Effect of sustained intensive therapy with disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis: a 5-year real-world consecutive study / 中华医学杂志(英文版)

BACKGROUND@#Intensive therapy with disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) has been reported to improve the outcomes of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, real-world study on the effect of intensive therapy on RA sustained remission is still lacking. This study aimed to investigate the outcome of sustained intensive DMARD therapy (SUIT) for RA in a real-world 5-year consecutive cohort.@*METHODS@#Based on a consecutive cohort of 610 out-patients with RA, remission of RA was assessed in 541 patients from 2012 to 2017, by dividing into SUIT, non-SUIT, and intermittent SUIT (Int-SUIT) groups. Changes in the disease activity scores were evaluated by 28-joint disease activity score based on erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR), 28-joint disease activity score based on C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), and clinical deep remission criteria (CliDR). Cumulative remission rates between different groups were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves and predictive factors of sustained remission were identified by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis.@*RESULTS@#The remission rates of the SUIT group decreased from 12.0% (65/541) to 5.6% (20/359) based on DAS28-ESR, from 14.0% (76/541) to 7.2% (26/359) based on DAS28-CRP, and from 8.5% (46/541) to 3.1% (11/359) based on CliDR, respectively, with a gradually decreasing trend during the 5 years. The SUIT regimen led to a significantly higher cumulative remission rate than non-SUIT regimen based on DAS28-ESR (39.7% vs. 19.5%, P = 0.001), DAS28-CRP (42.0% vs. 19.6%, P = 0.001), and CliDR (24.5% vs. 8.7%, P = 0.001). The cumulative remission rates of patients treated with SUIT regimen were significantly higher than those treated with Int-SUIT regimen based on DAS28-ESR (39.7% vs. 25.7%, P = 0.043) and CliDR (24.5% vs. 14.2%, P = 0.047), but there was no significant difference between the two groups based on DAS28-CRP (42.0% vs. 27.4%, P = 0.066). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the use of SUIT regimen was an independent favorable predictor according to different remission definitions (for DAS28-ESR: odds ratio [OR], 2.215, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.271-3.861, P = 0.005; for DAS28-CRP: OR, 1.520, 95% CI: 1.345-1.783, P = 0.002; for CliDR: OR, 1.525, 95% CI: 1.314-1.875, P = 0.013).@*CONCLUSION@#Sustained intensive treatment of RA is an optimal strategy in daily practice and will lead to an increased remission rate.

Comparison of clinical and immunological features between clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis and typical dermatomyositis / 北京大学学报(医学版)

OBJECTIVE@#To study the differences between clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis (CADM) and typical dermatomyositis (DM) on clinical and immunological features.@*METHODS@#By collecting clinical data of 106 CADM patients and 158 DM patients from January 2010 to June 2019 in the department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, the clinical characteristics and immunological features in the two groups were compared, and the distribution characters and the clinical meanings of myositis autoantibodies were discussed in the two groups respectively. Myositis autoantibodies were measured by immunoblotting according to the manufacturers' instructions.@*RESULTS@#In the aspects of clinical manifestations, CADM presented more with onset of interstial lung diseases (ILD) compared with DM (20.7% vs. 7.6%, P=0.002), and CADM-ILD was more likely to be acute ILD (58.3% vs. 26%, P < 0.001), and there were no differences between CADM and DM in cutaneous manifestations, accompanied with connective tissue disease (CTD) and malignancy. In CADM, the positive rate of rheumatoid factors and antinuclear antibodies was lower in DM. The most common myositis specific autoantibodies (MSAs) in CADM were anti-MDA5 (36%), anti-PL-7 (11.2%) and anti-TIF-1γ (10.1%). The most common MSAs in DM were anti-Jo-1 (19.2%), anti-TIF-1γ (11.5%) and anti-MDA5 (11.5%). Anti-MDA5 was correlated with acute ILD and skin ulceration both in CADM and DM; in CADM, skin ulceration was not associated with the titer of anti-MDA5; while in DM, skin ulceration was associated with high titer of anti-MDA5. In DM, anti-TIF-1γ was correlated with heliotrope eruption, V/shawl neck sign, perionychia erythma and malignancy, and higher rate of malignancy was seen in all titers of the anti-TIF-1γ positive patients. In CADM, anti-TIF1-γ showed no correlation with clinical manifestations. The most common myositis associated autoantibody was anti-Ro-52 both in CADM and DM. In CADM, anti-Ro-52 was associated with Raynaud's phenomenon and chronic ILD, while in DM, anti-Ro-52 was associated with mechanic's hands, noninfectious fever and accompanied CTD.@*CONCLUSION@#Compared with DM, ILD is more likely to be acute in CADM. It is different between CADM and DM about the distribution of myositis autoantibodies and the clinical significance of the same myositis antibody, and the clinical significance of some myositis antibodies is related to titers.

Clinical deep remission and related factors in a large cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis / 中华医学杂志(英文版)

