scholarly journals PsAID High-impact Disease in Psoriatic Arthritis: A Component Weighting Analysis of the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Health Index

2021 ◽  
pp. jrheum.210377
Author(s):  
Rubén Queiro ◽  
Isla Morante
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
General Population ◽  
Epidemiological Study ◽  
International Society ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Inflammatory Condition ◽  
Health Index ◽  
Chronic Inflammatory Arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory arthritis that affects almost one-third of patients with psoriasis. PsA is a relatively common inflammatory condition in rheumatology clinics. In fact, a recent epidemiological study raised the prevalence of PsA to almost 0.6% in the general population in Spain.1

Overview of psoriatic arthritis pathogenesis

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurt de Vlam
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Immune Response ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Environmental Factors ◽  
Rheumatic Diseases ◽  
Skin Disease ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Heterogeneous Group ◽  
Chronic Inflammatory Arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory arthritis occurring in patients with psoriasis. Some consider it as part of the heterogeneous group of diseases unified in the concept of spondyloarthritis (SpA). At least some subtypes, such as the oligoarticular and axial subtypes, can be classified as SpA. The aetiology and pathogenesis are poorly understood. An enthesitis-based model was proposed to unify skin and joint manifestation and to differentiate PsA from other rheumatic diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. The development of PsA results from the interplay of genes, the immune response, and interaction with environmental factors. The fact that more than 80% of patients with PsA have precedent or simultaneous psoriasis suggests that the skin disease is almost a ‘condicio sine qua non’ for the development of PsA.

Immunopathogenesis of psoriatic arthritis: Recent advances

Open Medicine ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 245-253
Author(s):  
Panayiotis Stavropoulos ◽  
Andreas Goules ◽  
Georgia Avgerinou ◽  
Andreas Katsambas
Keyword(s):  
Immune System ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Inflammatory Response ◽  
Adhesion Molecules ◽  
Proinflammatory Cytokines ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Angiogenic Factors ◽  
Chronic Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Immunologic Factors

AbstractPsoriatic Arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory arthritis associated with psoriasis. The pathophysiology of PsA includes genetic, environmental and immunologic factors. Recent studies revealed the dynamic role of the immune system in the pathogenesis of the disease. Adhesion molecules, proinflammatory cytokines, angiogenic factors and metalloproteinases appear to orchestrate the inflammatory response in PsA. This article summarizes the current immunologic findings and suggests future therapeutic and researching approaches in the field of PsA.

Construct validity of the ASAS health index in psoriatic arthritis: a cross-sectional analysis

Rheumatology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isla Morante ◽  
Elena Aurrecoechea ◽  
Ignacio Villa ◽  
Montserrat Santos ◽  
Leyre Riancho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Health Index ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Optimal Criterion ◽  
Active Disease

Abstract Objectives The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society health index (ASAS-HI) was designed to assess the global health of patients with spondyloarthritis, but its performance in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is hardly known. We addressed the clinimetric properties of this instrument in patients with PsA. Methods This was a cross-sectional observational study that included 90 consecutive patients with PsA. The measurement properties of ASAS-HI were analysed against the Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) and the Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID) questionnaire. A multivariate analysis was performed to weigh the ASAS-HI items associated with DAPSA active disease and PsAID high impact. Results Mean ASAS-HI was 5.8 (4.3). Convergent validity was high both against DAPSA (ρ 0.78, P < 0.0001) and PsAID (ρ 0.80, P < 0.0001). ASAS-HI showed a high discriminant capacity for both DAPSA remission [optimal criterion ≤ 2, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.97), P < 0.0001], and low activity [optimal criterion ≤6, AUC 0.87 (95% CI: 0.79, 0.94), P < 0.0001]. The ASAS-HI items significantly associated with DAPSA active disease were: ‘I find it hard to stand for long’ (β 4.48, P < 0.0001), ‘I find it hard to concentrate’ (β 2.94, P = 0.042) and ‘I sleep badly at night’ (β 1.86, P = 0.044). As for PsAID, the only item significantly associated with a high impact was ‘I sleep badly at night’ (β −3.29, P = 0.015). Conclusion We demonstrated construct validity of ASAS-HI, a spondyloarthritis instrument, for the assessment of global health in patients with PsA.

