch. The switch to CT-P13 represented a 26.4 % reduction of costs in the use of IFX therapy in these patients. The switch in routine care of a group of RA, SpA and PsA patients from IFXor to CT-P13 did not affect efficacy, safety, immunogenicity and reduced costs in 26.4%. The observed changes in blood samples were not associated with higher disease activity and did not lead to stopping IFX therapy.

Objectives: To assess the discontinuation of first-line biological treatment and to evaluate the reasons and predictors thereof in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from daily clinical practice., Methods: RA patients registered in the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register (Reuma.pt) starting treatment with biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) were included in this prospective observational study. The main outcome was the time to discontinuation (in years) due to any cause. Discontinuation was defined as a 90-day discontinuation of treatment or the occurrence of any switch to another bDMARD during follow-up. Baseline and time-varying sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were tested as possible predictors of discontinuation using multivariable Cox models., Results: Of the 1,851 RA patients included in the study, 871 (47%) discontinued their first bDMARD. The median overall persistence of the first bDMARD was 5.5 years and the leading cause of discontinuation was inefficacy [N=476 (55%)], followed by adverse events [N=262 (30%)], other causes [N=69, (8%)] and unknown causes [N=64 (7%)]. Patients with a higher HAQ score (more disability) at baseline were more likely to discontinue their first bDMARD [hazard ratio (HR):1.39 (95% CI: 1.17-1.64)], as were patients with a higher number of comorbidities [HR: 1.17 (1.05-1.29)] and patients starting treatment from 2007 onwards [HR:1.89 (1.5-2.38)]. On the contrary, receiving TNFi bDMARD [HR:0.74 (0.57-0.94)] as opposed to non-TNFi was associated with less discontinuation. Expectedly, the higher the DAS28 during follow-up the higher the likelihood to discontinue bDMARD [HR:1.08 (1.06-1.1)]. No other time-varying predictor was found., Conclusion: In the Portuguese RA population, maintenance of first-line bDMARD was shown to be relatively high. Inefficacy was the leading cause of discontinuation. Features found to predict drug discontinuation (e.g. baseline disability) may contribute to inform clinician's decisions in clinical practice.

Objectives: To compare consecutive disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-treatment regimes in daily practice in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who failed on initial methotrexate, while using a multiple propensity score (PS) method to control for the spurious effects of confounding by indication., Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed RA who had failed initial treatment with methotrexate were selected from METEOR, an international, observational registry. Subsequent DMARD-treatment regimens were categorised as: (1) conventional synthetic DMARD(s) (csDMARD(s)) only (143 patients), (2) csDMARD(s)+glucocorticoid (278 patients) and (3) biological DMARD (bDMARD)±csDMARD(s) (89 patients). Multiple PS that reflect the likelihood of treatment with each treatment-regime were estimated per patient using multinomial regression. Linear mixed model analyses were performed to analyse treatment responses per category (Disease Activity Score (DAS)) after a maximum follow-up duration of 6 and 12 months, and results were presented with adjustment for the multiple PS., Results: After 6 months, follow-up PS-adjusted treatment responses yielded a change in DAS per year (95%  CI) of -2.00 (-2.65 to -1.36) if patients received a bDMARD; of -0.96 (-1.33 to -0.59) if patients received csDMARD(s)+glucocorticoids and of -0.73 (-1.21 to -0.25) if patients received csDMARDs only. These changes were -0.91 (-1.23 to -0.60); -0.43 (-0.62 to -0.23) and -0.39 (-0.66 to -0.13), respectively after 1  year of follow-up., Conclusions: In this analysis of worldwide common practice data with adjustment for multiple PS, patients with RA who had failed initial treatment with methotrexate monotherapy had a better DAS-response after a subsequent switch to a bDMARD-containing treatment regimen than to a regimen with csDMARD(s) only, with or without glucocorticoids., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SAB, L-LW, AC, KS-E, CFA, RBML: none declared. EM: received support from AbbVie and UCB to attend meetings and has received support from Roche to audit work on behalf of the Scottish Society for Rheumatology. JEF: received unrestricted research grants or acted as a speaker for Abbvie, Ache, Amgen, BIAL, Biogen, BMS, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: In RA, the relationship between autoantibody status and treatment response to MTX remains unclear. We investigated the association between autoantibody status and early remission in newly diagnosed RA patients treated with MTX using real-world data., Methods: RA-patients initially treated with MTX were selected from an international observational database (METEOR). Patients were stratified into autoantibody-positive (RF- and/or ACPA-positive) or autoantibody negative (RF- and ACPA-negative). The effect of autoantibody status on the chance of achieving remission within 3 to 6 months was analysed using Cox-proportional hazards regression., Results: Data from 1826 RA patients were available for analysis. DAS remission was achieved in 17% (318/1826). This was similar in autoantibody-positive [17% (282/1629)] and -negative patients [18% (36/197)]. Hence, autoantibody positivity was not associated with remission [hazard ratio (HR) 0.89, 95% CI 0.57, 1.38]. Similar findings were found when stratified for MTX monotherapy (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.41, 1.37) or combination treatment (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.37, 1.54). Good physical function (HAQ < 0.5) was achieved in 33% (530/1590) of all patients. Autoantibody-positivity was also not associated with HAQ < 0.5 (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.71, 1.57)., Conclusion: Autoantibody status is not associated with early remission in newly diagnosed RA-patients receiving MTX. This indicates that MTX is effective as an initial treatment strategy regardless of autoantibody status.

