Key clinical point: Regular vitamin E supplementation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may help reduce joint discomfort, edema, and stiffness, thus enhancing the overall quality of life.

Major finding: Patients with RA who received regular vitamin E supplementation showed improvements in uncomfortable joints (mean difference [MD] −0.62; 95% CI −12.59 to 11.36) and tender joints (MD −1.66; 95% CI −6.32 to 2.99) compared with those who received placebo, fish oil, or other medications, without any significant safety concerns.

Study details: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of nine studies including 39,845 individuals with RA who received vitamin E (experimental group) or placebo, fish oil, or other medications (control group).

Disclosures: This study was supported by funding from the Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province, China. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Kou H et al. Effect of vitamin E supplementation in rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2022 (Apr 25). Doi: 10.1038/s41430-022-01148-9

Key clinical point: Regular vitamin E supplementation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may help reduce joint discomfort, edema, and stiffness, thus enhancing the overall quality of life.

Major finding: Patients with RA who received regular vitamin E supplementation showed improvements in uncomfortable joints (mean difference [MD] −0.62; 95% CI −12.59 to 11.36) and tender joints (MD −1.66; 95% CI −6.32 to 2.99) compared with those who received placebo, fish oil, or other medications, without any significant safety concerns.

Study details: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of nine studies including 39,845 individuals with RA who received vitamin E (experimental group) or placebo, fish oil, or other medications (control group).

Disclosures: This study was supported by funding from the Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province, China. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Kou H et al. Effect of vitamin E supplementation in rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2022 (Apr 25). Doi: 10.1038/s41430-022-01148-9

Key clinical point: Regular vitamin E supplementation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may help reduce joint discomfort, edema, and stiffness, thus enhancing the overall quality of life.

Major finding: Patients with RA who received regular vitamin E supplementation showed improvements in uncomfortable joints (mean difference [MD] −0.62; 95% CI −12.59 to 11.36) and tender joints (MD −1.66; 95% CI −6.32 to 2.99) compared with those who received placebo, fish oil, or other medications, without any significant safety concerns.

Study details: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of nine studies including 39,845 individuals with RA who received vitamin E (experimental group) or placebo, fish oil, or other medications (control group).

Disclosures: This study was supported by funding from the Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province, China. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Kou H et al. Effect of vitamin E supplementation in rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2022 (Apr 25). Doi: 10.1038/s41430-022-01148-9

Key clinical point: Regular vitamin E supplementation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may help reduce joint discomfort, edema, and stiffness, thus enhancing the overall quality of life.

Major finding: Patients with RA who received regular vitamin E supplementation showed improvements in uncomfortable joints (mean difference [MD] −0.62; 95% CI −12.59 to 11.36) and tender joints (MD −1.66; 95% CI −6.32 to 2.99) compared with those who received placebo, fish oil, or other medications, without any significant safety concerns.

Study details: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of nine studies including 39,845 individuals with RA who received vitamin E (experimental group) or placebo, fish oil, or other medications (control group).

Disclosures: This study was supported by funding from the Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province, China. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Kou H et al. Effect of vitamin E supplementation in rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2022 (Apr 25). Doi: 10.1038/s41430-022-01148-9

Key clinical point: Regular vitamin E supplementation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may help reduce joint discomfort, edema, and stiffness, thus enhancing the overall quality of life.

Major finding: Patients with RA who received regular vitamin E supplementation showed improvements in uncomfortable joints (mean difference [MD] −0.62; 95% CI −12.59 to 11.36) and tender joints (MD −1.66; 95% CI −6.32 to 2.99) compared with those who received placebo, fish oil, or other medications, without any significant safety concerns.

Study details: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of nine studies including 39,845 individuals with RA who received vitamin E (experimental group) or placebo, fish oil, or other medications (control group).

