Philip J. Mease

The American College of Rheumatology Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia and Measurement of Symptom Severity

To develop simple, practical criteria for clinical diagnosis of fibromyalgia that are suitable for use in primary and specialty care and that do not require a tender point examination, and to provide a severity scale for characteristic fibromyalgia symptoms.

Etanercept in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis: a randomised trial

BACKGROUND Etanercept, a tumour-necrosis-factor inhibitor, has shown efficacy in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis are disease states in which tumour necrosis factor, a proinflammatory cytokine, is present in increased concentrations in joints and in the skin. Therefore, psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis may be appropriate therapeutic targets for etanercept. METHODS This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12 week study assessed the efficacy and safety of etanercept (25 mg twice-weekly subcutaneous injections) or placebo in 60 patients with psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis. Psoriatic arthritis endpoints included the proportion of patients who met the Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) and who met the American College of Rheumatology preliminary criteria for improvement (ACR20). Psoriasis endpoints included improvement in the psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) and improvement in prospectively-identified individual target lesions. FINDINGS In this 12 week study, 26 (87%) of etanercept-treated patients met the PsARC, compared with seven (23%) of placebo-controlled patients. The ARC20 was achieved by 22 (73%) of etanercept-treated patients compared with four (13%) of placebo-treated patients. Of the 19 patients in each treatment group who could be assessed for psoriasis (> or = 3% body surface area), five (26%) of etanercept-treated patients achieved a 75% improvement in the PASI, compared with none of the placebo-treated patients (p=0.015). The median PASI improvement was 46% in etanercept-treated patients versus 9% in placebo-treated patients; similarly, median target lesion improvements were 50% and 0, respectively. Etanercept was well tolerated. INTERPRETATION Etanercept offers patients with psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis a new therapeutic option for control of their disease.

Updated consensus statement on biological agents for the treatment of rheumatic diseases, 2009

As in previous years, the consensus group to consider the use of biological agents in the treatment of rheumatic diseases met during the 13th Annual Workshop on Advances in Targeted Therapies in April, 2011. The group consisted of rheumatologists from a number of universities among the continents of Europe, North America, South America, Australia and Asia. Pharmaceutical industry support was obtained from a number of companies for the annual workshop itself, but these companies had no part in the decisions about the specific programme or about the academic participants at this conference. Representatives of the supporting sponsors participated in the initial working groups to supply factual information. The sponsors did not participate in the drafting of the consensus statement. This consensus was prepared from the perspective of the treating physician. In view of the new data for abatacept, B cell-specific agents, interleukin 1 (IL-1) antagonists, tocilizumab (TCZ) and tumour necrosis factor α blocking agents (TNF inhibitors), an update of the previous consensus statement is appropriate. To allow ease of updating, the 2010 (data from March 2009 to January 2010) updates are incorporated into the body of the article, while 2011 updates (February 2010–January 2011) are separated and highlighted. The consensus statement is annotated to document the credibility of the data supporting it as much as possible. This annotation is that of Shekelle et al and is described in appendix 1.1 We have modified the Shekelle annotation by designating all abstracts as ‘category D evidence’, whether they describe well-controlled trials or not, as details of the study were often not available in the abstracts. Further, the number of possible references has become so large that reviews are sometimes included; if they contain category A references, they will be referred to as category A evidence. The rheumatologists and bioscientists who attended …

Psoriatic arthritis: epidemiology, clinical features, course, and outcome

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has been defined as a unique inflammatory arthritis associated with psoriasis. Its exact prevalence is unknown, but estimates vary from 0.3% to 1% of the population. The clinical features described initially are recognised by most experienced clinicians, although they are most distinct in early disease. Initially, PsA typically presents as an oligoarticular and mild disease. However, with time PsA becomes polyarticular, and it is a severe disease in at least 20% of patients. Patients with PsA who present with polyarticular disease are at risk for disease progression. In addition to progression of clinical and radiological damage, health related quality of life is reduced among patients with PsA. It important to note that patients included in recent drug trials resemble patients followed prospectively in a clinic.

