AB1028 Development and Validation of A Patient Questionnaire on Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Related Knowledge in The Treat To Target Era: Preliminary Results

2016 ◽  
Vol 75 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. 1253.2-1253
Author(s):  
M.J. de Jonge ◽  
M.A.H. Oude Voshaar ◽  
A.M.P. Huis ◽  
M.A.F.J. van de Laar ◽  
M.E.J.L. Hulscher ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 378-379
Author(s):  
B. Fautrel ◽  
R. Caporali ◽  
E. Holdsworth ◽  
B. Donaghy ◽  
M. Khalid ◽  
...  

Background:The principles of treat to target (T2T) include defining an appropriate treatment target, assessed at pre-defined intervals, with a commitment to changing therapeutic approach if the target is not met (1). T2T is recommended as a key strategy for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Objectives:To explore attitudes towards T2T, its implementation and stated treatment goals among physicians and their patients with RA.Methods:The Adelphi RA Disease Specific Programme™ was a large, quantitative, point-in-time survey conducted amongst rheumatologists (n=296) and their consulting patients with RA (n=3042) in Europe (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK) between Q4 2019–Q3 2020. Physicians were recruited via publicly available lists, completing an online survey and medical record extraction for their next 10–12 consecutive patients. The same patients were invited to voluntarily complete a self-report questionnaire (n=1098, 36% response), collecting data on attitudes towards T2T and treatment goals.Results:Physicians reported that 76% of patients were in remission (DAS28: <2.6) or had low disease activity (DAS28: 2.6 – 3.2), and 24% had moderate-high disease activity (DAS28: >3.2). Patient mean age was 53.0 years (SD 14.0), mean time since diagnosis was 7.2 years (SD 7.2). The proportion of patients currently receiving an advanced therapy (AT; defined as biologic or targeted synthetic DMARD) was 68%, of whom 70% were on a first line AT. No difference was observed between disease activity groups.In the physician survey, 86% of physicians stated they followed T2T principals in at least some of their RA patients, and would utilize a T2T approach in RA patients with moderate-high disease activity (61%), the most uncontrolled patients (37%) and those who do not respond well to initial therapy (34%). In this sample of real-world RA patients, 66% were reported by physicians to be on a T2T plan at the time of data collection. The most common physician-reported targets were remission (DAS28: <2.6) (75%), improvement of quality of life (QoL) (41%) and reduction of pain (31%), with 85% of physicians perceiving these treatment goals were fully or partially met. The most stated reasons for not implementing T2T was physician preference not to adjust current treatment (34%), patient preference not to adjust current treatment (23%), and there are no achievable goals for this patient (16%).Overall, 29% of patients reported they were involved in setting their T2T goals, while 34% stated their T2T goals were set by their physicians only, and 29% perceived no T2T goal had been set (n=620). The most common overall T2T goals from the patient perspective were remission (61%), controlling symptoms (41%), and reducing impact on QoL (34%). Of those patients who acknowledged a T2T goal had been set (n=407), 77% reported their T2T goal was fully or partially achieved.Of 719 patients who had moderate-high disease activity, 57% were on a T2T plan, with 46% of physicians perceiving these treatment goals were fully or partially met. The most common physician-stated reason for not implementing T2T was a lack of achievable targets (29%).Conclusion:Rheumatologists in this study reported a strong belief in T2T. The most common physician-set T2T goals were remission, improvement of QoL and reduction of pain, corresponding with T2T goals as reported by patients. However, a third of patients in this cohort were not aware of a defined T2T objective in their management, which may be a result of a perceived lack of achievable goals by physicians. It may be desirable to promote more patient involvement in defining achievable targets amongst those with moderate-high disease activity who despite best efforts may not reach a clinical state of remission. Further research is needed to identify and understand goals important to RA patients.References:[1]van Vollenhoven R. Treat-to-target in rheumatoid arthritis - are we there yet? Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2019;15(3):180-6.Acknowledgements:This study was funded by Galapagos NV, Belgium.Medical writing support was provided by Gary Sidgwick, PhD (Adelphi Real World, Bollington, UK) and editorial support was provided by Debbie Sherwood, BSc, CMPP (Aspire Scientific, Bollington, UK), both funded by Galapagos NV.Disclosure of Interests:Bruno Fautrel Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, MSD, Mylan, NORDIC Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi-Genzyme, SOBI, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Roberto Caporali Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Galapagos, Gilead, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Sanofi, Fresenius Kabi, Samsung Bioepis, MSD, Consultant of: Galapagos, Gilead, Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Elizabeth Holdsworth Employee of: Adelphi Real World, Bethany Donaghy Employee of: Adelphi Real World, Mona Khalid Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Mark Moore Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Speakers bureau: Gilead Sciences (only as employee), Paid instructor for: Gilead Sciences (only as employee), Consultant of: Gilead Sciences (only as employee), Grant/research support from: Gilead Sciences (only as employee), Employee of: Gilead Sciences, and previously Sanofi and AstraZeneca, Katrien Van Beneden Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Yves Piette Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Galapagos, Grünenthal and Sandoz, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Mylan and UCB, Susana Romero-Yuste Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Grunenthal, Kern Pharma, Lilly, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB, Janssen, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biogen, Fresenius, Galapagos, Gebro, Janssen, Lilly, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Jasper Broen Shareholder of: Pharming Group, Consultant of: Galapagos, Gilead, Novartis, Peter C. Taylor Consultant of: AbbVie, Biogen, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Nordic Pharma, Fresenius, UCB, Grant/research support from: Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Lilly


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 480-480
Author(s):  
S. S. Zhao ◽  
E. Nikiphorou ◽  
A. Young ◽  
P. Kiely