scholarly journals POS0208 GENDER DIFFERENCES IN RESPONSE TO BIOLOGICALS. WOMEN FARE WORSE ACROSS INFLAMMATORY ARTHRITIS DISEASES - DATA FROM THE BIOREG

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 320.1-321
Author(s):  
E. Loibner ◽  
V. Ritschl ◽  
B. Leeb ◽  
P. Spellitz ◽  
G. Eichbauer-Sturm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Gender Difference ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Tnf Inhibitors ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Difference ◽  
All Diseases

Background:Gender differences in prevalence and disease course are known in various rheumatic diseases; however, investigations of gender difference concerning therapeutical response have yielded variable results.Objectives:The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate, whether a gender difference in response rate to biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and apremilast in bDMARD-naïve patients could be observed across the three most prevalent inflammatory arthritis diseases: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondylarthritis (SpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Additionally, a response to individual TNF blockers was investigated in this respect.Methods:Data from bDMARD-naïve RA-, SpA- and PsA-patients from Bioreg, the Austrian registry for biological DMARDs in rheumatic diseases, were used. Patients with a baseline (Visit 1=V1) and follow-up visits at 6 months (Visit 2=V2) and 12 months (Visit 3=V3) were included and response to therapy with TNF-inhibitors (TNFi), furthermore to therapy with rituximab, tocilizumab and apremilast was analyzed according to gender. The remaining bDMARDs were not analyzed due to small numbers. Key response-parameter for RA was disease activity score (DAS28), whereas for PsoA the Stockerau Activity Score for Psoriatic Arthritis (SASPA) and for SpA the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) were employed; in addition, the Health assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) was used. Data were analyzed in R Statistic stratified by gender using Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon tests.Results:354 women and 123 men with RA (n=477), 81 women and 69 men with PsA (n=150), 121 women and 191 men with SpA (n=312) were included. No significant differences in biometrics was seen between female and male patients at baseline in all diseases.In RA patients overall DAS28 decreased from baseline (V1) to V2 and V3 (DAS28: V1: male: 4.38 [3.66, 5.11], female: 4.30 [3.68, 5.03], p(m/f) = 0.905; V2: male: 2.66 [1.73, 3.63], female: 3.10 [2.17, 3.98], p(m/f) = 0.015; V3: male: 2.25 [1.39, 3.36], female: 3.01 [1.87, 3.87], p(m/f) = 0.002). For TNF inhibitors (n=311), there was a significant difference between genders at V2 (Fig.1a). Patients receiving Rituximab (n=41) displayed a significantly higher DAS28 at baseline in females, which diminished in the follow up: V1: (p(m/f) p=0.002; V2: p=0.019; V3: p=0.13); response to tocilizumab (n=63) did not show any gender differences.In PsA patients overall SASPA decreased from baseline (V1) to V2 and V3 (SASPA: V1: male: 4.00 [2.80, 5.20], female: 4.40 [2.80, 5.80], p(m/f) = 0.399; V2: male: 2.20 [1.20, 3.50], female: 3.40 [2.00, 5.00], p(m/f) = 0.071; V3: male: 1.80 [0.80, 2.70], female: 3.01 [2.35, 4.80], p(m/f) = 0.001). For TNF inhibitors (n=79), there was a significant difference between genders at V3 (Fig 1a). For Apremilast (n=39), there was a significant difference between genders at V2 (Fig.1c).In SpA patients overall BASDAI decreased from baseline (V1) to V2 and V3 (BASDAI: V1: male: 4.70 [2.88, 6.18], female: 4.80 [3.30, 6.20], p(m/f) = 0.463; V2: male: 3.05 [2.00, 4.60], female: 3.64 [2.62, 5.41], p(m/f) = 0.039; V3: male: 3.02 [1.67, 4.20], female: 3.65 [2.18, 5.47], p(m/f) = 0.016). In V3 a differential BASDAI in response to TNFi (n=299) was observed (Fig.1a).Possible differences of response to individual TNFi (etanercept, infliximab, other TNFi) measured by HAQ were investigated in all diseases together. The difference between male and females was significant at baseline for all 3 TNFi; whereas with the use of ETA the significant difference was carried through to V2 and V3, it was lost with the use of IFX and was variable with the other TNFi (Fig.1b)Figure 1.Conclusion:Female patients showed a statistically lower response to TNFi in all three disease entities (RA, SpA and PsoA) to a variable degree in our homogenous central european population. Interestingly, the difference was not uniform across individual TNFi when measured by HAQ. Gender differences were also seen in response to Apremilast.Disclosure of Interests:Elisabeth Loibner: None declared, Valentin Ritschl: None declared, Burkhard Leeb Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Actiopharm, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Kwizda, Celgene, Sandoz, Grünenthal, Eli-Lilly, Grant/research support from: TRB, Roche, Consultancies: AbbVie, Amgen, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Celgene, Grünenthal, Kwizda, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Sandoz;, Peter Spellitz: None declared, Gabriela Eichbauer-Sturm: None declared, Jochen Zwerina: None declared, Manfred Herold: None declared, Miriam Stetter: None declared, Rudolf Puchner Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Janssen, Kwizda, MSD, Pfizer, Celgene, Grünenthal, Eli-Lilly, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Pfizer, Celgene, Grünenthal, Eli-Lilly, Franz Singer: None declared, Ruth Fritsch-Stork: None declared