Disclosures: This study was supported by funding from the Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province, China. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Kou H et al. Effect of vitamin E supplementation in rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2022 (Apr 25). Doi: 10.1038/s41430-022-01148-9

Key clinical point: Regular vitamin E supplementation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may help reduce joint discomfort, edema, and stiffness, thus enhancing the overall quality of life.

Major finding: Patients with RA who received regular vitamin E supplementation showed improvements in uncomfortable joints (mean difference [MD] −0.62; 95% CI −12.59 to 11.36) and tender joints (MD −1.66; 95% CI −6.32 to 2.99) compared with those who received placebo, fish oil, or other medications, without any significant safety concerns.

Study details: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of nine studies including 39,845 individuals with RA who received vitamin E (experimental group) or placebo, fish oil, or other medications (control group).

Disclosures: This study was supported by funding from the Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province, China. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Kou H et al. Effect of vitamin E supplementation in rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2022 (Apr 25). Doi: 10.1038/s41430-022-01148-9

Key clinical point: Treatment with tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) vs. abatacept did not reduce the risk of developing Alzheimer disease and related dementia (ADRD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Major finding: The risk for ADRD associated with tofacitinib (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.90; 95% CI 0.55-1.51), tocilizumab (aHR 0.82; 95% CI 0.55-1.21), and TNFi (aHR 0.93; 95% CI 0.72-1.20) was similar to that with abatacept.

Study details: This was an observational study including 22,569 patients aged ≥65 years with RA from the DREAM study who were treated with tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or TNFi and were propensity score-matched with an equal number of patients treated with abatacept.

Disclosures: The DREAM study is funded by the National Institute on Aging. Several authors reported receiving grants, personal fees, or salary support from or owning stocks in various sources outside the submitted work.

Source: Desai RJ et al. Comparative risk of Alzheimer disease and related dementia among Medicare beneficiaries with rheumatoid arthritis treated with targeted disease-modifying antirheumatic agents. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(4):e226567 (Apr 8). Doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.6567

Key clinical point: Treatment with tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) vs. abatacept did not reduce the risk of developing Alzheimer disease and related dementia (ADRD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Major finding: The risk for ADRD associated with tofacitinib (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.90; 95% CI 0.55-1.51), tocilizumab (aHR 0.82; 95% CI 0.55-1.21), and TNFi (aHR 0.93; 95% CI 0.72-1.20) was similar to that with abatacept.

Study details: This was an observational study including 22,569 patients aged ≥65 years with RA from the DREAM study who were treated with tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or TNFi and were propensity score-matched with an equal number of patients treated with abatacept.

Disclosures: The DREAM study is funded by the National Institute on Aging. Several authors reported receiving grants, personal fees, or salary support from or owning stocks in various sources outside the submitted work.

Source: Desai RJ et al. Comparative risk of Alzheimer disease and related dementia among Medicare beneficiaries with rheumatoid arthritis treated with targeted disease-modifying antirheumatic agents. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(4):e226567 (Apr 8). Doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.6567

Key clinical point: Treatment with tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) vs. abatacept did not reduce the risk of developing Alzheimer disease and related dementia (ADRD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Major finding: The risk for ADRD associated with tofacitinib (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.90; 95% CI 0.55-1.51), tocilizumab (aHR 0.82; 95% CI 0.55-1.21), and TNFi (aHR 0.93; 95% CI 0.72-1.20) was similar to that with abatacept.

Study details: This was an observational study including 22,569 patients aged ≥65 years with RA from the DREAM study who were treated with tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or TNFi and were propensity score-matched with an equal number of patients treated with abatacept.

Disclosures: The DREAM study is funded by the National Institute on Aging. Several authors reported receiving grants, personal fees, or salary support from or owning stocks in various sources outside the submitted work.

Source: Desai RJ et al. Comparative risk of Alzheimer disease and related dementia among Medicare beneficiaries with rheumatoid arthritis treated with targeted disease-modifying antirheumatic agents. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(4):e226567 (Apr 8). Doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.6567

Key clinical point: Identification of swelling in specific large, medium, and small joints in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is correlated with severe disease activity and may indicate the need for more intensive therapy.

