Marjatta Leirisalo-Repo

Comparison of combination therapy with single-drug therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised trial

BACKGROUND The treatment of rheumatoid arthritis should aim at clinical remission. This multicentre, randomised trial with 2-year follow-up sought evidence on the efficacy and tolerability of combination therapy (sulphasalazine, methotrexate, hydroxychloroquine, and prednisolone) compared with treatment with a single disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, with or without prednisolone, in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS 199 patients were randomly assigned to two treatment groups. 195 started the treatment (97 received combination and 98 single drug therapy). Single-drug therapy in all patients started with sulphasalazine; in 51 patients methotrexate was later substituted. Oral prednisolone was required by 63 patients. The primary outcome measure was induction of remission. Analyses were intention to treat. FINDINGS 87 patients in the combination group and 91 in the single-therapy group completed the trial. After a year, remission was achieved in 24 of 97 patients with combination therapy, and 11 of 98 with single-drug therapy (p=0.011). The remission frequencies at 2 years were 36 of 97 and 18 of 98 (p=0.003). Clinical improvement (American College of Rheumatology criteria of 50% clinical response) was achieved after 1 year in 68 (75%) patients with combination therapy, and in 56 (60%) using single-drug therapy (p=0.028), while at the 2-year visit 69 and 57 respectively (71% vs 58%, p=0.058) had clinically improved. The frequencies of adverse events were similar in both treatment groups. INTERPRETATION Combination therapy was better and not more hazardous than single treatment in induction of remission in early rheumatoid arthritis. The combination strategy as an initial therapy seems to increase the efficacy of the treatment in at least a proportion of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.

ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis

Objective: To develop evidence based recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) as a combined effort of the ‘ASsessment in AS’ international working group and the European League Against Rheumatism. Methods: Each of the 22 participants was asked to contribute up to 15 propositions describing key clinical aspects of AS management. A Delphi process was used to select 10 final propositions. A systematic literature search was then performed to obtain scientific evidence for each proposition. Outcome data for efficacy, adverse effects, and cost effectiveness were abstracted. The effect size, relative risk, number needed to treat, and incremental cost effectiveness ratio were calculated. On the basis of the search results, 10 major recommendations for the management of AS were constructed. The strength of recommendation was assessed based on the strength of the literature evidence, risk-benefit trade-off, and clinical expertise. Results: The final recommendations considered the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (conventional NSAIDs, coxibs, and co-prescription of gastroprotective agents), disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, treatments with biological agents, simple analgesics, local and systemic steroids, non-pharmacological treatment (including education, exercise, and physiotherapy), and surgical interventions. Three general recommendations were also included. Research evidence (categories I–IV) supported 11 interventions in the treatment of AS. Strength of recommendation varied, depending on the category of evidence and expert opinion. Conclusion: Ten key recommendations for the treatment of AS were developed and assessed using a combination of research based evidence and expert consensus. Regular updating will be carried out to keep abreast of new developments in the management of AS.

The development of Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis (part I): classification of paper patients by expert opinion including uncertainty appraisal

Objective: Non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) is characterised by a lack of definitive radiographic sacroiliitis and is considered an early stage of ankylosing spondylitis. The objective of this study was to develop candidate classification criteria for axial SpA that include patients with but also without radiographic sacroiliitis. Methods: Seventy-one patients with possible axial SpA, most of whom were lacking definite radiographic sacroiliitis, were reviewed as “paper patients” by 20 experts from the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS). Unequivocally classifiable patients were identified based on the aggregate expert opinion in conjunction with the expert-reported level of certainty of their judgement. Draft criteria for axial SpA were formulated and tested using classifiable patients. Results: Active sacroiliitis on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (odds ratio 45, 95% CI 5.3 to 383; p<0.001) was strongly associated with the classification of axial SpA. The knowledge of MRI findings led to a change in the classification of 21.1% of patients. According to the first set of candidate criteria (sensitivity 97.1%; specificity 94.7%) a patient with chronic back pain is classified as axial SpA in the presence of sacroiliitis by MRI or x rays in conjunction with one SpA feature or, if sacroilitiis is absent, in the presence of at least three SpA features. In a second set of candidate criteria, inflammatory back pain is obligatory in the clinical arm (sensitivity 86.1%; specificity 94.7%). Conclusion: The ASAS group has developed candidate criteria for the classification of axial SpA that include patients without radiographic sacroiliitis. The candidate criteria need to be validated in an independent international study.

Crossreaction between antibodies to oxidised low-density lipoprotein and to cardiolipin in systemic lupus erythematosus

Serum lipoproteins contain phospholipids and modified low-density lipoprotein (LDL) may thus act as a target for antiphospholipid antibodies. Raised concentrations of IgG antibodies against oxidised LDL were found in 47 of 61 (80%) patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). 46% of patients also had raised concentrations of IgG anticardiolipin antibodies. Binding of anticardiolipin antibodies to solid-phase cardiolipin was inhibited by oxidised LDL but not by native LDL in 16 of 21 sera from SLE patients. These observations suggest crossreactivity between antiphospholipid antibodies, which are closely associated with thrombosis in SLE, and antibodies to oxidised LDL, thus providing a possible link between thrombotic and atherosclerotic complications in SLE.