Background:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is classically described as a symmetric small joint polyarthritis with additional involvement of large joints. There is a paucity of information concerning the time course of damage in large joints, such as shoulder, elbow, hip, knee and ankle, from early to established RA, or of the influence of Rheumatoid Factor (RF) status. There is a historic perception that patients who do not have RF follow a milder less destructive course, which might promote less aggressive treatment strategies in RF-negative patients. The historic nature of the Ealy Rheumatoid Arthritis Study (ERAS) provides a unique opportunity to study RA in the context of less aggressive treatment strategies.Objectives:To examine the progression of large joint involvement from early to established RA in terms of range of movement (ROM) and time to joint surgery, according to the presence of RF.Methods:ERAS was a multi-centre inception cohort of newly diagnosed RA patients (<2 years disease duration, csDMARD naive), recruited from 1985-2001 with yearly follow-up for up to 25 (median 10) years. First line treatment was csDMARD monotherapy with/without steroids, favouring sulphasalazine for the majority. Outcome data was recorded at baseline, at 12 months and then once yearly. Patients were deemed RF negative if all repeated assessments were negative. ROM of individual shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, ankle and hindfeet joints was collected at 3, 5, 9 and 12-15 years. The rate of progression from normal to any loss of ROM, from years 3 to 14 was modelled using GEE, adjusting for confounders. Radiographs of wrists taken at years 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 were scored according to the Larsen method. Change in the Larsen wrist damage score was modelled using GEE as a continuous variable, while the erosion score was dichotomised into present/absent. Surgical procedure data were obtained by linking to Hospital Episodes Statistics and the National Joint Registry. Time to joint surgery was analysed using multivariable Cox models.Results:A total of 1458 patients from the ERAS cohort were included (66% female, mean age 55 years) and 74% were RF-positive. The prevalence of any loss of ROM, from year 3 through to 14 was highest in the wrist followed by ankle, knee, elbow and hip. The proportion of patients at year 9 with greater than 25% loss of ROM was: wrist 30%, ankle 12%, elbow 7%, knee 7% and hip 5%. Odds of loss of ROM increased over time in all joint regions, at around 7 to 13% per year from year 3 to 14. There was no significant difference between RF-positive and RF-negative patients (see Figure 1). Larsen erosion and damage scores at the wrists progressed in all patients; annual odds of developing any erosions were higher in RF-positives OR 1.28 (95%CI 1.24-1.32) than RF-negatives OR 1.17 (95%CI 1.09-1.26), p 0.013. Time to surgery was similar according to RF-status for the wrist and ankle, but RF-positive cases had a lower hazard of surgery at the elbow (HR 0.37, 0.15-0.90), hip (HR 0.69, 0.48-0.99) and after 10 years at the knee (HR 0.41, 0.25-0.68). Adjustment of the models for Lawrence assessed osteoarthritis of hand and feet radiographs did not influence these results.Figure 1.Odds of progression to any loss of ROM (from no loss of ROM) per year in the overall population and stratified by RF status.Conclusion:Large joints become progressively involved in RA, most frequently affecting the wrist followed by ankle, which is overlooked in some composite disease activity indices. We confirm a higher burden of erosions and damage at the wrists in RF-positive patients, but have not found RF-negative patients to have a better prognosis over time with respect to involvement of other large joints. In contrast RF-negative patients had more joint surgery at the elbow, hip, and knee after 10 years. There is no justification to adopt a less aggressive treatment strategy for RF-negative RA. High vigilance and treat-to-target approaches should be followed irrespective of RF status.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshinari Matsumoto ◽  
Nitin Shivappa ◽  
Yuko Sugioka ◽  
Masahiro Tada ◽  
Tadashi Okano ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The dietary inflammatory index (DII®), a quantitative measure of the inflammatory potential of daily food and nutrient intake, and associations between a variety of health outcomes have been reported. However, the association between DII score and disease activity of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is unclear. Therefore, this study was designed to test whether higher DII score contributes to disease activity and as a corollary, whether reducing DII score helps to achieve or maintain low disease activity or remission in patients with RA. Methods We performed a cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis using 6 years of data (from 2011 to 2017) in TOMORROW, a cohort study consisting of 208 RA patients and 205 gender- and age-matched controls started in 2010. Disease activity of RA patients was assessed annually using DAS28-ESR (disease activity score 28 joints and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate) as a composite measure based on arthritic symptoms in 28 joints plus global health assessment and ESR. Dietary data were collected in 2011 and 2017 using the brief-type self-administered diet history questionnaire (BDHQ). Energy-adjusted DII (E-DII™) score was calculated using 26 nutrients derived from the BDHQ. Data were analyzed with two-group comparisons, correlation analysis, and multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results One hundred and seventy-seven RA patients and 183 controls, for whom clinical and dietary survey data were available, were analyzed. RA patients had significantly higher E-DII (pro-inflammatory) score compared to controls both in 2011 and 2017 (p < 0.05). In RA patients, E-DII score was not a factor associated with significant change in disease activity. However, anti-inflammatory change in E-DII score was associated maintaining low disease activity (DAS28-ESR ≤ 3.2) or less for 6 years (OR 3.46, 95% CI 0.33–8.98, p = 0.011). Conclusions The diets of RA patients had a higher inflammatory potential than controls. Although E-DII score was not a factor associated with significant disease activity change, anti-inflammatory change in E-DII score appeared to be associated with maintaining low disease activity in patients with RA. Trial registration UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000003876. Registered 7 Aug 2010—retrospectively registered.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document