Major finding: At baseline, 91.9% and 89.1% of patients had swelling in the wrist and meta-carpophalangeal-2 joint, respectively, and swelling in the knee, temporomandibular joint, wrist, and elbow was associated with severe disease activity (P < .001). Patients treated with abatacept+methotrexate vs. methotrexate alone showed higher swelling resolution and Boolean remission rates (all P < .01).

Study details: This was a post hoc analysis of the phase 3 study, AGREE, including 509 methotrexate-naive patients with early erosive, seropositive RA and factors associated with poor prognosis who were randomly assigned to receive abatacept+methotrexate or methotrexate alone for 12 months.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS). P Durez reported receiving speaker fees from BMS and other sources. Four authors reported being employees or shareholders of BMS or companies contracting with BMS.

Source: Durez P et al. Identification of poor prognostic joint locations in an early rheumatoid arthritis cohort at risk of rapidly progressing disease: a post-hoc analysis of the Phase III AGREE study. BMC Rheumatol. 2022;6:24 (Apr 14). Doi: 10.1186/s41927-022-00252-4

Key clinical point: Identification of swelling in specific large, medium, and small joints in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is correlated with severe disease activity and may indicate the need for more intensive therapy.

Major finding: At baseline, 91.9% and 89.1% of patients had swelling in the wrist and meta-carpophalangeal-2 joint, respectively, and swelling in the knee, temporomandibular joint, wrist, and elbow was associated with severe disease activity (P < .001). Patients treated with abatacept+methotrexate vs. methotrexate alone showed higher swelling resolution and Boolean remission rates (all P < .01).

Study details: This was a post hoc analysis of the phase 3 study, AGREE, including 509 methotrexate-naive patients with early erosive, seropositive RA and factors associated with poor prognosis who were randomly assigned to receive abatacept+methotrexate or methotrexate alone for 12 months.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS). P Durez reported receiving speaker fees from BMS and other sources. Four authors reported being employees or shareholders of BMS or companies contracting with BMS.

Source: Durez P et al. Identification of poor prognostic joint locations in an early rheumatoid arthritis cohort at risk of rapidly progressing disease: a post-hoc analysis of the Phase III AGREE study. BMC Rheumatol. 2022;6:24 (Apr 14). Doi: 10.1186/s41927-022-00252-4

Key clinical point: Identification of swelling in specific large, medium, and small joints in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is correlated with severe disease activity and may indicate the need for more intensive therapy.

Major finding: At baseline, 91.9% and 89.1% of patients had swelling in the wrist and meta-carpophalangeal-2 joint, respectively, and swelling in the knee, temporomandibular joint, wrist, and elbow was associated with severe disease activity (P < .001). Patients treated with abatacept+methotrexate vs. methotrexate alone showed higher swelling resolution and Boolean remission rates (all P < .01).

Study details: This was a post hoc analysis of the phase 3 study, AGREE, including 509 methotrexate-naive patients with early erosive, seropositive RA and factors associated with poor prognosis who were randomly assigned to receive abatacept+methotrexate or methotrexate alone for 12 months.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS). P Durez reported receiving speaker fees from BMS and other sources. Four authors reported being employees or shareholders of BMS or companies contracting with BMS.

Source: Durez P et al. Identification of poor prognostic joint locations in an early rheumatoid arthritis cohort at risk of rapidly progressing disease: a post-hoc analysis of the Phase III AGREE study. BMC Rheumatol. 2022;6:24 (Apr 14). Doi: 10.1186/s41927-022-00252-4

Key clinical point: Management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD) should include regular assessment of disease activity and pulmonary function because both independently predicted the mortality risk in U.S. veterans with RA-ILD.

