Journal List > J Rheum Dis > v.29(3) > 1516078715

Park: Importance of Time-integrated Cumulative Parameters for Radiographic Progression Prediction of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Body

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is one of the most common autoimmune diseases and is characterized by synovial hypertrophy and joint inflammation and damage [1,2]. RA affects up to 2% of adults worldwide and often causes substantial functional impairment and decreased health-related quality of life, relative to the general population [3,4]. The conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (csDMARDs), including methotrexate and leflunomide, are still used as the first-line treatment for RA. However, the development of targeted treatments such as biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) have shown great promise at improving the disease outcomes [5,6].
Radiographs of hands and feet evaluate the bone resorption as erosions and cartilage degradation as joint space narrowing. These images are used to assess the structural progression of damage in clinical research trials in patients with RA, aiming to provide the disease-modifying capacity of a drug [7]. Recent studies have reported that ongoing disease activities, as reflected by elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive proteins (CRP) or composite indices including the 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28), are associated with severe radiologic joint destruction [8]. The disease composite indices are largely applied to therapeutic targets for treat-to-target (T2T) strategy targeting remission or low disease activity (LDA), resulting in better disease outcomes and quality of life [9]. However, clinical trials of bDMARDs in established RA patients after inadequate response to csDMARDs have reported a subsequent disconnect between disease activity and radiographic progression [10]. Furthermore, recent real-world data demonstrate that approximately 20% of RA patients with sustained remission or LDA still show radiographic progression [11,12]. Similarly, Brown et al. [13] found that 60%~80% of RA patients who fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and DAS28 remission criteria had synovitis or subclinical joint inflammation on magnetic resonance imaging or musculoskeletal ultrasonography. Subsequently, they observed that subclinical joint inflammation detected by imaging techniques explains the structural deterioration in RA patients in clinical remission [14]. Additionally, there may be challenges in assessing disease activity when patients are treated with interleukin-6 inhibitors and other drugs that directly affect levels of CRP [15]. The level of CRP is a component of composite indices measuring RA disease activity (DAS28-CRP, simplified disease activity index [SDAI], and ACR/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology [EULAR] remission). Therefore, assessment of disease activity based on the prompt reduction in the level of CRP may not reflect the actual improvement of disease activity in patients receiving interleukin-6 inhibitors [15,16]. In conclusion, although T2T results in an acceptable control of disease activity for a considerable proportion of RA patients, the current T2T paradigm under the real-world situation remains unfulfilled.
RA disease activity exhibits a fluctuating pattern and varies over time during the follow-up period [17]. Furthermore, satisfying remission or LDA according to T2T strategy may not completely reflect the presence of subclinical synovial inflammation [13]. Therefore, time-integrated cumulative methods could be more suitable than single evaluations of RA activity for summarizing the course of disease activity and promoting the assessment of cumulative outcome measures such as radiographic progression. Recently, Park et al. [18] demonstrated that cumulative values such as the cumulative ESR, cumulative tender joint count, cumulative swollen joint count (SJC), and cumulative DAS28-ESR are the major determinants of radiographic progression. Notably, they demonstrated that the cumulative SJC is the best predictive performance for radiographic progression. In this study, single measurement of RA activity, such as ESR, CRP, or DAS28 was not associated with radiographic progression. The only relevant baseline value, which predicts radiographic progression, was radiographic damage at the time of diagnosis. Fluctuations in disease activity are directly related to changes in radiologic progression. Hence, at a certain time point, radiographic damage could be also considered as the result of accumulation of disease activity [19].
Sustainability has not been considered in any of the composite indices evaluating RA disease activity or remission definition. However, the sustainability of the targeted disease activity would better capture the differential effects, and specifically, of novel targeted agents, including bDMARDs and tsDMARDs, on structural damage progression than that at a single time point [20]. Therefore, by including time value such as time-integrated cumulative methods in measuring the disease activity of RA would probably improve patient’s outcome as measured by radiographic progression.

Notes

FUNDING

This research was supported by a grant of Patient-Centered Clinical Research Coordinating Center (PACEN) funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (grant number: HI19C0481, HC19C0052).

