A.C. Marijnissen

Tissue structure modification in knee osteoarthritis by use of joint distraction: an open 1-year pilot study

Background Modification of joint tissue damage is challenging in late-stage osteoarthritis (OA). Few options are available for treating end-stage knee OA other than joint replacement. Objectives To examine whether joint distraction can effectively modify knee joint tissue damage and has the potential to delay prosthesis surgery. Methods 20 patients (<60 years) with tibiofemoral OA were treated surgically using joint distraction. Distraction (∼5 mm) was applied for 2 months using an external fixation frame. Tissue structure modification at 1 year of follow-up was evaluated radiographically (joint space width (JSW)), by MRI (segmentation of cartilage morphology) and by biochemical markers of collagen type II turnover, with operators blinded to time points. Clinical improvement was evaluated by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain score. Results Radiography demonstrated an increase in mean and minimum JSW (2.7 to 3.6 mm and 1.0 to 1.9 mm; p<0.05 and <0.01). MRI revealed an increase in cartilage thickness (2.4 to 3.0 mm; p<0.001) and a decrease of denuded bone areas (22% to 5%; p<0.001). Collagen type II levels showed a trend towards increased synthesis (+103%; p<0.06) and decreased breakdown (−11%; p<0.08). The WOMAC index increased from 45 to 77 points, and VAS pain decreased from 73 to 31 mm (both p<0.001). Conclusions Joint distraction can induce tissue structure modification in knee OA and could result in clinical benefit. No current treatment is able to induce such changes. Larger, longer and randomised studies on joint distraction are warranted.

Unloading joints to treat osteoarthritis, including joint distraction

Purpose of reviewPatients are increasingly becoming interested in nonpharmacologic approaches to manage their osteoarthritis. This review examines the recent literature on the potential beneficial effects of unloading joints in the treatment of osteoarthritis, with a focus on joint distraction. Recent findingsMechanical factors are involved in the development and progression of osteoarthritis. If ‘loading’ is a major cause in development and progression of osteoarthritis, then ‘unloading’ may be able to prevent progression. There is evidence that unloading may be effective in reducing pain and slowing down structural damage. This review describes unloading by footwear and bracing (nonsurgical), unloading by osteotomy (surgical), and has a focus on unloading by joint distraction. Excellent reviews in all these three fields have been published over the past few years. Recent studies argue for the usefulness of a biomechanical approach to improve function and possibly reduce disease progression in osteoarthritis. SummaryTo improve patient function and possibly reduce disease progression, a biomechanical approach should be considered in treating patients with osteoarthritis. Further research (appropriate high-quality clinical trials) and analysis (clinical as well as preclinical and fundamental) are still necessary, however, to understand, validate, and refine the different approaches of unloading to treat osteoarthritis.

Early rheumatoid arthritis treated with tocilizumab, methotrexate, or their combination (U-Act-Early) : a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, strategy trial

BACKGROUND For patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, treatment aim is early, rapid, and sustained remission. We compared the efficacy and safety of strategies initiating the interleukin-6 receptor-blocking monoclonal antibody tocilizumab with or without methotrexate (a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug [DMARD]), versus initiation of methotrexate monotherapy in line with international guidelines. METHODS We did a 2-year, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, strategy study at 21 rheumatology outpatient departments in the Netherlands. We included patients who had been diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis within 1 year before inclusion, were DMARD-naive, aged 18 years or older, met current rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria, and had a disease activity score assessing 28 joints (DAS28) of at least 2·6. We randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) to start tocilizumab plus methotrexate (the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm), or tocilizumab plus placebo-methotrexate (the tocilizumab arm), or methotrexate plus placebo-tocilizumab (the methotrexate arm). Tocilizumab was given at 8 mg/kg intravenously every 4 weeks with a maximum of 800 mg per dose. Methotrexate was started at 10 mg per week orally and increased stepwise every 4 weeks by 5 mg to a maximum of 30 mg per week, until remission or dose-limiting toxicity. We did the randomisation using an interactive web response system. Masking was achieved with placebos that were similar in appearance to the active drug; the study physicians, pharmacists, monitors, and patients remained masked during the study, and all assessments were done by masked assessors. Patients not achieving remission on their initial regimen switched from placebo to active treatments; patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm switched to standard of care therapy (typically methotrexate combined with a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor). When sustained remission was achieved, methotrexate (and placebo-methotrexate) was tapered and stopped, then tocilizumab (and placebo-tocilizumab) was also tapered and stopped. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving sustained remission (defined as DAS28 <2·6 with a swollen joint count ≤four, persisting for at least 24 weeks) on the initial regimen and during the entire study duration, compared between groups with a two-sided Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. Analysis was based on an intention-to-treat method. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01034137. FINDINGS Between Jan 13, 2010, and July 30, 2012, we recruited and assigned 317 eligible patients to treatment (106 to the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm, 103 to the tocilizumab arm, and 108 to the methotrexate arm). The study was completed by a similar proportion of patients in the three groups (range 72-78%). The most frequent reasons for dropout were adverse events or intercurrent illness: 27 (34%) of dropouts, and insufficient response: 26 (33%) of dropouts. 91 (86%) of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm achieved sustained remission on the initial regimen, compared with 86 (84%) of 103 in the tocilizumab arm, and 48 (44%) of 108 in the methotrexate arm (relative risk [RR] 2·00, 95% CI 1·59-2·51 for tocilizumab plus methotrexate vs methotrexate, and 1·86, 1·48-2·32 for tocilizumab vs methotrexate, p<0·0001 for both comparisons). For the entire study, 91 (86%) of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm, 91 (88%) of 103 in the tocilizumab arm, and 83 (77%) of 108 in the methotrexate arm achieved sustained remission (RR 1·13, 95% CI 1·00-1·29, p=0·06 for tocilizumab plus methotrexate vs methotrexate, 1·14, 1·01-1·29, p=0·0356 for tocilizumab vs methotrexate, and p=0·59 for tocilizumab plus methotrexate vs tocilizumab). Nasopharyngitis was the most common adverse event in all three treatment groups, occurring in 38 (36%) of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm, 40 (39%) of 103 in the tocilizumab arm, and 37 (34%) of 108 in the methotrexate arm. The occurrence of serious adverse events did not differ between the treatment groups (17 [16%] of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm vs 19 [18%] of 103 in the tocilizumab arm and 13 [12%] of 108 in the methotrexate arm), and no deaths occurred during the study. INTERPRETATION For patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, strategies aimed at sustained remission by immediate initiation of tocilizumab with or without methotrexate are more effective, and with a similar safety profile, compared with initiation of methotrexate in line with current standards. FUNDING Roche Nederland BV.