Individualising biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) to maximise outcomes and deliver safe and cost-effective care is a key goal in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Investigation to identify predictive tools of bDMARD response is a highly active and prolific area of research. In addition to clinical phenotyping, cellular and molecular characterisation of synovial tissue and blood in patients with RA, using different technologies, can facilitate predictive testing. This narrative review will summarise the literature for the available bDMARD classes and focus on where progress has been made. We will also look ahead and consider the increasing use of 'omics' technologies, the potential they hold as well as the challenges, and what is needed in the future to fully realise our ambition of personalised bDMARD treatment.

Background: Methotrexate (MTX) is the first-line drug in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and the most commonly prescribed disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug. Moreover, it is also used as an adjuvant drug in patients under biologic therapies, enhancing the efficacy of biologic agents., Objectives: To review the literature and update the Portuguese recommendations for the use of MTX in rheumatic diseases first published in 2009., Methods: The first Portuguese guidelines for the use of MTX in rheumatic diseases were published in 2009 and were integrated in the multinational 3E Initiative (Evidence Expertise Exchange) project. The Portuguese rheumatologists based on literature evidence and consensus opinion formulated 13 recommendations. At a national meeting, the recommendations included in this document were further discussed and updated. The document resulting from this meeting circulated to all Portuguese rheumatologists, who anonymously voted online on the level of agreement with the updated recommendations., Results: Results presented in this article are mainly in accordance with previous guidelines, with some new information regarding hepatitis B infection during MTX treatment, pulmonary toxicity monitoring, hepatotoxicity management, association with hematologic neoplasms, combination therapy and tuberculosis screening during treatment., Conclusion: The present recommendations combine scientific evidence with expert opinion and attained desirable agreement among Portuguese rheumatologists. The regular update of these recommendations is essential in order to keep them a valid and useful tool in daily practice.

Despite representing a breakthrough in the treatment of immune-mediated rheumatic diseases, the direct costs of biotechnological therapies represent a burden to healthcare budgets worldwide. Furthermore, several studies demonstrated that socioeconomically constrained countries have poorer access to these therapies and this has consequences on the optimal management of rheumatic patients. Experience with small peptide biosimilars like filgrastim and epoetin confirmed significant cost savings but revealed variable market uptake. In this report, we summarize the available budget impact models and discuss possible determinants of the pharmacoeconomic performance of antirheumatic biosimilar drugs.

The bone and the immune system have a very tight interaction. Systemic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), induce bone loss, leading to a twofold increase in osteoporosis and an increase of fragility fracture risk of 1.35-2.13 times. This review focuses on the effects of conventional and biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on bone biology, in the context of systemic inflammation, with a focus on RA. Published evidence supports a decrease in osteoclastic activity induced by DMARDs, which leads to positive effects on bone mineral density (BMD). It is unknown if this effect could be translated into fracture risk reduction. The combination with antiosteoclastic drugs can have an additional benefit.

