A retrospective study of people with familial hypercholesterolaemia in a Belgian lipid clinic.

BACKGROUND: Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a genetic disease characterised by hypercholesterolaemia and premature cardiovascular events. Early diagnosis and treatment can reduce the cardiovascular burden. We describe the characteristics of patients with heterozygous FH followed in a tertiary hospital in Belgium. METHODS: We retrospectively studied a population of 321 patients with definite heterozygous FH who visited the UZ Leuven lipid clinic at least once between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2020. Data are represented as mean ± SD. RESULTS: The age at time of diagnosis of FH was 39 ± 18 years. Patients with atherosclerotic disease (secondary prevention) were older (p < .001), more often male (p < .001), had a higher body mass index (p < .001), prevalence of (pre)diabetes (p < .001) and hypertension (p < .001) and had lower levels of low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) (p < .001) than individuals without atherosclerotic disease (primary prevention). The average LDL-C in both primary (109 ± 53 mg/dL) and secondary (81 ± 63 mg/dL) prevention did not meet the targets of LDL-C as proposed by the 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias. However, LDL-C levels in the subgroup of patients treated with PCSK9 inhibition therapy, and especially in the triple therapy group (combination of statin, ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitor), were markedly lower (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this Belgian population, people with heterozygous FH remain undertreated. Reaching treatment targets in FH seems possible, although this requires combination treatment (with PCSK9-targeted therapy) in most patients. Earlier diagnosis of FH, more extensive lipid-lowering treatment and reimbursement options and a more holistic approach are needed to lower LDL-C and cardiovascular risk in patients with FH.

Belgian rheumatologists' preferences regarding measures of disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from a mixed-methods study.

The reliability and clinical usefulness of the different composite disease activity scores and their individual components in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) are still debated. This study investigated which measures of disease activity were preferred by rheumatologists. A mixed-method study was performed. First, ten Belgian rheumatologists were invited for individual interviews on their current practice and preferences for measurement of RA disease activity. Results of this qualitative study and evidence from literature served as input for developing a survey. This survey asked rheumatologists to rate preferred standard disease activity score(s), their individual components, ultrasound and related patient-reported outcomes (PROs), by maximum difference scaling. The relative importance score (RIS) for each indicator was calculated using hierarchical Bayes modeling. The qualitative study included 6/10 invited rheumatologists. Composite scores and components were perceived as useful, while PROs were found subjective. Interestingly, ultrasound was used to mediate discrepancies between physician and patient. The survey based on this was sent to 244 Belgian rheumatologists, 83/244 (34%) responded, including 66/83 (80%) complete and 17/83 (20%) incomplete surveys (two missing essential information). Most rheumatologists (75/81, 93%) used a disease activity score and 68/81 (84%) preferred the DAS28-CRP. Swollen joint count obtained the highest mean ± SD RIS (22.54 ± 2.64), followed by DAS28 ESR/CRP (20.61 ± 4.06), ultrasound (16.47 ± 7.97), CRP (13.34 ± 6.11) and physician's global assessment (12.59 ± 7.83). PROs including fatigue, pain, and patient's global assessment, and Health Assessment Questionnaire, obtained the lowest mean RIS (0.34-2.54). Rheumatologists place more faith in self-assessed disease activity components or in laboratory tests. Trust in PROs to evaluate disease activity is low in clinical practice.