Major finding: Uncontrolled RA disease activity (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 3.00; 95% CI, 1.13-7.97) and forced vital capacity (FVC) impairment (aHR, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.03-9.19) were independently associated with higher mortality among US veterans with RA-ILD, with survival being the poorest among veterans with impaired disease activity and FVC impairment (aHR 4.43; 95% CI 1.70-11.55).

Study details: This was a prospective cohort study including 227 US veterans with RA-ILD.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the US Department of Veterans Affairs, the Rheumatology Research Foundation, and others. Several authors reported consulting with or receiving research funding from various sources.

Source: Brooks R et al. The impact of disease severity measures on survival in U.S. Veterans with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2022 (Apr 4). Doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac208

Key clinical point: Management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD) should include regular assessment of disease activity and pulmonary function because both independently predicted the mortality risk in U.S. veterans with RA-ILD.

Major finding: Uncontrolled RA disease activity (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 3.00; 95% CI, 1.13-7.97) and forced vital capacity (FVC) impairment (aHR, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.03-9.19) were independently associated with higher mortality among US veterans with RA-ILD, with survival being the poorest among veterans with impaired disease activity and FVC impairment (aHR 4.43; 95% CI 1.70-11.55).

Study details: This was a prospective cohort study including 227 US veterans with RA-ILD.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the US Department of Veterans Affairs, the Rheumatology Research Foundation, and others. Several authors reported consulting with or receiving research funding from various sources.

Source: Brooks R et al. The impact of disease severity measures on survival in U.S. Veterans with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2022 (Apr 4). Doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac208

Key clinical point: Management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD) should include regular assessment of disease activity and pulmonary function because both independently predicted the mortality risk in U.S. veterans with RA-ILD.

Major finding: Uncontrolled RA disease activity (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 3.00; 95% CI, 1.13-7.97) and forced vital capacity (FVC) impairment (aHR, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.03-9.19) were independently associated with higher mortality among US veterans with RA-ILD, with survival being the poorest among veterans with impaired disease activity and FVC impairment (aHR 4.43; 95% CI 1.70-11.55).

Study details: This was a prospective cohort study including 227 US veterans with RA-ILD.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the US Department of Veterans Affairs, the Rheumatology Research Foundation, and others. Several authors reported consulting with or receiving research funding from various sources.

Source: Brooks R et al. The impact of disease severity measures on survival in U.S. Veterans with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2022 (Apr 4). Doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac208

Key clinical point: The risk for COVID-19 hospitalization reduced markedly after vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and matched individuals from the general population; however, patients with RA remained at a higher risk for hospitalization even after complete vaccination.

Major finding: The absolute risk for hospitalization was 0.20% vs 0.08% among unvaccinated patients with RA vs matched patients at 60 days of follow-up and remained below 0.05% in both fully vaccinated groups after 180 days of follow-up. However, patients with RA remained at a higher risk for COVID-19 hospitalization vs matched patients, even after complete vaccination (adjusted hazard ratio 1.94; 95% CI 1.03-3.66).

Study details: This was an observational study of 28,447 unvaccinated patients with RA receiving conventional synthetic or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs who were matched with 568,940 individuals from the general population with no history of inflammatory rheumatic disease; eventually, all individuals received one or two doses of COVID-19 vaccine.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Aalborg University Hospital. Some authors reported receiving grants and being on speaker’s bureau for various sources.

Source: Cordtz R et al. COVID-19 infection and hospitalization risk according to vaccination status and DMARD treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2022 (Apr 13). Doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac241

Key clinical point: The risk for COVID-19 hospitalization reduced markedly after vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and matched individuals from the general population; however, patients with RA remained at a higher risk for hospitalization even after complete vaccination.

Major finding: The absolute risk for hospitalization was 0.20% vs 0.08% among unvaccinated patients with RA vs matched patients at 60 days of follow-up and remained below 0.05% in both fully vaccinated groups after 180 days of follow-up. However, patients with RA remained at a higher risk for COVID-19 hospitalization vs matched patients, even after complete vaccination (adjusted hazard ratio 1.94; 95% CI 1.03-3.66).