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

REFERENCES

1. Scott DL, Wolfe F, Huizinga TW. 2010; Rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet. 376:1094–108. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60826-4.
crossref
2. Aletaha D, Neogi T, Silman AJ, Funovits J, Felson DT, Bingham CO 3rd, et al. 2010; 2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Arthritis Rheum. 62:2569–81. DOI: 10.1002/art.27584. PMID: 20872595.
crossref
3. Helmick CG, Felson DT, Lawrence RC, Gabriel S, Hirsch R, Kwoh CK, et al. 2008; Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States. Part I. Arthritis Rheum. 58:15–25. DOI: 10.1002/art.23177. PMID: 18163481.
crossref
4. Salaffi F, Carotti M, Gasparini S, Intorcia M, Grassi W. 2009; The health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis: a comparison with a selected sample of healthy people. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 7:25. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-7-25. PMID: 19296831. PMCID: PMC2674445.
crossref
5. Singh JA, Saag KG, Bridges SL Jr, Akl EA, Bannuru RR, Sullivan MC, et al. 2016; 2015 American College of Rheumatology guideline for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 68:1–25. DOI: 10.1002/acr.22783. PMID: 26545825.
crossref
6. Pope J, Sawant R, Tundia N, Du EX, Qi CZ, Song Y, et al. 2020; Comparative efficacy of JAK inhibitors for moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis: a network meta-analysis. Adv Ther. 37:2356–72. DOI: 10.1007/s12325-020-01303-3. PMID: 32297280. PMCID: PMC7467453.
crossref
7. van der Heijde D, Landewé R. 2018; Should radiographic progression still be used as outcome in RA? Clin Immunol. 186:79–81. DOI: 10.1016/j.clim.2017.07.022. PMID: 28743593.
crossref
8. van der Heijde D. 2001; Radiographic progression in rheumatoid arthritis: does it reflect outcome? Does it reflect treatment? Ann Rheum Dis. 60 Suppl 3:iii47–50.
9. Fraenkel L, Bathon JM, England BR, St Clair EW, Arayssi T, Carandang K, et al. 2021; 2021 American College of Rheumatology guideline for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 73:1108–23. DOI: 10.1002/art.41752. PMID: 34101376.
crossref
10. Landewé R, van der Heijde D, Klareskog L, van Vollenhoven R, Fatenejad S. 2006; Disconnect between inflammation and joint destruction after treatment with etanercept plus methotrexate: results from the trial of etanercept and methotrexate with radiographic and patient outcomes. Arthritis Rheum. 54:3119–25. DOI: 10.1002/art.22143. PMID: 17009230.
crossref
11. Ten Klooster PM, Versteeg LGA, Oude Voshaar MAH, de la Torre I, De Leonardis F, Fakhouri W, et al. 2019; Radiographic progression can still occur in individual patients with low or moderate disease activity in the current treat-to-target paradigm: real-world data from the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring (DREAM) registry. Arthritis Res Ther. 21:237. DOI: 10.1186/s13075-019-2030-8. PMID: 31718678. PMCID: PMC6852758.
crossref
12. Lillegraven S, Prince FH, Shadick NA, Bykerk VP, Lu B, Frits ML, et al. 2012; Remission and radiographic outcome in rheumatoid arthritis: application of the 2011 ACR/EULAR remission criteria in an observational cohort. Ann Rheum Dis. 71:681–6. DOI: 10.1136/ard.2011.154625. PMID: 21994234.
crossref
13. Brown AK, Quinn MA, Karim Z, Conaghan PG, Peterfy CG, Hensor E, et al. 2006; Presence of significant synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis patients with disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-induced clinical remission: evidence from an imaging study may explain structural progression. Arthritis Rheum. 54:3761–73. DOI: 10.1002/art.22190. PMID: 17133543.
crossref
14. Brown AK, Conaghan PG, Karim Z, Quinn MA, Ikeda K, Peterfy CG, et al. 2008; An explanation for the apparent dissociation between clinical remission and continued structural deterioration in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 58:2958–67. DOI: 10.1002/art.23945. PMID: 18821687.
crossref
15. Pope JE, Choy EH. 2021; C-reactive protein and implications in rheumatoid arthritis and associated comorbidities. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 51:219–29. DOI: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2020.11.005. PMID: 33385862.
crossref
16. Chiu WC, Lai HM, Ko CH, Chen JF, Hsu CY, Chen YC. 2018; Ultrasound is more reliable than inflammatory parameters to evaluate disease activity in patients with RA receiving tocilizumab therapy. J Investig Med. 66:1015–8. DOI: 10.1136/jim-2017-000705. PMID: 29581384. PMCID: PMC6073910.
crossref
17. Walker UA, Mueller RB, Jaeger VK, Theiler R, Forster A, Dufner P, et al. 2017; Disease activity dynamics in rheumatoid arthritis: patients' self-assessment of disease activity via WebApp. Rheumatology (Oxford). 56:1707–12. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kex229. PMID: 28957553. PMCID: PMC5873216.
crossref
18. Park Y, Li ML, Kim JW, Koh JH, Park YJ, Kim WU. 2022; Time-integrated cumulative parameters predictive of radiographic progression of rheumatoid arthritis: real-world data from a prospective single-center cohort. J Rheum Dis. 29:98–107. DOI: 10.4078/jrd.2022.29.2.98.
crossref
19. Welsing PM, Landewé RB, van Riel PL, Boers M, van Gestel AM, van der Linden S, et al. 2004; The relationship between disease activity and radiologic progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a longitudinal analysis. Arthritis Rheum. 50:2082–93. DOI: 10.1002/art.20350. PMID: 15248205.
crossref
20. Svensson B, Andersson ML, Bala SV, Forslind K, Hafström I. BARFOT study group. 2013; Long-term sustained remission in a cohort study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: choice of remission criteria. BMJ Open. 3:e003554. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003554. PMID: 24022393. PMCID: PMC3773654.
crossref
TOOLS
Similar articles