New criteria for inflammatory back pain in patients with chronic back pain: a real patient exercise by experts from the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS)

Objective: Inflammatory back pain (IBP) is an important clinical symptom in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (SpA), and relevant for classification and diagnosis. In the present report, a new approach for the development of IBP classification criteria is discussed. Methods: Rheumatologists (n = 13) who are experts in SpA took part in a 2-day international workshop to investigate 20 patients with back pain and possible SpA. Each expert documented the presence/absence of clinical parameters typical for IBP, and judged whether IBP was considered present or absent based on the received information. This expert judgement was used as the dependent variable in a logistic regression analysis in order to identify those individual IBP parameters that contributed best to a diagnosis of IBP. The new set of IBP criteria was validated in a separate cohort of patients (n = 648). Results: Five parameters best explained IBP according to the experts. These were: (1) improvement with exercise (odds ratio (OR) 23.1); (2) pain at night (OR 20.4); (3) insidious onset (OR 12.7); (4) age at onset <40 years (OR 9.9); and (5) no improvement with rest (OR 7.7). If at least four out of these five parameters were fulfilled, the criteria had a sensitivity of 77.0% and specificity of 91.7% in the patients participating in the workshop, and 79.6% and 72.4%, respectively, in the validation cohort. Conclusion: This new approach with real patients defines a set of IBP definition criteria using overall expert judgement on IBP as the gold standard. The IBP experts’ criteria are robust, easy to apply and have good face validity.

Outcomes of a multicentre randomised clinical trial of etanercept to treat ankylosing spondylitis

Objective: A double blind, randomised, placebo controlled study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of etanercept to treat adult patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Methods: Adult patients with AS at 14 European sites were randomly assigned to 25 mg injections of etanercept or placebo twice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was an improvement of at least 20% in patient reported symptoms, based on the multicomponent Assessments in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) response criteria (ASAS 20). Secondary end points included ASAS 50 and ASAS 70 responses and improved scores on individual components of ASAS, the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), acute phase reactants, and spinal mobility tests. Safety was evaluated during scheduled visits. Results: Of 84 patients enrolled, 45 received etanercept and 39 received placebo. Significantly more etanercept patients than placebo patients responded at the ASAS 20 level as early as week 2, and sustained differences were evident up to week 12. Significantly more etanercept patients reported ASAS 50 responses at all times and ASAS 70 responses at weeks 2, 4, and 8; reported lower composite and fatigue BASDAI scores; had lower acute phase reactant levels; and had improved spinal flexion. Etanercept was well tolerated. Most adverse events were mild to moderate; the only between-group difference was injection site reactions, which occurred significantly more often in etanercept patients. Conclusions: Etanercept is a well tolerated and effective treatment for reducing clinical symptoms and signs of AS.

Combination therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised, controlled, double blind 52 week clinical trial of sulphasalazine and methotrexate compared with the single components

OBJECTIVES To investigate the potential clinical benefit of a combination therapy. METHODS 205 patients fulfilling the ACR criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), not treated with disease modifying anti-rheumatoid drugs previously, with an early (⩽1 year duration), active (Disease Activity Score (DAS) > 3.0), rheumatoid factor and/or HLA DR 1/4 positive disease were randomised between sulphasalazine (SASP) 2000 (maximum 3000) mg daily (n = 68), or methotrexate (MTX) 7.5 (maximum 15) mg weekly (n = 69) or the combination (SASP + MTX) of both (n = 68). RESULTS The mean changes in the DAS during the one year follow up of the study was −1.15, −0.87, −1.26 in the SASP, MTX, and SASP + MTX group respectively (p = 0.019). However, there was no statistically significant difference in terms of either EULAR good responders 34%, 38%, 38% or ACR criteria responders 59%, 59%, 65% in the SASP, MTX, and SASP + MTX group respectively. Radiological progression evaluated by the modified Sharp score was very modest in the three groups: mean changes in erosion score: +2.4, +2.4, +1.9, in narrowing score: +2.3, +2.1, +1.6 and in total damage score: +4.6, +4.5, +3.5, in the SASP, MTX, and SASP + MTX groups respectively. Adverse events occurred more frequently in the SASP + MTX group 91% versus 75% in the SASP and MTX group (p = 0.025). Nausea was the most frequent side effect: 32%, 23%, 49% in the SASP, MTX, and SASP + MTX groups respectively (p = 0.007). CONCLUSION This study suggests that an early initiation therapy of disease modifying drug seems to be of benefit. However, this study was unable to demonstrate a clinically relevant superiority of the combination therapy although several outcomes were in favour of this observation. The tolerability of the three treatment modalities seems acceptable.