scholarly journals Mechanisms and Mediators of Pain in Chronic Inflammatory Arthritis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Di Carlo ◽  
Gianluca Smerilli ◽  
Fausto Salaffi
Keyword(s):  
Inflammatory Pain ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Operational Definition ◽  
Immunosuppressive Drugs ◽  
Therapeutic Strategies ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Common Symptom ◽  
Joint Diseases ◽  
Chronic Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Inflammatory Joint Diseases

Abstract Purpose of the review Pain in chronic inflammatory joint diseases is a common symptom reported by patients. Pain becomes of absolute clinical relevance especially when it becomes chronic, i.e., when it persists beyond normal healing times. As an operational definition, pain is defined chronic when it lasts for more than 3 months. This article aims to provide a review of the main mechanisms underlying pain in patients with chronic inflammatory joint diseases, discussing in particular their overlap. Recent findings While it may be intuitive how synovial inflammation or enthesitis are responsible for nociceptive pain, in clinical practice, it is common to find patients who continue to complain of symptoms despite optimal control of inflammation. In this kind of patients at the genesis of pain, there may be neuropathic or nociplastic mechanisms. Summary In the context of chronic inflammatory joint diseases, multiple mechanisms generally coexist behind chronic pain. It is the rheumatologist’s task to identify the mechanisms of pain that go beyond the nociceptive mechanisms, to adopt appropriate therapeutic strategies, including avoiding overtreatment of patients with immunosuppressive drugs. In this sense, future research will have to be oriented to search for biomarkers of non-inflammatory pain in patients with chronic inflammatory joint diseases.

scholarly journals AB1271 PATIENT EDUCATION IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: A SERVICE EVALUATION AT ONE YEAR

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1926.2-1927
Author(s):  
K. Austin ◽  
R. Prasad
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Patient Education ◽  
Support Group ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Disease Duration ◽  
World Health ◽  
Online Resources ◽  
Group Setting ◽  
Education Session ◽  
The World

