Search

In this article, the 2010 European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (sDMARDs and bDMARDs, respectively) have been updated. The 2013 update has been developed by an international task force, which based its decisions mostly on evidence from three systematic literature reviews (one each on sDMARDs, including glucocorticoids, bDMARDs and safety aspects of DMARD therapy); treatment strategies were also covered by the searches. The evidence presented was discussed and summarised by the experts in the course of a consensus finding and voting process. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations were derived and levels of agreement (strengths of recommendations) were determined. Fourteen recommendations were developed (instead of 15 in 2010). Some of the 2010 recommendations were deleted, and others were amended or split. The recommendations cover general aspects, such as attainment of remission or low disease activity using a treat-to-target approach, and the need for shared decision-making between rheumatologists and patients. The more specific items relate to starting DMARD therapy using a conventional sDMARD (csDMARD) strategy in combination with glucocorticoids, followed by the addition of a bDMARD or another csDMARD strategy (after stratification by presence or absence of adverse risk factors) if the treatment target is not reached within 6months (or improvement not seen at 3months). Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, biosimilars), abatacept, tocilizumab and, under certain circumstances, rituximab are essentially considered to have similar efficacy and safety. If the first bDMARD strategy fails, any other bDMARD may be used. The recommendations also address tofacitinib as a targeted sDMARD (tsDMARD), which is recommended, where licensed, after use of at least one bDM

OBJECTIVE: To assess the predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-detected subclinical inflammation for subsequent radiographic progression in a longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical remission or low disease activity (LDA), and to determine cutoffs for an MRI inflammatory activity acceptable state in RA in which radiographic progression rarely occurs.METHODS: Patients with RA in clinical remission [28-joint Disease Activity Score-C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) < 2.6, n = 185] or LDA state (2.6 ≤ DAS28-CRP < 3.2, n = 69) with longitudinal MRI and radiographic data were included from 5 cohorts (4 international centers). MRI were assessed according to the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) RA MRI scoring system (RAMRIS). Statistical analyses included an underlying conditional logistic regression model stratified per cohort, with radiographic progression as dependent variable.RESULTS: A total of 254 patients were included in the multivariate analyses. At baseline, synovitis was observed in 95% and osteitis in 49% of patients. Radiographic progression was observed in 60 patients (24%). RAMRIS synovitis was the only independent predictive factor in multivariate analysis. ROC analysis identified a cutoff value for baseline RAMRIS synovitis score of 5 (maximum possible score 21). Rheumatoid factor (RF) status yielded a significant interaction with synovitis (p value = 0.044). RF-positive patients with a RAMRIS synovitis score of > 5 vs ≤ 5, had an OR of 4.4 (95% CI 1.72-11.4) for radiographic progression.CONCLUSION: High MRI synovitis score predicts radiographic progression in patients in clinical remission/LDA. A cutoff point for determining an MRI inflammatory activity acceptable state based on the RAMRIS synovitis score was established. Incorporating MRI in future remission criteria should be considered.

BACKGROUND: Since approval of tocilizumab (TCZ) for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), interleukin 6 (IL-6) pathway inhibition was evaluated in trials of TCZ and other agents targeting the IL-6 receptor and ligand in various RA populations and other inflammatory diseases. This consensus document informs on interference with the IL-6 pathway based on evidence and expert opinion. METHODS: Preparation of this document involved international experts in RA treatment and RA patients. A systematic literature search was performed that focused on TCZ and other IL6-pathway inhibitors in RA and other diseases. Subsequently, incorporating available published evidence and expert opinion, the steering committee and a broader expert committee (both including RA patients) formulated the current consensus statement. RESULTS: The consensus statement covers use of TCZ as combination- or monotherapy in various RA populations and includes clinical, functional and structural aspects. The statement also addresses the second approved indication in Europe JIA and non-approved indications. Also early phase trials involving additional agents that target the IL-6 receptor or IL-6 were evaluated. Safety concerns, including haematological, hepatic and metabolic issues as well as infections, are addressed likewise. CONCLUSIONS: The consensus statement identifies points to consider when using TCZ, regarding indications, contraindications, screening, dose, comedication, response evaluation and safety. The document is aimed at supporting clinicians and informing patients, administrators and payers on opportunities and limitations of IL-6 pathway inhibition.

Objective: Apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotypes are associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and lipid levels. In rheumatoid arthritis (RA), an association has been found with disease activity. We examined the associations between APOE genotypes and disease susceptibility and markers of disease severity in RA, including radiographic joint damage, inflammatory markers, lipid levels and cardiovascular markers. Method: A Norwegian cohort of 945 RA patients and 988 controls were genotyped for two APOE polymorphisms. We examined longitudinal associations between APOE genotypes and C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) as well as hand radiographs (van der Heijde Sharp Score(SHS)) in 207 patients with 10 year longitudinal data. Lipid levels, cardiovascular markers and history of CVD were compared across genotypes in a cross sectional study of 136 patients. Longitudinal radiological data of cohorts from Lund and Leiden were available for replication. (N = 935, with 4799 radiographs). Results: In the Norwegian cohort, associations between APOE genotypes and total cholesterol (TC) and low-density lipoproteins (LDL) were observed (epsilon 2