Impaired Responsiveness to NO in Newly Diagnosed Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objective—Cardiovascular disease is the major cause of excessive mortality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We determined whether endothelial dysfunction characterizes patients with newly diagnosed RA (n=10) compared with normal subjects (control group, n=33) and whether it is reversible with 6 months of anti-inflammatory therapy. Methods and Results—Endothelial function was determined by measuring vasodilatory responses to intrabrachial artery infusions of acetylcholine (ACh at 7.5 and 15 &mgr;g/min, low and high dose, respectively), an endothelium-dependent vasodilator, and to sodium nitroprusside (SNP, 3 and 10 &mgr;g/min), an endothelium-independent vasodilator. Before treatment, blood flow responses (fold increase in flow) to low-dose SNP were 30% lower in the RA versus the control group (4.1±0.4-fold versus 5.9±0.5-fold, respectively), and responses to high-dose SNP were 34% lower in the RA group versus the control group (5.1±0.6-fold versus 7.7±0.7-fold, respectively;P <0.001). The responses to low-dose ACh were 50% lower in the RA group versus the control group (3.0±0.5-fold versus 6.6±0.7-fold, respectively), and responses to high-dose ACh were 37% lower in the RA group versus the control group (5.0±0.4-fold versus 7.9±0.8-fold, respectively;P <0.001). After therapy, clinical and laboratory markers of inflammation had significantly decreased. Blood flow responses to ACh increased significantly (P =0.02). Conclusions—We conclude that newly diagnosed patients with RA have vascular dysfunction, which is reversible with successful therapy. Therefore, early suppression of inflammatory activity may reduce long-term vascular damage.

Annual incidence of inflammatory joint diseases in a population based study in southern Sweden

Objective: To estimate the annual incidence of inflammatory joint diseases in a population based prospective referral study in an adult population in Kronoberg County in southern Sweden. Methods: The patients were referred from primary healthcare centres to the rheumatology department in Växjö Central Hospital or to the one private rheumatologist in Växjö participating in the study. Additionally, the hospital records for patients with joint aspirates during the inclusion period were checked. The patients were registered as incident cases if the onset of the joint inflammation was between 1 May 1999 and 1 May 2000. A systematic follow up of incoming referrals was conducted up to 31 January 2001. Children under the age of 16 and patients with septic arthritis, crystal arthropathies, and osteoarthritis were excluded from the study. Results: A total of 151 new cases with inflammatory joint diseases were identified during one year, corresponding to a total annual incidence of 115/100 000. Of these, 31 patients (21%) had rheumatoid arthritis, the annual incidence being 24/100 000 (for women 29/100 000, and for men 18/100 000). Reactive arthritis was diagnosed in 37 patients (24%, annual incidence 28/100 000) and 54 patients had undifferentiated arthritis (36%, annual incidence 41/100 000). Eleven patients presented with psoriatic arthritis (7%, annual incidence 8/100 000). The incidence of Lyme arthritis was small in this non-endemic area, and the incidence of sarcoid arthritis corresponded to that in earlier studies. Conclusion: This is the first prospective population based annual incidence study of early arthritis in Sweden. In this population, 36% of the incident cases had undifferentiated arthritis, whereas rheumatoid arthritis and reactive arthritis accounted for 45% of the cases. The incidence figures compare well with figures reported from other countries.

Only high disease activity and positive rheumatoid factor indicate poor prognosis in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis treated with “sawtooth” strategy

OBJECTIVES To investigate the prognostic significance of clinical and genetic markers on the outcome of patients with recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated actively with slow acting antirheumatic drugs (SAARDs). METHODS A total of 142 consecutive patients with early RA (median disease duration of 7 months) were treated according to the “sawtooth” strategy and prospectively followed up for an average of 6.2 years. Several clinical parameters at start as well as genetic markers were related to the functional outcome (ARA Functional class and HAQ disability score) and radiographic joint damage (Larsen’s score) at the latest visit. RESULTS In logistic regression analysis only Mallya score (including morning stiffness, pain scale, grip strength, Ritchie’s articular index, haemoglobin, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate) at baseline, and Mallya score and rheumatoid factor (RF) positivity at one year were found to be of significance with respect to the radiographic outcome of the patients. Furthermore, at the latest visit HAQ score was related to radiographic score. At baseline the mean ages of the DR4 positive patients and the patients with RA associated DR alleles were statistically significantly lower than those without the above mentioned risk factors (44 v 49, p=0.03 and 41 v 53, p=0.04, respectively). However, these genetic markers had no prognostic significance on the functional or radiographic outcome of the patients. CONCLUSION High clinical disease activity at baseline and RF positivity especially at one year after the institution of SAARD treatment are the best predictors of poor prognosis in early RA. However, from the clinical point of view, the disease outcome of an individual patient with early RA, cannot be predicted accurately enough by present means.