Study details: This was an observational study of 28,447 unvaccinated patients with RA receiving conventional synthetic or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs who were matched with 568,940 individuals from the general population with no history of inflammatory rheumatic disease; eventually, all individuals received one or two doses of COVID-19 vaccine.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Aalborg University Hospital. Some authors reported receiving grants and being on speaker’s bureau for various sources.

Source: Cordtz R et al. COVID-19 infection and hospitalization risk according to vaccination status and DMARD treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2022 (Apr 13). Doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac241

Key clinical point: The risk for COVID-19 hospitalization reduced markedly after vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and matched individuals from the general population; however, patients with RA remained at a higher risk for hospitalization even after complete vaccination.

Major finding: The absolute risk for hospitalization was 0.20% vs 0.08% among unvaccinated patients with RA vs matched patients at 60 days of follow-up and remained below 0.05% in both fully vaccinated groups after 180 days of follow-up. However, patients with RA remained at a higher risk for COVID-19 hospitalization vs matched patients, even after complete vaccination (adjusted hazard ratio 1.94; 95% CI 1.03-3.66).

Study details: This was an observational study of 28,447 unvaccinated patients with RA receiving conventional synthetic or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs who were matched with 568,940 individuals from the general population with no history of inflammatory rheumatic disease; eventually, all individuals received one or two doses of COVID-19 vaccine.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Aalborg University Hospital. Some authors reported receiving grants and being on speaker’s bureau for various sources.

Source: Cordtz R et al. COVID-19 infection and hospitalization risk according to vaccination status and DMARD treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2022 (Apr 13). Doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac241

Key clinical point: The disease activity metrics of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) improved significantly with upadacitinib plus elsubrutinib (ABBV-599) vs placebo in patients with inadequate response or intolerance to biologics, with effects likely driven by upadacitinib and not elsubrutinib.

Major finding: At week 12, compared with placebo, the change in Disease Activity Score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein was significantly higher with ABBV-599 (least squares mean difference [LSMD] −1.44) and upadacitinib (LSMD −1.75; both P < .0001) but not with elsubrutinib. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar for ABBV-599 and placebo.

Study details: This was a phase 2 trial including 242 patients with RA and inadequate response/intolerance to biologics who were randomly assigned to receive ABBV-599, elsubrutinib (60, 20, or 5 mg), upadacitinib, or placebo for 12 weeks.

Disclosures: This study was funded by AbbVie. R Fleischmann and several authors reported receiving grant support or honorarium for consultancy from various sources, including AbbVie. Six authors declared being full-time current or former employees or holding stocks or stock options at AbbVie.

Source: Fleischmann R et al. Safety and efficacy of elsubrutinib or upadacitinib alone or in combination (ABBV-599) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response or intolerance to biological therapies: A multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Rheumatol. 2022 (Apr 27). Doi: 10.1016/S2665-9913(22)00092-3

Key clinical point: The disease activity metrics of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) improved significantly with upadacitinib plus elsubrutinib (ABBV-599) vs placebo in patients with inadequate response or intolerance to biologics, with effects likely driven by upadacitinib and not elsubrutinib.

Major finding: At week 12, compared with placebo, the change in Disease Activity Score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein was significantly higher with ABBV-599 (least squares mean difference [LSMD] −1.44) and upadacitinib (LSMD −1.75; both P < .0001) but not with elsubrutinib. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar for ABBV-599 and placebo.

Study details: This was a phase 2 trial including 242 patients with RA and inadequate response/intolerance to biologics who were randomly assigned to receive ABBV-599, elsubrutinib (60, 20, or 5 mg), upadacitinib, or placebo for 12 weeks.