Biological drugs and their originated biosimilars are large, highly complex molecules derived from living cells or organisms. Traditional medicines, by contrast, are usually simple molecules of low molecular weight, synthesised by chemical means. The distinct complexities and methods of manufacture create an important difference between biosimilars and conventional generic drugs: while chemical generics can be fully characterised as identical to the originator product, biosimilars cannot. In addition, biological therapies are inherently variable, creating unavoidable differences between even subsequent batches of the same product. An expiring patent does not necessarily mean that the manufacturing process of the originator product becomes available to the biosimilar developers (for instance, the relevant cell line clone and growth medium). Therefore, it cannot be guaranteed that biosimilar products are identical to their reference product on a molecular level. This difference has important implications for the regulation and licensing of biosimilars. While conventional generic drugs require only a limited comparison and demonstration of identical chemical structure to the reference product, biosimilars require far more rigorous testing. In general, there must be a thorough comparison of structural and functional characteristics between biosimilar and originator drug. Stepwise nonclinical in vitro and in vivo approaches are recommended to evaluate the similarity of both drugs and any identified micro-heterogeneities must then be assessed for their impact on safety and clinical performance. Subsequently, clinical pharmacokinetic (PK) studies need to be performed in order to demonstrate a similar PK profile, prior to conducting clinical efficacy trials.

Biological medicinal products, albeit fundamental in unresponsive inflammatory rheumatic diseases, represent a significant economic burden to healthcare systems worldwide. A new landmark in the treatment of these conditions was achieved with the European Medicines Agency's endorsement of CT-P13, the first biosimilar of a monoclonal antibody, infliximab. The main driving force behind biosimilar development is to improve accessibility at lower costs, provided the quality, efficacy and safety of the biosimilar is similar to that of the reference drug. Many other biosimilar candidates are currently under development and will probably be approved in the near future, posing complex prescribing decisions for rheumatologists. In this article, biosimilar disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are put into perspective: what they are, the stepwise manufacturing process and the available mechanisms that regulate the thorough comparability exercise. Non-clinical and clinical data leading to CT-P13 approval are briefly reviewed, and current clinical data on upcoming biosimilars are also addressed. Other matters covered include extrapolation of clinical indications, interchangeability and automatic substitution. As cumulative evidence on the use of biosimilars grows, controversies abate and patients and physicians become reassured. However, adequate answers to the uncertainties still surrounding biosimilar agents are necessary to ensure the trust of rheumatologists and, on a larger scale, to guarantee their widespread use and success.

Methotrexate (MTX) is the anchor disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. It is used in monotherapy and/or in combination with other synthetic or biological DMARDs, and is known to have the best cost-effectiveness and efficacy/toxicity ratios. However, toxicity is still a concern, with a significant proportion of patients interrupting long-term treatment due to the occurrence of MTX-related adverse drug reactions (ADRs), which are the main cause of drug withdrawal. Despite the extensive accumulated experience in the last three decades, it is still impossible in routine clinical practice to identify patients prone to develop MTX toxicity. While clinical and biological variables, including folate supplementation, partially help to minimize MTX-related ADRs, the advent of pharmacogenomics could provide further insight into risk stratification and help to optimize drug monitoring and long-term retention. In this paper, we aimed to review and summarize current data on low-dose MTX-associated toxicity, its prevention and predictors, keeping in mind practical RA clinical care.

Background: The access to healthcare and treatment by rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, particularly to biologics, differs significantly among European countries.We aimed to explore the views and experiences of Portuguese healthcare stakeholders on key barriers which limit the access to treatment, and ultimately to biologics, by RA patients and to find potential solutions (leverage points) to overcome the identified barriers., Methods: This was a qualitative research consisting of semi-structured face-to-face interviews with key stakeholders in RA framework. Thirty four individuals from eight groups of stakeholders were interviewed: rural and urban general practitioners (GPs), rheumatologists, hospital managers, hospital pharmacists, budget holders, representatives from the Portuguese Rheumatology Society and the RA Patient Association. Interviews were conducted between May and June 2011. Conventional content analysis with research triangulation was used., Results: The key barriers identified were related to the accessibility to primary healthcare services, difficulties in RA diagnosis among GPs, inefficient referral to secondary healthcare and controlled process of biologics prescription in public hospitals. The leverage points identified included the improvement of epidemiological and clinical knowledge about RA in Portugal, a better understanding of the disease among patients and GPs, the clarification of biologics benefits among budget holders and a raised awareness of the current treatment guidelines. In order to further address the leverage points, the following key initiatives were proposed: optimization of RA national registry; dissemination of information on rheumatic symptoms in primary care facilities and among the general public; increase interaction between rheumatologists and GPs through clinical discussions of successfully treated patients or workshops; broader utilization of disease diagnosis and monitoring tools, such as DAS28, and implementation of hospital-based research to collect real-world data., Conclusions: Most of the key barriers limiting the access to treatment, including biologics, in RA in Portugal are upstream of rheumatology practice. Our findings suggest that future actions should be focused on the primary care level to improve referral to rheumatologists. In addition, the collection of real-world data seems essential to characterise the RA population, to improve disease management and to increase compliance with current treatment guidelines.