The Study Group for Risk Factors for Rheumatoid Arthritis was established by the EULAR Standing Committee on Investigative Rheumatology to facilitate research into the preclinical and earliest clinically apparent phases of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This report describes the recommendation for terminology to be used to define specific subgroups during different phases of disease, and defines the priorities for research in this area. Terminology was discussed by way of a three-stage structured process: A provisional list of descriptors for each of the possible phases preceding the diagnosis of RA were circulated to members of the study group for review and feedback. Anonymised comments from the members on this list were fed back to participants before a 2-day meeting. 18 participants met to discuss these data, agree terminologies and prioritise important research questions. The study group recommended that, in prospective studies, individuals without RA are described as having: genetic risk factors for RA; environmental risk factors for RA; systemic autoimmunity associated with RA; symptoms without clinical arthritis; unclassified arthritis; which may be used in a combinatorial manner. It was recommended that the prefix 'pre-RA with:' could be used before any/any combination of the five points above but only to describe retrospectively a phase that an individual had progressed through once it was known that they have developed RA. An approach to dating disease onset was recommended. In addition, important areas for research were proposed, including research of other tissues in which an adaptive immune response may be initiated, and the identification of additional risk factors and biomarkers for the development of RA, its progression and the development of extra-articular features. These recommendations provide guidance on approaches to describe phases before the development of RA that will facilitate communication between researchers and comparisons between studies.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and safety of rituximab alone or in combination with either methotrexate or leflunomide.METHODS: 10 European registries submitted anonymised datasets with baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12-month clinical data from patients who started rituximab.RESULTS: 1195 patients were treated with rituximab plus methotrexate, 177 with rituximab plus leflunomide and 505 with rituximab alone. Significantly more patients achieved a European League Against Rheumatism good response at 6 months when treated with rituximab plus leflunomide (29.1%) compared with rituximab plus methotrexate (21.1%) and rituximab alone (19.3%; p=0.02 and p=0.01, respectively). Similar results were observed at 12 months. Adverse events occurred in 10.2%, 13.2% and 13.9% of patients on rituximab plus leflunomide, rituximab plus methotrexate and rituximab alone, respectively.CONCLUSIONS: Leflunomide is an effective and safe alternative to methotrexate as concomitant treatment with rituximab. Slightly better results were obtained by the combination of rituximab and leflunomide than rituximab and methotrexate, raising the possibility of a synergistic effect of leflunomide and rituximab.

The Study Group for Risk Factors for Rheumatoid Arthritis was established by the EULAR Standing Committee on Investigative Rheumatology to facilitate research into the preclinical and earliest clinically apparent phases of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This report describes the recommendation for terminology to be used to define specific subgroups during different phases of disease, and defines the priorities for research in this area. Terminology was discussed by way of a three-stage structured process: A provisional list of descriptors for each of the possible phases preceding the diagnosis of RA were circulated to members of the study group for review and feedback. Anonymised comments from the members on this list were fed back to participants before a 2-day meeting. 18 participants met to discuss these data, agree terminologies and prioritise important research questions. The study group recommended that, in prospective studies, individuals without RA are described as having: genetic risk factors for RA; environmental risk factors for RA; systemic autoimmunity associated with RA; symptoms without clinical arthritis; unclassified arthritis; which may be used in a combinatorial manner. It was recommended that the prefix 'pre-RA with:' could be used before any/any combination of the five points above but only to describe retrospectively a phase that an individual had progressed through once it was known that they have developed RA. An approach to dating disease onset was recommended. In addition, important areas for research were proposed, including research of other tissues in which an adaptive immune response may be initiated, and the identification of additional risk factors and biomarkers for the development of RA, its progression and the development of extra-articular features. These recommendations provide guidance on approaches to describe phases before the development of RA that will facilitate communication between researchers and comparisons between studies.

To determine whether MRI and conventional (clinical and laboratory) measures of inflammation can predict 3-year radiographic changes measured by the van der Heijde Sharp score in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Since initial approval for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), rituximab has been evaluated in clinical trials involving various populations with RA. Information has also been gathered from registries. This report therefore updates the 2007 consensus document on the use of rituximab in the treatment of RA.

In rheumatoid arthritis (RA), radiographic progression may occur despite clinical remission. This may be explained by subclinical inflammation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides a greater sensitivity than clinical examination and radiography for assessing disease activity. Our objective was to determine the MRI characteristics of RA patients in clinical remission or low disease activity (LDA) state.

To assess the 6-month effectiveness of the first rituximab (RTX) course in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to identify possible predictors of response.

Objectives To examine the associations between modern imaging modalities and joint damage measured as 1-year MRI erosive progression, in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Methods 84 RA patients with disease duration of less than 1 year were included in this inception cohort. Patients were evaluated at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months by core measures of disease activity, MRI and ultrasound grey-scale (USGS) of inflammation, conventional radiography and digital x-ray radiogrammetry (DXR) bone mineral density (BMD) of cortical hand bone. Results 53 of the 79 patients (67%) who completed the follow-up had MRI erosive progression (dependent variable). USGS and MRI bone marrow oedema (BME) were in multivariate analyses independent predictors of 1-year MRI erosive progression. There was a trend towards higher MRI synovitis score and 3-month DXR BMD loss in patients developing MRI erosions. On an individual level, USGS inflammation, MRI synovitis and MRI BME also somewhat better predicted outcome than rheumatoid factor, anticitrullinated protein antibodies and disease activity score 28. Conclusions USGS inflammation and MRI BME were independent predictors of MRI erosive progression in early RA patients on a group level. The exact prognosis of the individual patients could not be determined by imaging alone., To examine the associations between modern imaging modalities and joint damage measured as 1-year MRI erosive progression, in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.