Disclosures: This study was funded by AbbVie. R Fleischmann and several authors reported receiving grant support or honorarium for consultancy from various sources, including AbbVie. Six authors declared being full-time current or former employees or holding stocks or stock options at AbbVie.

Source: Fleischmann R et al. Safety and efficacy of elsubrutinib or upadacitinib alone or in combination (ABBV-599) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response or intolerance to biological therapies: A multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Rheumatol. 2022 (Apr 27). Doi: 10.1016/S2665-9913(22)00092-3

Key clinical point: The disease activity metrics of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) improved significantly with upadacitinib plus elsubrutinib (ABBV-599) vs placebo in patients with inadequate response or intolerance to biologics, with effects likely driven by upadacitinib and not elsubrutinib.

Major finding: At week 12, compared with placebo, the change in Disease Activity Score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein was significantly higher with ABBV-599 (least squares mean difference [LSMD] −1.44) and upadacitinib (LSMD −1.75; both P < .0001) but not with elsubrutinib. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar for ABBV-599 and placebo.

Study details: This was a phase 2 trial including 242 patients with RA and inadequate response/intolerance to biologics who were randomly assigned to receive ABBV-599, elsubrutinib (60, 20, or 5 mg), upadacitinib, or placebo for 12 weeks.

Disclosures: This study was funded by AbbVie. R Fleischmann and several authors reported receiving grant support or honorarium for consultancy from various sources, including AbbVie. Six authors declared being full-time current or former employees or holding stocks or stock options at AbbVie.

Source: Fleischmann R et al. Safety and efficacy of elsubrutinib or upadacitinib alone or in combination (ABBV-599) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response or intolerance to biological therapies: A multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Rheumatol. 2022 (Apr 27). Doi: 10.1016/S2665-9913(22)00092-3

Key clinical point: Interleukin-22 (IL-22) can be used as a biomarker to predict response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and IL-17 inhibitors (IL-17i) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Major finding: After 1 year of IL-17i therapy, a higher proportion of patients with low vs high IL-22 levels achieved Disease Activity in PsA (DAPSA) remission (90% vs 15.3%, P = .0006) and Minimal Disease Activity (MDA; 100% vs 46.1%, P = .0075), with the rate of achieving DAPSA remission and MDA at 1 year significantly higher in patients with high IL-22 levels who received TNFi vs IL-17-i and in patients with low IL-22 levels who received IL-17i vs TNFi.

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective study including 47 patients with PsA who were treated with TNFi or IL-17i for ≥1 year.

Disclosures: This study was partly supported by Research on Rare and Interactable Diseases and Research Grant-In-Aid for Scientific Research by the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare of Japan; and other sources. Y Tanaka and S Nakayamada declared receiving consulting fees, speaking fees, honoraria, and research grants from several sources.

Source: Miyagawa I et al. Impact of serum interleukin-22 as a biomarker for the differential use of molecular targeted drugs in psoriatic arthritis: a retrospective study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2022;24:86 (Apr 15). Doi: 10.1186/s13075-022-02771-4

Key clinical point: Interleukin-22 (IL-22) can be used as a biomarker to predict response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and IL-17 inhibitors (IL-17i) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Major finding: After 1 year of IL-17i therapy, a higher proportion of patients with low vs high IL-22 levels achieved Disease Activity in PsA (DAPSA) remission (90% vs 15.3%, P = .0006) and Minimal Disease Activity (MDA; 100% vs 46.1%, P = .0075), with the rate of achieving DAPSA remission and MDA at 1 year significantly higher in patients with high IL-22 levels who received TNFi vs IL-17-i and in patients with low IL-22 levels who received IL-17i vs TNFi.

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective study including 47 patients with PsA who were treated with TNFi or IL-17i for ≥1 year.