Fibromyalgia Criteria and Severity Scales for Clinical and Epidemiological Studies: A Modification of the ACR Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia

Objective. To develop a fibromyalgia (FM) survey questionnaire for epidemiologic and clinical studies using a modification of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia (ACR 2010). We also created a new FM symptom scale to further characterize FM severity. Methods. The ACR 2010 consists of 2 scales, the Widespread Pain Index (WPI) and the Symptom Severity (SS) scale. We modified these ACR 2010 criteria by eliminating the physician’s estimate of the extent of somatic symptoms and substituting the sum of 3 specific self-reported symptoms. We also created a 0–31 FM Symptom scale (FS) by adding the WPI to the modified SS scale. We administered the questionnaire to 729 patients previously diagnosed with FM, 845 with osteoarthritis (OA) or with other noninflammatory rheumatic conditions, 439 with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and 5210 with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Results. The modified ACR 2010 criteria were satisfied by 60% with a prior diagnosis of FM, 21.1% with RA, 16.8% with OA, and 36.7% with SLE. The criteria properly identified diagnostic groups based on FM severity variables. An FS score ≥ 13 best separated criteria+ and criteria− patients, classifying 93.0% correctly, with a sensitivity of 96.6% and a specificity of 91.8% in the study population. Conclusion. A modification to the ACR 2010 criteria will allow their use in epidemiologic and clinical studies without the requirement for an examiner. The criteria are simple to use and administer, but they are not to be used for self-diagnosis. The FS may have wide utility beyond the bounds of FM, including substitution for widespread pain in epidemiological studies.

Certolizumab pegol plus methotrexate is significantly more effective than placebo plus methotrexate in active rheumatoid arthritis: Findings of a fifty-two–week, phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study†‡

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 dosage regimens of lyophilized certolizumab pegol (a novel PEGylated anti-tumor necrosis factor agent) as adjunctive therapy to methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to MTX therapy alone. METHODS In this 52-week, phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, 982 patients were randomized 2:2:1 to receive treatment with subcutaneous certolizumab pegol at an initial dosage of 400 mg given at weeks 0, 2, and 4, with a subsequent dosage of 200 mg or 400 mg given every 2 weeks, plus MTX, or placebo plus MTX. Co-primary end points were the response rate at week 24 according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% criteria for improvement (ACR20) and the mean change from baseline in the modified total Sharp score at week 52. RESULTS At week 24, ACR20 response rates using nonresponder imputation for the certolizumab pegol 200-mg and 400-mg groups were 58.8% and 60.8%, respectively, as compared with 13.6% for the placebo group. Differences in ACR20 response rates versus placebo were significant at week 1 and were sustained to week 52 (P < 0.001). At week 52, mean radiographic progression from baseline was reduced in patients treated with certolizumab pegol 200 mg (0.4 Sharp units) or 400 mg (0.2 Sharp units) as compared with that in placebo-treated patients (2.8 Sharp units) (P < 0.001 by rank analysis). Improvements in all ACR core set of disease activity measures, including physical function, were observed by week 1 with both certolizumab pegol dosage regimens. Most adverse events were mild or moderate. CONCLUSION Treatment with certolizumab pegol 200 or 400 mg plus MTX resulted in a rapid and sustained reduction in RA signs and symptoms, inhibited the progression of structural joint damage, and improved physical function as compared with placebo plus MTX treatment in RA patients with an incomplete response to MTX.

Golimumab, a new human tumor necrosis factor α antibody, administered every four weeks as a subcutaneous injection in psoriatic arthritis: Twenty-four–week efficacy and safety results of a randomized, placebo-controlled study†

OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy and safety of golimumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS Adult patients with PsA who had at least 3 swollen and 3 tender joints and active psoriasis were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous injections of placebo (n = 113), golimumab 50 mg (n = 146), or golimumab 100 mg (n = 146) every 4 weeks through week 20. Efficacy assessments through week 24 included the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20), the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) in patients in whom at least 3% of the body surface area was affected by psoriasis at baseline, the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36), the disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), the Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI), the physicians global assessment of psoriatic nail disease, and enthesitis (using the PsA-modified Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score [MASES] index). RESULTS At week 14, 48% of all patients receiving golimumab, 51% of patients receiving golimumab 50 mg, and 45% of patients receiving golimumab 100 mg achieved an ACR20 response (the primary end point), compared with 9% of patients receiving placebo (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). Among the 74% of patients in whom at least 3% of the body surface area was affected by psoriasis at baseline, 40% of those in the golimumab 50 mg group and 58% of those in the golimumab 100 mg group had at least 75% improvement in the PASI at week 14 (major secondary end point), compared with 3% of placebo-treated patients (P < 0.001 for both doses). Significant improvement was observed for other major secondary end points (the HAQ and the SF-36), the NAPSI, the physicians global assessment of psoriatric nail disease, and the PsA-modified MASES index in each golimumab group compared with placebo. This efficacy was maintained through week 24. Golimumab was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION Treatment with golimumab at doses of 50 mg and 100 mg significantly improved active PsA and associated skin and nail psoriasis through week 24.

