Remission versus low disease activity as treatment targets in rheumatoid arthritis: how to strike the right balance between too strict and too lenient targets? A meta-epidemiological study of individual patient data.

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Catia Duarte, Johannes W G Jacobs, Ricardo J O Ferreira, Paco M J Welsing, Laure Gossec, Pedro M Machado, Désirée van der Heijde, Jose Antonio Pereira da Silva
{"title":"Remission versus low disease activity as treatment targets in rheumatoid arthritis: how to strike the right balance between too strict and too lenient targets? A meta-epidemiological study of individual patient data.","authors":"Catia Duarte, Johannes W G Jacobs, Ricardo J O Ferreira, Paco M J Welsing, Laure Gossec, Pedro M Machado, Désirée van der Heijde, Jose Antonio Pereira da Silva","doi":"10.1136/rmdopen-2024-004387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the impact of using Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI)-LDA (low disease activity) versus different definitions of remission as a treatment target in established rheumatoid arthritis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A meta-epidemiological study of individual patient data from eight randomised controlled trials was performed. Four definitions of the target were considered at 6 months: (1) SDAI-LDA: SDAI≤11; (2) SDAI-Remission: SDAI≤3.3; (3) 4V-Remission: Tender and swollen 28-joint counts and C reactive protein (mg/dL) all ≤1 and patient global assessment (PGA)≤2 and (4) 3-variable (3V)-Remission: as 4V, excluding PGA. The mean radiographic change in the modified total Sharp-van der Heijde score (mTSS) and the Good Radiographic Outcome rates (defined as a change of ≤0.5 units mTSS) over 2 years were compared among target definitions. Radiographic progression and the distribution of the individual criteria of the Boolean definition in the only LDA subgroup (3.3<SDAI≤11) were analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 4374 patients (mean disease duration of 5.9 years (95% CI 4.6; 7.1)) were included. The pooled rate of SDAI-LDA at 6 months was 49%, with 13% in SDAI-remission. The 4V-Remission and 3V-Remission were achieved by 16% and 23%, respectively. Mean radiographic progression was 0.55 (0.14; 0.96) units for SDAI-LDA and 0.22 (-0.09; 0.54), 0.28 (-0.07; 0.62), 0.28 (-0.10; 0.65) for SDAI-Remission, 4V-Remission and 3V-Remission states, respectively. Patients with SDAI Pure-LDA presented significantly more radiographic progression than patients in SDAI-Remission (mean 0.72 vs 0.22 units, p<0.05). Over 53% of all patients achieving SDAI-LDA were not in 3V-Remission and had more mean radiographic progression over 2 years than those who met both targets (0.70 vs 0.25 units, p=0.014). Among patients with SDAI-LDA but not in SDAI-Remission, 40% scored PGA>2, reflecting relevant disease impact.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SDAI-LDA is associated with more structural damage over 2 years than any of the definitions of remission. It also allows substantial disease impact to go unchecked and uncontrolled. Physicians should strive for remission whenever possible and safe while also taking into account the different individual disease activity parameters included in the adopted definition.</p>","PeriodicalId":21396,"journal":{"name":"RMD Open","volume":"10 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11552590/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RMD Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2024-004387","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of using Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI)-LDA (low disease activity) versus different definitions of remission as a treatment target in established rheumatoid arthritis.

Methods: A meta-epidemiological study of individual patient data from eight randomised controlled trials was performed. Four definitions of the target were considered at 6 months: (1) SDAI-LDA: SDAI≤11; (2) SDAI-Remission: SDAI≤3.3; (3) 4V-Remission: Tender and swollen 28-joint counts and C reactive protein (mg/dL) all ≤1 and patient global assessment (PGA)≤2 and (4) 3-variable (3V)-Remission: as 4V, excluding PGA. The mean radiographic change in the modified total Sharp-van der Heijde score (mTSS) and the Good Radiographic Outcome rates (defined as a change of ≤0.5 units mTSS) over 2 years were compared among target definitions. Radiographic progression and the distribution of the individual criteria of the Boolean definition in the only LDA subgroup (3.3