Disclosures: This study was partly supported by Research on Rare and Interactable Diseases and Research Grant-In-Aid for Scientific Research by the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare of Japan; and other sources. Y Tanaka and S Nakayamada declared receiving consulting fees, speaking fees, honoraria, and research grants from several sources.

Source: Miyagawa I et al. Impact of serum interleukin-22 as a biomarker for the differential use of molecular targeted drugs in psoriatic arthritis: a retrospective study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2022;24:86 (Apr 15). Doi: 10.1186/s13075-022-02771-4

Key clinical point: Interleukin-22 (IL-22) can be used as a biomarker to predict response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and IL-17 inhibitors (IL-17i) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Major finding: After 1 year of IL-17i therapy, a higher proportion of patients with low vs high IL-22 levels achieved Disease Activity in PsA (DAPSA) remission (90% vs 15.3%, P = .0006) and Minimal Disease Activity (MDA; 100% vs 46.1%, P = .0075), with the rate of achieving DAPSA remission and MDA at 1 year significantly higher in patients with high IL-22 levels who received TNFi vs IL-17-i and in patients with low IL-22 levels who received IL-17i vs TNFi.

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective study including 47 patients with PsA who were treated with TNFi or IL-17i for ≥1 year.

Disclosures: This study was partly supported by Research on Rare and Interactable Diseases and Research Grant-In-Aid for Scientific Research by the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare of Japan; and other sources. Y Tanaka and S Nakayamada declared receiving consulting fees, speaking fees, honoraria, and research grants from several sources.

Source: Miyagawa I et al. Impact of serum interleukin-22 as a biomarker for the differential use of molecular targeted drugs in psoriatic arthritis: a retrospective study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2022;24:86 (Apr 15). Doi: 10.1186/s13075-022-02771-4

Key clinical point: A dose of 300 mg secukinumab vs  placebo showed rapid and significant improvements in the signs and symptoms of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) along with a tolerable safety profile in a US-only cohort of biologic-naive patients with PsA.

Major finding: At week 16, a significantly higher proportion of patients receiving 300 mg secukinumab vs placebo achieved ≥20% (odds ratio [OR] 3.51; P = .0011), ≥50% (OR 6.30; P = .0038), and ≥70% (OR 10.50; P = .0243) improvement in American College of Rheumatology score, with response maintained through week 52. Diarrhea (5.8%), hypertension (4.9%), and upper respiratory tract infections (5.8%) were the most common adverse events, mostly of mild or moderate severity.

Study details: This phase 4 CHOICE study included 258 biologic-naive patients with moderate-to-severe PsA who were randomly assigned to receive 300 mg secukinumab, 150 mg secukinumab, or placebo.

Disclosures: This study was supported by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Four authors declared being employees and shareholders of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation and other authors reported ties with various sources, including Novartis.

Source: Nguyen T et al. Secukinumab in US biologic-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis: Results from the randomized, placebo-controlled CHOICE study. J Rheumatol. 2022 (Apr 15). Doi: 10.3899/jrheum.210912

Key clinical point: A dose of 300 mg secukinumab vs  placebo showed rapid and significant improvements in the signs and symptoms of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) along with a tolerable safety profile in a US-only cohort of biologic-naive patients with PsA.

Major finding: At week 16, a significantly higher proportion of patients receiving 300 mg secukinumab vs placebo achieved ≥20% (odds ratio [OR] 3.51; P = .0011), ≥50% (OR 6.30; P = .0038), and ≥70% (OR 10.50; P = .0243) improvement in American College of Rheumatology score, with response maintained through week 52. Diarrhea (5.8%), hypertension (4.9%), and upper respiratory tract infections (5.8%) were the most common adverse events, mostly of mild or moderate severity.

Study details: This phase 4 CHOICE study included 258 biologic-naive patients with moderate-to-severe PsA who were randomly assigned to receive 300 mg secukinumab, 150 mg secukinumab, or placebo.

Disclosures: This study was supported by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Four authors declared being employees and shareholders of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation and other authors reported ties with various sources, including Novartis.