Joint distraction as an alternative for the treatment of osteoarthritis

Irrespective of underlying mechanisms, the long-term efficacy of joint distraction in the treatment of severe ankle osteoarthritis at young age validates the concept of joint distraction in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Therefore, joint distraction in the case of severe ankle osteoarthritis may be a treatment of choice. This opens the possibility to study joint distraction as a treatment for other joints. Because knee osteoarthritis is much more common, it is a much greater social and economic problem. Beneficial effects of joint distraction in the case of ankle osteoarthritis, and specifically in the treatment of more common forms of osteoarthritis such as severe knee and hip osteoarthritis, may therefore have a great impact, especially in view of the increasing age of our population.

Clinical benefit of joint distraction in the treatment of ankle osteoarthritis

Irrespective of underlying mechanisms, the structural changes after joint distraction and the efficacy during several years validate the concept of joint distraction in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Therefore, joint distraction in the case of severe ankle osteoarthritis at relatively young age may be a treatment of choice. In the light of increased aging, and the limited life span of an endoprosthesis, evaluation of joint distraction in the case of knee and hip osteoarthritis is justified.

Personalized biological treatment for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review with a focus on clinical applicability

OBJECTIVES To review studies that address prediction of response to biologic treatment in RA and to explore the clinical utility of the studied (bio)markers. METHODS A search for relevant articles was performed in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases. Studies that presented predictive values or in which these could be calculated were selected. The added value was determined by the added value on prior probability for each (bio)marker. Only an increase/decrease in chance of response ⩾15% was considered clinically relevant, whereas in oncology values >25% are common. RESULTS Of the 57 eligible studies, 14 (bio)markers were studied in more than one cohort and an overview of the added predictive value of each marker is presented. Of the replicated predictors, none consistently showed an increase/decrease in probability of response ⩾15%. However, positivity of RF and ACPA in case of rituximab and the presence of the TNF-α promoter 308 GG genotype for TNF inhibitor therapy were consistently predictive, yet low in added predictive value. Besides these, 65 (bio)markers studied once showed remarkably high (but not validated) predictive values. CONCLUSION We were unable to address clinically useful baseline (bio)markers for use in individually tailored treatment. Some predictors are consistently predictive, yet low in added predictive value, while several others are promising but await replication. The challenge now is to design studies to validate all explored and promising findings individually and in combination to make these (bio)markers relevant to clinical practice.

Evaluation of separate quantitative radiographic features adds to the prediction of incident radiographic osteoarthritis in individuals with recent onset of knee pain: 5-year follow-up in the CHECK cohort

OBJECTIVE Detailed radiographic evaluation might enable the identification of osteoarthritis (OA) earlier in the disease. This study evaluated whether and which separate quantitative features on knee radiographs of individuals with recent onset knee pain are associated with incidence of radiographic OA and persistence and/or progression of clinical OA during 5-year follow-up. METHOD From the Cohort Hip & Cohort Knee study participants with knee pain at baseline were evaluated. Radiographic OA development was defined as Kellgren & Lawrence (K&L) grade ≥ II at 5-year follow-up. Clinical OA was defined as persistent knee pain and as progression of Westen Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) pain and function score during follow-up. At baseline radiographic damage was determined by quantitative measurement of separate features using Knee Images Digital Analysis, and by K&L-grading. RESULTS Measuring osteophyte area [odds ratio (OR) =7.0] and minimum joint space width (OR=0.7), in addition to demographic and clinical characteristics, improved the prediction of radiographic OA 5 years later [area under curve receiver operating characteristic=0.74 vs 0.64 without radiographic features]. When the predictive score (based on multivariate regression coefficients) was larger than the cut-off for optimal specificity, the chance of incident radiographic OA was 54% instead of the prior probability of 19%. Evaluating separate quantitative features performed slightly better than K&L-grading (AUC=0.70). Radiographic characteristics hardly added to prediction of clinical OA. CONCLUSION In individuals with onset knee pain, radiographic characteristics added to the prediction of radiographic OA development 5 years later. Quantitative radiographic evaluation in individuals with suspected OA is worthwhile when determining treatment strategies and designing clinical trials.