Tapering of Etanercept is feasible in patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in sustained remission: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in sustained remission, tapering of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs can be considered. Tapering has already been investigated, but its feasibility remains to be determined. Therefore, we explored the feasibility of tapering etanercept in RA in a setting close to practice. METHOD: Patients with RA in 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) remission (≥ 6 months) and treated with etanercept 50 mg weekly (≥ 1 year) were included in the pragmatic 1 year open-label multicentre randomized controlled TapERA (Tapering Etanercept in Rheumatoid Arthritis) trial. Patients were assigned to continue etanercept weekly or to taper to every other week (EOW). Patients who lost remission [DAS28-C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 2.6] were re-escalated to etanercept weekly. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients maintaining DAS28-CRP remission for 6 months. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were randomized to etanercept weekly (n = 34) or EOW (n = 32). After 6 months, 26/34 patients (76%) in the weekly and 19/32 (59%) in the EOW group maintained disease control (p = 0.136). In the EOW group, 20/32 patients (63%) remained on their tapered treatment during the trial. Two patients reintroduced weekly etanercept themselves. Ten patients were re-escalated to etanercept weekly by the rheumatologist, after a median (interquartile range) interval of 3.0 (2.0-6.0) months. Among these patients, 7/10 regained remission after re-escalation, four of them at the next study visit. CONCLUSIONS: Although non-inferiority could not be demonstrated, tapering of etanercept to EOW appeared feasible in patients in sustained remission.

A systematic review on the effect of DMARDs on fertility in rheumatoid arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Drug therapy could alter fertility in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We aimed to perform a systematic review to evaluate if Disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy influences fertility as this is an important point to consider in shared decision making on RA therapy. METHODS: A search was conducted at 18/10/2019 in EMBASE, PubMed (including MEDLINE) and the Web of Science Core Collection. Our inclusion criteria were studies involving women or men diagnosed with RA, older than 18 years and on DMARD therapy, with as outcome a fertility parameter. Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, case reports, case series and animal studies were excluded. Studies not in English or Dutch or published before 2004 were excluded. Quality appraisal was performed by the CASP systematic review checklist. RESULTS: After duplicate removal, 9030 references were identified. After title/abstract screening, 82 articles remained. After full text screening, 4 articles could be retained. No studies were found through backward snowballing. Only studies involving women could be retained. The included studies investigated the effect of methotrexate, certolizumab pegol, etanercept and sulfasalazine on fertility. No detrimental effects of these DMARDs on time-to-pregnancy, anti-Müllerian hormone serum level or presence of a history of infertility, were reported. CONCLUSION: This systematic review underlines the gap in knowledge regarding the effect of DMARDs on fertility in women and especially men with RA. DMARD treatment, contrary to general belief, seemed to have no harmful effect on fertility, possibly because it resulted in better controlled disease activity. More research is needed to improve guidance for patients with RA with a child wish.

Are illness perception and coping style associated with the delay between symptom onset and the first general practitioner consultation in early rheumatoid arthritis management? An exploratory study within the CareRA trial.

OBJECTIVES: Persons who are later diagnosed with early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA) often delay their first contact with a health professional after symptom onset. Besides initial symptoms, psychosocial characteristics of individuals may influence their help-seeking behaviour. We explored the role of disease characteristics, illness perception, and coping in patient-related delay before treatment initiation in recently diagnosed patients with ERA. METHOD: This exploratory, cross-sectional study included 112 patients with ERA from the Care for early RA (CareRA) trial for whom complete data on patient-related delay, coping, and illness perception were available. In addition to baseline sociodemographic and clinical data, the patients' psychosocial profiles were assessed with the Utrecht Coping List (UCL) and the revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R). Correlations were measured by Spearman's rho. Using regression analyses, we weighted the association of variables with patient-related delay. RESULTS: Patient-related delay was positively correlated with perceptions of causality including psychological attributions (r = 0.301, p = 0.001), risk factors (r = 0.189, p = 0.045), immunity (r = 0.261, p = 0.005), and passive coping (r = 0.222, p = 0.018). It was negatively correlated with the 28 swollen joint count (SJC28; r = -0.194, p = 0.040), perceptions of treatment control (r = -0.271, p = 0.004), and illness coherence (r = -0.208, p = 0.028). Clinical and psychosocial variables explained 15% and 18%, respectively, of the variability in patient-related delay. CONCLUSIONS: Aside from a lower SJC, a longer patient-related delay was correlated with a passive coping style, a strong conviction of symptom causality, poor expected treatment control, and a feeling of limited illness coherence. Psychosocial aspects influence individuals' help-seeking behaviour and are worth considering when aiming for a reduction in ERA treatment delay.