Source: Nguyen T et al. Secukinumab in US biologic-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis: Results from the randomized, placebo-controlled CHOICE study. J Rheumatol. 2022 (Apr 15). Doi: 10.3899/jrheum.210912

Key clinical point: A dose of 300 mg secukinumab vs  placebo showed rapid and significant improvements in the signs and symptoms of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) along with a tolerable safety profile in a US-only cohort of biologic-naive patients with PsA.

Major finding: At week 16, a significantly higher proportion of patients receiving 300 mg secukinumab vs placebo achieved ≥20% (odds ratio [OR] 3.51; P = .0011), ≥50% (OR 6.30; P = .0038), and ≥70% (OR 10.50; P = .0243) improvement in American College of Rheumatology score, with response maintained through week 52. Diarrhea (5.8%), hypertension (4.9%), and upper respiratory tract infections (5.8%) were the most common adverse events, mostly of mild or moderate severity.

Study details: This phase 4 CHOICE study included 258 biologic-naive patients with moderate-to-severe PsA who were randomly assigned to receive 300 mg secukinumab, 150 mg secukinumab, or placebo.

Disclosures: This study was supported by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Four authors declared being employees and shareholders of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation and other authors reported ties with various sources, including Novartis.

Source: Nguyen T et al. Secukinumab in US biologic-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis: Results from the randomized, placebo-controlled CHOICE study. J Rheumatol. 2022 (Apr 15). Doi: 10.3899/jrheum.210912

Key clinical point: Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) significantly improved the quality of life (QoL) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) compared with placebo.

Major finding: The Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (mean difference [MD] −0.21), Dermatology Life Quality Index (MD −4.36), and Short Form 36 Questionnaire physical (MD 3.76) and mental (MD 1.76; all P < .00001) component summaries improved significantly with bDMARD vs placebo. However, bDMARD showed no significant advantage or disadvantage over methotrexate or tofacitinib.

Study details: This was a meta-analysis of 37 randomized controlled trials including 14,115 patients with PsA who received non-bDMARD, placebo, or bDMARD alone or in combination with non-bDMARD.

Disclosures: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Lu Y et al. Effects of bDMARDs on quality of life in patients with psoriatic arthritis: Meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e058497 (Apr 12). Doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058497

Key clinical point: Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) significantly improved the quality of life (QoL) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) compared with placebo.

Major finding: The Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (mean difference [MD] −0.21), Dermatology Life Quality Index (MD −4.36), and Short Form 36 Questionnaire physical (MD 3.76) and mental (MD 1.76; all P < .00001) component summaries improved significantly with bDMARD vs placebo. However, bDMARD showed no significant advantage or disadvantage over methotrexate or tofacitinib.

Study details: This was a meta-analysis of 37 randomized controlled trials including 14,115 patients with PsA who received non-bDMARD, placebo, or bDMARD alone or in combination with non-bDMARD.

Disclosures: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Lu Y et al. Effects of bDMARDs on quality of life in patients with psoriatic arthritis: Meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e058497 (Apr 12). Doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058497

Key clinical point: Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) significantly improved the quality of life (QoL) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) compared with placebo.

Major finding: The Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (mean difference [MD] −0.21), Dermatology Life Quality Index (MD −4.36), and Short Form 36 Questionnaire physical (MD 3.76) and mental (MD 1.76; all P < .00001) component summaries improved significantly with bDMARD vs placebo. However, bDMARD showed no significant advantage or disadvantage over methotrexate or tofacitinib.

Study details: This was a meta-analysis of 37 randomized controlled trials including 14,115 patients with PsA who received non-bDMARD, placebo, or bDMARD alone or in combination with non-bDMARD.

Disclosures: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Lu Y et al. Effects of bDMARDs on quality of life in patients with psoriatic arthritis: Meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e058497 (Apr 12). Doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058497