BACKGROUND@#Clinical remission is the treatment target in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study aimed to investigate clinical remission and related factors in a large cohort of patients with RA.@*METHODS@#This study composed of 342 patients with RA. Data were collected by face-to-face interview of 1049 patients with RA who visited the Department of Rheumatology of three teaching hospitals from September 2015 to May 2016. The patients with RA were clinically assessed by rheumatologists and a four-page questionnaire was completed on site. Subsequently, patients fulfilled remission criteria were further analyzed. The practicability of different definitions of remission of RA was rated by a panel of rheumatologists. Sustained intensive disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment was defined as a combination treatment with two or more DMARDs for at least 6 months.@*RESULTS@#In this cohort of 342 patients with RA, the proportions of patients achieving remission were 38.0%, 29.5%, 24.9%, 21.1%, 19.0%, 18.1%, and 17.0%, based on criteria of disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28) using CRP (DAS28-CRP), DAS28 using ESR (DAS28-ESR), routine assessment of patient index data 3 (RAPID-3), Boolean, simplified disease activity index (SDAI), clinical disease activity index, and the newly described clinical deep remission (CliDR), respectively. Boolean and CliDR are the best in practicability scored by rheumatologists (7.5 and 8.0, respectively). Compared with the non-sustained intensive group, sustained intensive treatment with DMARDs yielded higher remission rates of 25.6%, 23.8%, and 21.3% in patients with RA based on Boolean (χ = 3.937, P = 0.047), SDAI (χ = 4.666, P = 0.031), and CliDR criteria (χ = 4.297, P = 0.038). The most commonly prescribed conventional synthesized DMARDs (csDMARDs) in patients with RA was leflunomide, followed by methotrexate, and hydroxychloroquine. Compared with the non-remission group, patients achieving remission had a longer median duration of DMARDs (45.0 [22.8-72.3] months, Z = -2.295, P = 0.022).@*CONCLUSIONS@#The findings in this study indicated that clinical deep remission is achievable in patients with RA. Sustained intensive DMARD treatment is needed to achieve a better outcome in RA.

Clinical deep remission and related factors in a large cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis / 中华医学杂志(英文版)

Background:@#Clinical remission is the treatment target in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study aimed to investigate clinical remission and related factors in a large cohort of patients with RA.@*Methods:@#This study composed of 342 patients with RA. Data were collected by face-to-face interview of 1049 patients with RA who visited the Department of Rheumatology of three teaching hospitals from September 2015 to May 2016. The patients with RA were clinically assessed by rheumatologists and a four-page questionnaire was completed on site. Subsequently, patients fulfilled remission criteria were further analyzed. The practicability of different definitions of remission of RA was rated by a panel of rheumatologists. Sustained intensive disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment was defined as a combination treatment with two or more DMARDs for at least 6 months.@*Results:@#In this cohort of 342 patients with RA, the proportions of patients achieving remission were 38.0%, 29.5%, 24.9%, 21.1%, 19.0%, 18.1%, and 17.0%, based on criteria of disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28) using CRP (DAS28-CRP), DAS28 using ESR (DAS28-ESR), routine assessment of patient index data 3 (RAPID-3), Boolean, simplified disease activity index (SDAI), clinical disease activity index, and the newly described clinical deep remission (CliDR), respectively. Boolean and CliDR are the best in practicability scored by rheumatologists (7.5 and 8.0, respectively). Compared with the non-sustained intensive group, sustained intensive treatment with DMARDs yielded higher remission rates of 25.6%, 23.8%, and 21.3% in patients with RA based on Boolean (χ2=3.937, P=0.047), SDAI (χ2=4.666, P=0.031), and CliDR criteria (χ2=4.297, P=0.038). The most commonly prescribed conventional synthesized DMARDs (csDMARDs) in patients with RA was leflunomide, followed by methotrexate, and hydroxychloroquine. Compared with the non-remission group, patients achieving remission had a longer median duration of DMARDs (45.0 [22.8–72.3] months, Z=-2.295, P=0.022).@*Conclusions:@#The findings in this study indicated that clinical deep remission is achievable in patients with RA. Sustained intensive DMARD treatment is needed to achieve a better outcome in RA.

Family history of rheumatic diseases in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a large scale cross-sectional study / 北京大学学报(医学版)

OBJECTIVE@#To determine the associations between the family history of rheumatic diseases and clinical features in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).@*METHODS@#In total, eight hundred and ninety patients with RA were enrolled. The demographic and clinical data were collected, including gender, age, height, body weight, age of disease onset, history of smoking and drinking, family history of rheumatic diseases, clinical and laboratory features, pain and global visual analogue scale (VAS), and multi-dimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ). Finally, 803 patients were completed the dataset and were included in the study.@*RESULTS@#In this cohort, the male/female ratio was 1:3.5, and the age of onset was (45.09±14.50) years. A total of 123 (15.32%) patients were accompanied with family history of rheumatic diseases, including RA, spondyloarthritis, Sjögren's syndrome, systemic lupus erythematosus and systemic sclerosis. The percentages of first degree, second degree and both first and second degree relatives were 91 (73.98%), 22 (17.89%), and 10 (8.13%) respectively. The most common disease was RA (70.73%), followed by other rheumatic diseases (21.95%), and RA combined with other rheumatic diseases (7.32%). The clinical and laboratory characteristics were compared between the patients with and without family history. The onset-age of the subjects was significantly different between those with and without family history of rheumatic diseases (39.97 ±13.68 vs. 46.01±14.46; P<0.01), which meant that the onset-age in patients with family history was 6.04 years earlier than that in patients without family history. The patients with family history had higher positive rate of rheumatoid factor (RF) compared with those without family history (78.48% vs. 66.67%, P<0.05). By adjusting with gender, body mass index (BMI), smoking and alcohol drinking, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) antibody and RF level, the age at disease onset in the patients with family history was 4.54 years earlier than that in the patients without family history (β=-4.54; 95%CI:-8.70, -0.38; P<0.05). Further hierarchical regression analysis showed that, the age at onset of the RA patients with family history was 10.02 years earlier than that without family history among the smoking patients (β= -10.02; 95%CI:-17.60, -2.43; P=0.01), while the age at onset of the RA patients with family history was 3.27 years earlier than that without family history among the never smoking patients (β=-3.27; 95%CI:-8.37, 1.82; P=0.21).@*CONCLUSION@#The family history of rheumatic diseases is a risk factor for early onset of RA, and may interact with smoking.