Background:Recent studies have demonstrated an increasing burden of musculoskeletal (MSK) diseases worldwide.1The importance of patient education (PE) is often overlooked in the management of long term inflammatory conditions. The European League Against Rheumatism recommends that PE should be integral to standard of care in inflammatory arthritis.2PE increases patients’ knowledge, skills and confidence in managing their condition and improves patient activation (PA). Evidence shows that improved PA results in better outcomes and improved experiences of care. We previously reported on improved knowledge and confidence amongst a small patient group with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who had attended a pilot education session.3This education session was delivered to a wider group of patients with PsA over a 12 month period; we report on the evaluation received from this service.Objectives:To provide a PE programme to a wider group of patients with PsA, using a multi-disciplinary team (MDT) approach and to evaluate whether this improved patients’ knowledge, skills and confidence in managing their PsA.Methods:Adult patients with PsA attending their rheumatology clinic appointments were invited to a 2.5 hour MDT education session which covered: 1) a general overview of PsA; 2) medications used in PsA; 3) the role of physiotherapy and occupational therapy; 4) flares and self- management. These were interactive sessions, held in a small group setting to allow for informal discussion and questions to the MDT. Written materials including several booklets and online resources were also provided. Patients evaluated their knowledge or understanding before and after each topic covered, on the same day, using an evaluation tool with1-10 Likert scale items. Changes in ratings were analysed using student’s t-tests. Patients were also asked: which aspects they found particularly helpful; if there was anything they would like to have added/ have more of in the session; whether they found the session helpful; whether they would recommend it to other patients; whether they would be interested in developing a PsA patient support group.Results:Four sessions were held over a 12 month period. A total of 32 patients attended; 10 males and 22 females, across a range of age categories. Disease duration varied from less than1 year to over 10 years. There were statistically significant improvements in all topics covered: mean improvement of 91% in how well informed patients felt about PsA overall (p<0.0001); mean improvement of 74% in confidence in accessing help from the MDT (p<0.0001); mean improvement of 122% in how well informed patients were about medications used in PsA (p<0.0001); mean improvement of 99% in patients’ confidence in self-managing a flare (p<0.0001). Aspects that patients found particularly helpful included “The whole session”, “Asking questions to all different professionals”, “Meeting other sufferers”, “Management of flares”, “Fatigue information” and “Online resources”. Overall, 97% of patients (31 out of 32) found the session helpful and would recommend it to others. Over 40% of patients expressed interest in developing a local PsA support group.Conclusion:Following a 2.5 hour education session, improved knowledge, skills and confidence in managing their PsA was reported by 97% of patients, including patients with disease duration of > 10 years. This supports our previous finding that an interactive, group PsA education programme is a feasible and important adjunct to patient care.References:[1]Sebbag E, Felten R, Sagez F, et al. The world-wide burden of musculoskeletal diseases: a systematic analysis of the World Health Organization Burden of Diseases Database. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 2019;78:844-848.[2]Zangi HA, Ndosi M, Adams J, et al. EULAR recommendations for patient education for people with inflammatory arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74(6):954-62[3]Austin K, Jones N, Prasad R. Patient Education in psoriatic arthritis: addressing an unmet need. Ann Rheum Dis. 2019;78(suppl 2):A2134.Disclosure of Interests:Keziah Austin: None declared, Roopa Prasad Speakers bureau: Received speaker fees for Celgene, honorarium from Merck, advisory board fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb; all unrelated to the contents of this abstract.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of a single switch from etanercept originator to etanercept biosimilar in a cohort of inflammatory arthritis

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Chiara Ditto ◽  
Simone Parisi ◽  
Marta Priora ◽  
Silvia Sanna ◽  
Clara Lisa Peroni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Health Assessment Questionnaire ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Health Assessment ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Clinical State ◽  
Assessment Questionnaire

Abstract AntiTNF-α biosimilars are broadly available for the treatment of inflammatory arthritis. There are a lot of data concerning the maintenance of clinical efficacy after switching from originators to biosimilars; therefore, such a transition is increasingly encouraged both in the US and Europe. However, there are reports about flares and adverse events (AE) as a non-medical switch remains controversial due to ethical and clinical implications (efficacy, safety, tolerability). The aim of our work was to evaluate the disease activity trend after switching from etanercept originator (oETA-Enbrel) to its biosimilar (bETA-SP4/Benepali) in a cohort of patients in Turin, Piedmont, Italy. In this area, the switch to biosimilars is stalwartly encouraged. We switched 87 patients who were in a clinical state of stability from oETA to bETA: 48 patients were affected by Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA),26 by Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) and 13 by Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS).We evaluated VAS-pain, Global-Health, CRP, number of swollen and tender joints, Disease Activity Score on 28 joints (DAS28) for RA, Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) for PsA, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and Health Assessment Questionnaire for the spondyloarthropathies (HAQ-S),Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) for AS patients. 11/85 patients (12.6%) stopped treatment after switching to biosimilar etanercept. No difference was found between oETA and bETA in terms of efficacy. However, some arthritis flare and AE were reported. Our data regarding maintenance of efficacy and percentage of discontinuation were in line with the existing literature.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document