Methotrexate in combination with other DMARDs is not superior to methotrexate alone for remission induction with moderate-to-high-dose glucocorticoid bridging in early rheumatoid arthritis after 16†weeks of treatment: the CareRA trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of intensive combination strategies with glucocorticoids (GCs) in the first 16 weeks (W) of early rheumatoid arthritis (eRA) treatment, focusing on high-risk patients, in the Care in early RA trial. METHODS: 400 disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD)-naive patients with eRA were recruited and stratified into high risk or low risk according to classical prognostic markers. High-risk patients (n=290) were randomised to 1/3 treatment strategies: combination therapy for early rheumatoid arthritis (COBRA) Classic (methotrexate (MTX)+ sulfasalazine+60 mg prednisone tapered to 7.5 mg daily from W7), COBRA Slim (MTX+30 mg prednisone tapered to 5 mg from W6) and COBRA Avant-Garde (MTX+leflunomide+30 mg prednisone tapered to 5 mg from W6). Treatment modifications to target low-disease activity were mandatory from W8, if desirable and feasible according to the rheumatologist. The primary outcome was remission (28 joint disease activity score calculated with C-reactive protein <2.6) at W16 (intention-to-treat analysis). Secondary endpoints were good European League Against Rheumatism response, clinically meaningful health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) response and HAQ equal to zero. Adverse events (AEs) were registered. RESULTS: Data from 98 Classic, 98 Slim and 94 Avant-Garde patients were analysed. At W16, remission was reached in 70.4% Classic, 73.6% Slim and 68.1% Avant-Garde patients (p=0.713). Likewise, no significant differences were shown in other secondary endpoints. However, therapy-related AEs were reported in 61.2% of Classic, in 46.9% of Slim and in 69.1% of Avant-Garde patients (p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: For high-risk eRA, MTX associated with a moderate step-down dose of GCs was as effective in inducing remission at W16 as DMARD combination therapies with moderate or high step-down GC doses and it showed a more favourable short-term safety profile. EUDRACT NUMBER: 2008-007225-39.

Factors influencing the prescription of intensive combination treatment strategies for early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the availability and demonstrated effectiveness of intensive combination treatment strategies (ICTS) for early rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a discrepancy seems to exist between theoretical evidence and actual prescription in daily practice. The purpose of this study was to explore and identify the factors influencing the prescription of ICTS. METHOD: This study involved rheumatologists and nurses participating in the Care for Rheumatoid Arthritis (CareRA) trial, a multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing different ICTS for early RA with conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) plus step-down glucocorticoids (GCs). A qualitative study was carried out using individual semi-structured interviews. Each interview was recorded, transcribed literally, and analysed thematically. In addition, observations at outpatient clinics were used to clarify the interpretation of the results. RESULTS: We interviewed 26 rheumatologists and six nurses and observed five outpatient visits. Identified facilitators included available scientific evidence, personal faith in treatment strategy, staff support, and low treatment costs. Rheumatologists had no doubts about the value of methotrexate (MTX) but some questioned the value of combination strategy, others the effectiveness and/or the dosage of individual compounds. Additional barriers for prescribing ICTS included need for patient education, fear for patients' preconceptions, concerns about applicability to the individual patient, difficulties with breaking routine, interference with organizational structures and processes, time constraints, and lack of financial support. CONCLUSIONS: A heterogeneous set of factors highlights the complexity of prescribing ICTS for early RA in daily clinical practice. Future improvement strategies should stimulate the facilitators while at the same time addressing the barriers. The generalizability of these findings to other health care systems needs further examination.

Two-year clinical and radiologic follow-up of early RA patients treated with initial step up monotherapy or initial step down therapy with glucocorticoids, followed by a tight control approach: lessons from a cohort study in daily practice.