Treatment recommendations for psoriatic arthritis

Objective: To develop comprehensive recommendations for the treatment of the various clinical manifestations of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) based on evidence obtained from a systematic review of the literature and from consensus opinion. Methods: Formal literature reviews of treatment for the most significant discrete clinical manifestations of PsA (skin and nails, peripheral arthritis, axial disease, dactylitis and enthesitis) were performed and published by members of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA). Treatment recommendations were drafted for each of the clinical manifestations by rheumatologists, dermatologists and PsA patients based on the literature reviews and consensus opinion. The level of agreement for the individual treatment recommendations among GRAPPA members was assessed with an online questionnaire. Results: Treatment recommendations were developed for peripheral arthritis, axial disease, psoriasis, nail disease, dactylitis and enthesitis in the setting of PsA. In rotal, 19 recommendations were drafted, and over 80% agreement was obtained on 16 of them. In addition, a grid that factors disease severity into each of the different disease manifestations was developed to help the clinician with treatment decisions for the individual patient from an evidenced-based perspective. Conclusions: Treatment recommendations for the cardinal physical manifestations of PsA were developed based on a literature review and consensus between rheumatologists and dermatologists. In addition, a grid was established to assist in therapeutic reasoning and decision making for individual patients. It is anticipated that periodic updates will take place using this framework as new data become available.

Efficacy and safety of duloxetine for treatment of fibromyalgia in patients with or without major depressive disorder: Results from a 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose trial

&NA; The primary objectives of this study were to assess the efficacy and safety of duloxetine for reducing pain severity in fibromyalgia patients with or without current major depressive disorder. This was a 6‐month, multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study. In total, 520 patients meeting American College of Rheumatology criteria for fibromyalgia were randomly assigned to duloxetine (20 mg/day, 60 mg/day, or 120 mg/day) or placebo, administered once daily, for 6 months (after 3 months, the duloxetine 20‐mg/day group titrated to 60 mg/day). The co‐primary outcome measures were the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain severity score and Patient Global Impressions of Improvement (PGI‐I) score. Safety was assessed via treatment‐emergent adverse events, and changes in vital sign, laboratory, and ECG measures. Compared with placebo‐treated patients, those patients treated with duloxetine 120 mg/day improved significantly more on the co‐primary outcome measures at 3 months (change in BPI score [−2.31 vs −1.39, P < 0.001] and PGI‐I [2.89 vs 3.39, P = 0.004]) and at 6 months (change in BPI [−2.26 vs −1.43, P = 0.003] and PGI‐I [2.93 vs 3.37, P = 0.012]). Compared with placebo, treatment with duloxetine 60 mg/day also significantly improved the co‐primary measures at 3 months and BPI at 6 months. Duloxetine was efficacious in patients both with and without major depressive disorder. There were no clinically significant differences between treatment groups in changes in vital signs, laboratory measures, or ECG measures. Study results demonstrated that duloxetine at doses of 60 mg/day and 120 mg/day appears to be safe and efficacious in patients with fibromyalgia.

Efficacy and Safety of Certolizumab Pegol Plus Methotrexate in Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: The RAPID 2 Study

Background: Certolizumab pegol is a PEGylated tumour necrosis factor inhibitor. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol versus placebo, plus methotrexate (MTX), in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: An international, multicentre, phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in active adult-onset RA. Patients (n = 619) were randomised 2:2:1 to subcutaneous certolizumab pegol (liquid formulation) 400 mg at weeks 0, 2 and 4 followed by 200 mg or 400 mg plus MTX, or placebo plus MTX, every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. The primary end point was ACR20 response at week 24. Secondary end points included ACR50 and ACR70 responses, change from baseline in modified Total Sharp Score, ACR core set variables and physical function. Results: Significantly more patients in the certolizumab pegol 200 mg and 400 mg groups achieved an ACR20 response versus placebo (p⩽0.001); rates were 57.3%, 57.6% and 8.7%, respectively. Certolizumab pegol 200 and 400 mg also significantly inhibited radiographic progression; mean changes from baseline in mTSS at week 24 were 0.2 and −0.4, respectively, versus 1.2 for placebo (rank analysis p⩽0.01). Certolizumab pegol-treated patients reported rapid and significant improvements in physical function versus placebo; mean changes from baseline in HAQ-DI at week 24 were −0.50 and −0.50, respectively, versus −0.14 for placebo (p⩽0.001). Most adverse events were mild or moderate, with low incidence of withdrawals due to adverse events. Five patients developed tuberculosis. Conclusion: Certolizumab pegol plus MTX was more efficacious than placebo plus MTX, rapidly and significantly improving signs and symptoms of RA and physical function and inhibiting radiographic progression. Trial registration number: NCT00175877