Results: In total, 4374 patients (mean disease duration of 5.9 years (95% CI 4.6; 7.1)) were included. The pooled rate of SDAI-LDA at 6 months was 49%, with 13% in SDAI-remission. The 4V-Remission and 3V-Remission were achieved by 16% and 23%, respectively. Mean radiographic progression was 0.55 (0.14; 0.96) units for SDAI-LDA and 0.22 (-0.09; 0.54), 0.28 (-0.07; 0.62), 0.28 (-0.10; 0.65) for SDAI-Remission, 4V-Remission and 3V-Remission states, respectively. Patients with SDAI Pure-LDA presented significantly more radiographic progression than patients in SDAI-Remission (mean 0.72 vs 0.22 units, p<0.05). Over 53% of all patients achieving SDAI-LDA were not in 3V-Remission and had more mean radiographic progression over 2 years than those who met both targets (0.70 vs 0.25 units, p=0.014). Among patients with SDAI-LDA but not in SDAI-Remission, 40% scored PGA>2, reflecting relevant disease impact.

Conclusion: SDAI-LDA is associated with more structural damage over 2 years than any of the definitions of remission. It also allows substantial disease impact to go unchecked and uncontrolled. Physicians should strive for remission whenever possible and safe while also taking into account the different individual disease activity parameters included in the adopted definition.

类风湿关节炎的治疗目标是缓解还是低疾病活动度:如何在过于严格和过于宽松的目标之间取得平衡?一项针对患者个体数据的荟萃流行病学研究。
目的评估使用简化疾病活动指数(SDAI)-LDA(低疾病活动度)与不同的缓解定义作为已确诊类风湿关节炎治疗目标的影响:方法:对八项随机对照试验中的患者个体数据进行了一项荟萃流行病学研究。6个月时的目标有四种定义:(1) SDAI-LDA:SDAI≤11;(2) SDAI-缓解:SDAI≤3.3;(3)4V-缓解:28 个关节的触痛和肿胀计数和 C 反应蛋白(mg/dL)均≤1,患者总体评估(PGA)≤2;(4) 3变量(3V)-缓解:同 4V,不包括 PGA。比较了不同目标定义的改良夏普-范德海德总评分(mTSS)的平均放射学变化和两年内的良好放射学结果率(定义为 mTSS 变化≤0.5 个单位)。在唯一的 LDA 亚组(3.3Results:共纳入 4374 名患者(平均病程 5.9 年(95% CI 4.6; 7.1))。6个月后的SDAI-LDA汇总率为49%,SDAI缓解率为13%。4V缓解率和3V缓解率分别为16%和23%。SDAI-LDA 的平均放射学进展为 0.55 (0.14; 0.96) 个单位,SDAI 缓解、4V 缓解和 3V 缓解状态的平均放射学进展分别为 0.22 (-0.09; 0.54)、0.28 (-0.07; 0.62)、0.28 (-0.10; 0.65)个单位。SDAI纯LDA患者的放射学进展明显高于SDAI-缓解患者(平均0.72 vs 0.22个单位,P2,反映了相关疾病的影响:结论:与任何一种缓解定义相比,SDAI-LDA 在 2 年内会造成更多的结构性损伤。结论:与任何缓解的定义相比,SDAI-LDA 与 2 年内更多的结构性损伤相关,同时也使大量的疾病影响得不到控制。医生应尽可能在安全的情况下争取缓解,同时也要考虑到所采用的定义中包含的不同个体疾病活动参数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
RMD Open
RMD Open RHEUMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
205
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: RMD Open publishes high quality peer-reviewed original research covering the full spectrum of musculoskeletal disorders, rheumatism and connective tissue diseases, including osteoporosis, spine and rehabilitation. Clinical and epidemiological research, basic and translational medicine, interesting clinical cases, and smaller studies that add to the literature are all considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信