The objective of the study was to evaluate the effect of initial disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) combination therapy with steroids (ICTS) and DMARD monotherapy (IMT) on the clinical and radiologic evolution of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over a 2-year treatment period, applying tight control (TC) in daily practice. Seventy-four DMARD-naive early RA patients received ICTS or IMT in a TC setting. Baseline and year 1 and year 2 X-rays of hands and feet were scored according to Sharp/van der Heijde. Rapid radiographic progression (RRP) was defined as total Sharp score (TSS) of >5 units/year. At year 1, both treatment groups achieved 50 % remission. At year 2, 37 % of IMT and 60 % of ICTS patients were in remission, despite ICTS patients having initially a more severe RA profile. RRP was found in 4/74 patients at year 1: 3 IMT and 1 ICTS patients. Remarkably, three of these four patients had no radiographic progression in the second year. Five other patients had RRP in the second year: four IMT and one ICTS patients. In a TC setting, ICTS and IMT can prevent radiographic progression in the majority of patients in the daily practice of a Belgian academic hospital over 2 years. ICTS seems to be more effective than IMT in achieving higher remission rates and less radiographic progression.

The performance of matrices in daily clinical practice to predict rapid radiologic progression in patients with early RA.

OBJECTIVE: To compare in daily clinical practice the reliability of matrices that forecast rapid radiologic progression (RRP) at year one, at year two, and over 2 years in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Overall, 74 early RA patients with X-rays of hands and feet at baseline, year one, and year two were included. Initial DMARD combination therapy with steroids (ICTS) or DMARD monotherapy (IMT) was initiated according to patients' RA severity, based on rheumatologist opinion. The images were scored via the modified Sharp/van der Heijde (SvH) method. A total Sharp score progression of equal or higher than five per year was considered RRP. Six matrices were tested: ASPIRE CRP/ESR matrices, the BEST matrix, two SWEFOT matrices, and the ESPOIR matrix. Patients were placed in each of them yielding a RRP probability. The performance was tested by Area Under the Curve analysis reflecting the predictive value. RESULTS: Four patients developed RRP in year one, five in year two, and four over 2 years. With regard to face validity, the predicted probability did not correspond to the risk in reality: the one ICTS patient who developed RRP over 2 years was always found in the lowest RRP categories of all matrices. The ASPIRE CRP matrix yielded at least a moderate predicting value for the three time points. The other matrices showed moderate to no predicting value. CONCLUSION: The performance of all matrices was disappointing and it is impossible to fully rely on the existing matrices in daily clinical practice.

A detailed analysis of treatment delay from the onset of symptoms in early rheumatoid arthritis patients.

OBJECTIVES: A treatment delay of more than 12 weeks can negatively affect treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Our aim was to quantify the different stages of delay before RA treatment in different rheumatology centres and to explore influencing factors. METHOD: A total of 156 disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD)-naive early RA patients were included from eight practices: one academic hospital, five general hospitals, and two private practices. Eight different types of delay were defined from symptom onset until treatment initiation. Information on the duration of each stage of delay was collected from the patient, their general practitioner (GP), and patient files at the rheumatology practice. Patient/GP demographics and disease activity/severity parameters were recorded. RESULTS: The median total delay from symptom onset until treatment initiation was 23 weeks whereas patient-, GP- and rheumatologist-related median delay was 10, 4, and 7 weeks, respectively. Only 21.6% of the patients had a total delay of less than 12 weeks. The total median delay in private rheumatology practices was less than in academic and general hospitals (p < 0.001). Furthermore, RA patients treated within 12 weeks of symptom onset showed a higher level of disease activity. The duration of rheumatologist-related delay was inversely correlated with disease activity parameters. Patients with morning stiffness were treated, on average, 3 weeks sooner than those without morning stiffness (p < 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: In only one out of five early RA patients was treatment initiated within 12 weeks of symptom onset, as recommended. Patient-related delay contributed most to overall delay. Disease activity and type of rheumatology centre are pivotal determinants of delay.