Methotrexate (MTX) is the central drug in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other immune mediated inflammatory diseases. It is widely used either in monotherapy or in association with other synthetic and biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Although comprehensive clinical experience exists for MTX and synthetic DMARDs, to date it has not been possible to preview correctly whether or not a patient will respond to treatment with these drugs. Predicting response to MTX and other DMARDs would allow the selection of patients based on their likelihood of response, thus enabling individualized therapy and avoiding unnecessary adverse effects and elevated costs. However, studies analyzing this issue have struggled to obtain consistent, replicable results and no factor has yet been recognized to individually distinguish responders from nonresponders at treatment start. Variables possibly influencing drug effectiveness may be disease-, patient- or treatment-related, clinical or biological (genetic and nongenetic). In this review we summarize current evidence on predictors of response to MTX and other synthetic DMARDs, discuss possible causes for the heterogeneity observed and address its translation into daily clinical practice.

Objectives: Adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab are effective TNF inhibitors (TNFis) in the treatment of RA, but no randomized clinical trials have compared the three agents. Prior observational data are not consistent. We compared their effectiveness over 1 year in a prospective cohort., Methods: Analyses were performed on subjects' first episode of TNFi use in the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register, Reuma.pt. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with European League Against Rheumatism good response sustained at two consecutive observations separated by 3 months during the first year of TNFi use. Comparisons were performed using conventional adjusted logistic regression, as well as matching subjects across the three agents using a propensity score. In addition, baseline predictors of treatment response to TNFi were identified., Results: The study cohort included 617 RA patients, 250 starting etanercept, 206 infliximab and 161 adalimumab. Good response was achieved by 59.6% for adalimumab, 59.2% for etanercept and 51.9% for infliximab (P = 0.21). The modelled probability of good response did not significantly differ across agents (etanercept vs adalimumab OR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.55, 1.71; etanercept vs infliximab OR = 1.25, 95% CI 0.74, 2.12; infliximab vs adalimumab OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.47, 1.36). Matched propensity score analyses also showed no significant treatment response differences. Greater educational attainment was a predictor of better response, while smoking, presence of ACPA, glucocorticoid use and worse physician assessment of disease activity at baseline each predicted a reduced likelihood of treatment response., Conclusion: Over 1 year, we found no difference in effectiveness between adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab.

Primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) is an autoimmune disease in which intrahepatic bile ducts are targeted by an immune-mediated injury. This disease tends to progress to fibrosis and cirrhosis with hepatic failure. The authors report a case of a 50-year-old rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patient, with erosions and seropositive for rheumatoid factor and anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies, with 18 years disease duration refractory to prednisolone and several disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, either conventional or biological (adalimumab and etanercept). In April 2007, she started therapy with rituximab (RTX) with good European League Against Rheumatism response achieved 9 months later. In June 2008, she was admitted with intrahepatic cholestasis, steatorrhea, and spontaneous fractures of various ribs. After excluding cholelitiasis, as well as infectious and neoplastic diseases a liver biopsy was performed that was compatible with the diagnosis of PBC. The antinuclear antibodies (1/160) were positive as well as the antimitochondrial antibodies (1/640). Other antibodies were negative such as anti-SSA and anti-SSB. Afterwards, the patient started ursodesoxycholic acid 15 mg kg(-1) day(-1) with progressive improvement of cholestatic markers. A labial salivary gland biopsy was performed and showed findings compatible with the concomitant diagnosis of Sjögren's syndrome. Based on this clinical report, a detailed review of the clinical aspects of PBC is presented as well as its association with other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, particularly, with RA.

Aim: To measure the level of agreement and application of 10 international recommendations for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to a target of remission/low disease activity., Methods: A 10-point Likert scale (1=fully disagree, 10=fully agree) measured the level of agreement with each of 10 recommendations. A 4-point Likert scale (never, not very often, very often, always) assessed the degree to which each recommendation was being applied in current daily practice. If respondents answered 'never' or 'not very often', they were asked whether they would change their practice according to the particular recommendation., Results: A total of 1901 physicians representing 34 countries participated. Both agreement with and application of recommendations was high. With regard to application of recommendations in daily practice, the majority of responses were 'always' and 'very often'. A significant percentage of participants who were currently not applying these recommendations in clinical practice were willing to change their practice according to the recommendations., Conclusion: The results of this survey demonstrated great support of 'Treating RA to Target' recommendations among the international rheumatology community. Additional efforts may be needed to encourage application of the recommendations among certain clinicians who are resistant to changing their practice.

