Monday, 23 Jul 2018

You are here

We Measure What we do in RA, But so What?

We are supposed to treat to a target (T2T) in RA. In other words, measure many components of the disease and its activity and calculate a score and if the patient is not in remission (or a low state if remission is not achievable) we are to make a treatment change. At EULAR 2018 a study of 1776 patients from the VA database showed again the notion that if a patient is in high disease activity, treatment changes are made only half the time (FRI0018). My response to this is that the measures are not reflecting active RA (i.e. scores driven by non-inflammatory pain, tender joints from OA), or the patient refuses to accept more treatment or the most likely is that the score is not being calculated (i.e. for billing reimbursement, the components are collected but scores are not calculated during the visit) as the physician doesn’t think the disease is active (enough) to warrant a treatment change. However, even more strangely, 15% who were in remission had dose increasing or a new drug started and 21 to 25% in low disease activity had increases in treatment. I can say that the disease activity instruments used in the study (DAS28, CDAI and RAPID3) had a ‘dose response’ meaning that the frequency of treatment increases was lowest in remission, and highest in high disease activity and there will never be 100% concordance with outcome measures and treatment changes in clinical practice. It is too bad we don’t have the HbA1C (glycated Hbg) equivalent of RA – one easy test reflecting recent disease activity that we could target.

 

Disclosures: 
The author has no conflicts of interest to disclose related to this subject

Add new comment

More Like This

The Lung in RA: Little Progress

The progress that has been seen in the management of many aspects of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has not been paralleled for the pulmonary disease that remains the second most common cause of death among these patients, an Australian expert reported here at the annual meeting of the Florida Society of Rheumatology.

Ultrasound Tenosynovitis Predicts RA Development

Musculoskeletal ultrasound (US) has become a more widely used tool in rheumatology clinical practice. This study of early inflammatory arthritis patients shows that US-defined digit flexor tenosynovitis was more predictive of subsequent rheumatoid arthritis than findings of ACPA positivity or US-defined joint synovitis.

The Diverse Fate of Seronegative Rheumatoid Arthritis

A Finnish Rheumatology Center followed 435 early, seronegative rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients for 10-years and found that only 3% became erosive or seropositive RA. They also found that 32% could not be further reclassified, and that the remaining 65% evolve into another diagnosis, led by polymyalgia rheumatica (16%), psoriatic arthritis (11%), spondyloarthritis (9%), and osteoarthritis (10%).  

Does RA Have a Prodrome?

A pattern of increased primary care visits and joint complaints during the 2 years before rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was diagnosed were predictive of the diagnosis, a British case-control study found.

Can DMARDs Delay Rheumatoid Onset?

Preclinical rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a hot new area wherein at risk individuals (seropositive, first degree relatives of RA patients, etc.) are being studied to assess the triggers that lead to progression to RA or whether therapies can be used to avert the onset of RA.