Radiographic evaluation of posttraumatic osteoarthritis of the ankle: the Kellgren–Lawrence scale is reliable and correlates with clinical symptoms

OBJECTIVE To assess reliability and construct validity of the Kellgren-Lawrence (K&L) scale in posttraumatic ankle osteoarthritis (OA); additionally evaluate the validity of including tibiotalar tilting in the scale. METHOD One-hundred and fifty ankle radiographs (75 patients, unilateral malleolar fractures) evaluated at average of 18 years after surgery. American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot (HF) score and pain (visual analog scale) were recorded. Grading of OA according to K&L criteria and identification of OA features was performed on standardized radiographs by four physicians. Minimal joint space width, sclerosis, and talar tilt angle were quantified by digital measurements. A modified K&L scale including talar tilting is presented. Validity of original and modified scale was evaluated and expressed as ability to (1) Identify those with clinical symptoms of ankle OA; and (2) Distinguish between different degrees of fracture severity. RESULTS Inter- and intra-observer reliability of OA assessment according to K&L were good (ICC 0.61 and 0.75). Original and modified K&L grades significantly increased with decreasing AOFAS ankle-HF scores and greater pain. A talar-tilt angle > 2° compared with ≤ 2° in grade 3 was associated with significantly higher pain levels (VAS pain 4.2 vs 1.4, respectively; mean difference 2.8, 95% CI 0.5-5.1). More severe fracture patterns at time of surgery were more often in patients with the highest K&L grades. CONCLUSIONS The K&L scale is a valid and reliable radiographic grading system for assessment of ankle OA. Inclusion of the talar tilt angle might allow for better differentiation with respect to clinical outcomes.

Identifying Phenotypes of Knee Osteoarthritis by Separate Quantitative Radiographic Features May Improve Patient Selection for More Targeted Treatment

Objective. Expression of osteoarthritis (OA) varies significantly between individuals, and over time, suggesting the existence of different phenotypes, possibly with specific etiology and targets for treatment. Our objective was to identify phenotypes of progression of radiographic knee OA using separate quantitative features. Methods. Separate radiographic features of OA were measured by Knee Images Digital Analysis (KIDA) in individuals with early knee OA (the CHECK cohort: Cohort Hip & Cohort Knee), at baseline and at 2-year and 5-year followup. Hierarchical clustering was performed to identify phenotypes of radiographic knee OA progression. The phenotypes identified were compared for changes in joint space width (JSW), varus angle, osteophyte area, eminence height, bone density, for Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade, and for clinical characteristics. Logistic regression analysis evaluated whether baseline radiographic features and demographic/clinical characteristics were associated with each of the specific phenotypes. Results. The 5 clusters identified were interpreted as “Severe” or “No,” “Early” or “Late” progression of the radiographic features, or specific involvement of “Bone density.” Medial JSW, varus angle, osteophyte area, eminence height, and bone density at baseline were associated with the Severe and Bone density phenotypes. Lesser eminence height and bone density were associated with Early and Late progression. Larger varus angle and smaller osteophyte area were associated with No progression. Conclusion. Five phenotypes of radiographic progression of early knee OA were identified using separate quantitative features, which were associated with baseline radiographic features. Such phenotypes might require specific treatment and represent relevant subgroups for clinical trials.

Patient characteristics as predictors of clinical outcome of distraction in treatment of severe ankle osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a slowly progressive joint disease. Joint distraction can be a treatment of choice in case of severe OA. Prediction of failure will facilitate implementation of joint distraction in clinical practice. Patients with severe ankle OA, who underwent joint distraction were included. Survival analysis was performed over 12 years (n = 25 after 12 years). Regression analyses were used to predict failures and clinical benefit at 2 years after joint distraction (n = 111). Survival analysis showed that 44% of the patients failed, 17% within 2 years and 37% within 5 years after joint distraction (n = 48 after 5 years). Survival analysis in subgroups showed that the percentage failure was only different in women (30% after 2 years) versus men (after 11 years still no 30% failure). In the multivariate analyses female gender was predictive for failure 2 years after joint distraction. Gender and functional disability at baseline predicted more pain. Functional disability and pain at baseline were associated with more functional disability. Joint distraction shows a long‐term clinical beneficial outcome. However, failure rate is considerable over the years. Female patients have a higher chance of failure during follow‐up. Unfortunately, not all potential predictors could be investigated and other clinically significant predictors were not found.