Despite the enthusiastic progresses in the field of rheumatoid arthritis pharmacotherapy the presence of prognostic factors associated with an unfavorable outcome and the inappropriate and/or delayed initiation of DMARDs can diminish the likelihood of achieving remission and increase the probability of refractoriness to treatment. During the last decade we have experience exciting developments regarding the approval of new treatment options but few patients are reaching sustained remission and refractory patients continue to be a problem. Thus, it is critical to understand how clinicians can decrease the risk of refractoriness by close monitoring disease activity, using well defined and accepted composite measures, and by early and optimized use of DMARDs, including biologics. The goal of this review paper is to offer an evidence based roadmap to prevent and to deal with refractory RA., (Crown Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To develop Portuguese evidence-based recommendations for the use of methotrexate (MTX) in daily clinical practice in rheumatic disorders., Methods: The Portuguese project was integrated in the multinational 3E Initiative (Evidence, Expertise, Exchange) 2007-2008 where a total of 751 rheumatologists from 17 countries have participated. Ten clinical questions concerning the use of MTX in rheumatic diseases were formulated and the Portuguese group added three more questions. A systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and 2005-2007 ACR/EULAR meeting abstracts was conducted. Selected articles were systematically reviewed and the evidence was appraised according to the Oxford Levels of Evidence. In Portugal, a national meeting was held in Obidos on February 15th and 16th, 2008, involving 50 rheumatologists who discussed and voted by Dephi method the recommendations. Finally, the agreement among the rheumatologists and the potential impact on their clinical practice was assessed., Results: Thirteen national key recommendations on the use of MTX were formulated: work-up before starting MTX, optimal dosage and route of administration, use of folic acid, monitoring, management of hepatotoxicity, long-term safety, mono versus combination therapy, management in the peri-operative period, during infections, before/during pregnancy and after clinical remission, screening and treatment of tuberculosis and the role of MTX as a steroid-sparing agent in rheumatic diseases., Discussion: The Portuguese recommendations for the use of MTX in daily clinical practice were developed, which are evidence-based and supported by a panel of 50 rheumatologists, enhancing their validity and practical use. This project was integrated in a multinational initiative that led to the recent publication of ten multinational recommendations which differ from ours in some specific aspects.

Aim: To verify if the response to TNFalpha inhibitors is influenced by the presence of IgM rheumatoid factor (RF), in patients with RA., Material and Methods: In this study, the patients with the diagnosis of RA treated with TNFa inhibitors followed in our hospital were recruited. A protocol was applied including demographic, clinical and laboratory data, in order to calculate DAS 28. The presence/absence of IgM RF and associated therapies were record., Results: Fifty-seven patients, 52 female, with a mean duration of anti-TNFa treatment of 30,9+/-15,9 months were studied. Twenty-four patients were being treated with infliximab, 17 with adalimumab and 16 with etanercept. Forty-one patients had IgM RF detectable in serum (RF positive group). In the RF positive group, the variation of DAS 28 was -1,75 +/- 1,53 vs -1,04 +/- 1,76 in the RF negative group (p=0,135). The mean duration of anti-TNFalpha treatment was similar in both groups (31,9+/-15,9 vs 29,5+/-16,16 months). Patients who were treated with methotrexate presented a higher variation of DAS 28 (-1,87 +/- 1,70 vs -0,80 +/- 1,09; p=0,041) and this variation was dose dependent (p=0,056)., Conclusions: Despite needing a replication in a larger cohort, our results suggest that the presence of IgM RF in the serum did not interfere with the response to treatment with TNFalpha inhibitors.

The development of new and more efficacious therapeutic agents, though expensive and potentially toxic, helped to implement objective measures to quantify the improvement and to monitor the evolution of inflammatory rheumatic diseases. The aim of our protocol (PMAIJ) is to supply rheumatologists and paediatricians with a useful tool for follow-up of juvenile arthritis patients using validated instruments for the evaluation of activity, functional capacity and response to treatment. PMAIJ has 2 pages. The first page is filled only at the initial evaluation; the second page is filled at first and in all the appointments after that. The application of this protocol would contribute to the standardization of procedures in different Paediatric Rheumatology Centres and would help to obtain useful information on the clinical evolution of JIA patients followed in Portugal.

The authors present a study focusing on T follicular regulatory cells (Tfr) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Topics discussed include the phenotype and human circulating Tfr cells (2); the treatment of the patients with methotrexate; and the anti–citrullinated protein antibody levels in the body.