Rheumatoid Arthritis: Mease P

Furst DE, Breedveld FC, Kalden JR, Smolen JS, Burmester GR, Sieper J, Emery P, Keystone EC, Schiff MH, Mease P, van Riel PL, Fleischmann R, Weisman MH, Weinblatt ME. · David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA - RM 32-59, 1000 Veteran Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90025, USA. · Ann Rheum Dis. · Pubmed #17934088 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Mease P. · Seattle Rheumatology Associates, Swedish Medical Center, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA. · Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. · Pubmed #17121486 links to  free full text

Abstract: Psoriatic arthritis is an inflammatory arthritis occurring in up to 30% of patients with psoriasis. Its clear distinction from rheumatoid arthritis has been described clinically, genetically, and immunohistologically. Updated classification criteria have been recently derived from a large international study. Key pathophysiologic cellular processes are being elucidated, increasing our understanding of potential targets of therapy. Therapies that target cells, such as activated T cells, and proinflammatory cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha), are rational to pursue. Outcome measures have been "borrowed" from rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis studies. A variety of domains are assessed including joints, skin, enthesium, dactylitis, spine, function, quality of life, and imaging assessment of disease activity and damage. The performance qualities of outcome measures in these various domains is being evaluated by the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA), and improved measures are being developed and validated specifically for psoriatic arthritis. Traditional therapies for psoriatic arthritis have included nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, oral immunomodulatory drugs, topical creams, and light therapy. These therapies have been helpful in controlling both musculoskeletal and dermatologic aspects of the disease, but they may not be fully effective in all disease domains, may eventually show diminished benefit, and may produce treatment-limiting toxicities. In the past several years, use of biologic agents has generally yielded greater benefit across more domains, yielding significant and enduring benefits for clinical manifestations, function, and quality of life, and especially with the anti-TNF agents, inhibition of structural damage. Adverse effects with these agents can be significant but are usually manageable. Cost is also significant, but cost-effectiveness analysis is demonstrating reasonable trade-off between cost and benefit.

Mease P, Goffe BS. · Seattle Rheumatology Associates, Swedish Hospital Medical Center, Division of Clinical Research, WA 98104, USA. · J Am Acad Dermatol. · Pubmed #15627075 No free full text.

Abstract: Psoriatic arthritis is a chronic, heterogeneous disease whose pathogenesis is unknown, although genetic, environmental, and immunologic factors play major roles. Psoriatic arthritis can follow an aggressive clinical course, and differentiating it from other arthropathies is sometimes difficult. Diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis is based on history, physical examination, the usual absence of rheumatoid factor, and characteristic radiographic features. At least 40% of patients with psoriatic arthritis develop radiographically detectable joint destruction; therefore, proper diagnosis and early treatment can have a significant impact on disease course and outcome. Understanding the pathogenesis of psoriatic disease has led to the use of several biologic agents that work by modulating T-cell signaling or by inhibiting key cytokines involved in inflammation, such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF). TNF inhibitors have demonstrated excellent efficacy in resolving skin and joint disease in patients with psoriatic arthritis and have been shown to be safe agents in various inflammatory disorders. This article reviews the diagnostic and treatment challenges of psoriatic arthritis as they relate to pathogenesis and burden of disease. LEARNING OBJECTIVE: At the conclusion of this learning activity, participants should have acquired a more comprehensive knowledge of our current understanding of the classification, clinical presentation, etiology, pathophysiology, differential diagnosis, and treatment of psoriatic arthritis.

Smolen J, Landewé RB, Mease P, Brzezicki J, Mason D, Luijtens K, van Vollenhoven RF, Kavanaugh A, Schiff M, Burmester GR, Strand V, Vencovsky J, van der Heijde D. · Department of Internal Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna and 2nd Department of Medicine, Hietzing Hospital, Austria. · Ann Rheum Dis. · Pubmed #19015207 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Certolizumab pegol is a PEGylated tumour necrosis factor inhibitor. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol versus placebo, plus methotrexate (MTX), in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: An international, multicentre, phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in active adult-onset RA. Patients (n = 619) were randomised 2:2:1 to subcutaneous certolizumab pegol (liquid formulation) 400 mg at weeks 0, 2 and 4 followed by 200 mg or 400 mg plus MTX, or placebo plus MTX, every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. The primary end point was ACR20 response at week 24. Secondary end points included ACR50 and ACR70 responses, change from baseline in modified Total Sharp Score, ACR core set variables and physical function. RESULTS: Significantly more patients in the certolizumab pegol 200 mg and 400 mg groups achieved an ACR20 response versus placebo (p< or =0.001); rates were 57.3%, 57.6% and 8.7%, respectively. Certolizumab pegol 200 and 400 mg also significantly inhibited radiographic progression; mean changes from baseline in mTSS at week 24 were 0.2 and -0.4, respectively, versus 1.2 for placebo (rank analysis p< or =0.01). Certolizumab pegol-treated patients reported rapid and significant improvements in physical function versus placebo; mean changes from baseline in HAQ-DI at week 24 were -0.50 and -0.50, respectively, versus -0.14 for placebo (p< or =0.001). Most adverse events were mild or moderate, with low incidence of withdrawals due to adverse events. Five patients developed tuberculosis. CONCLUSION: Certolizumab pegol plus MTX was more efficacious than placebo plus MTX, rapidly and significantly improving signs and symptoms of RA and physical function and inhibiting radiographic progression. Trial registration number: NCT00175877.

Keystone E, Heijde D, Mason D, Landewé R, Vollenhoven RV, Combe B, Emery P, Strand V, Mease P, Desai C, Pavelka K. · University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #18975346 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 dosage regimens of lyophilized certolizumab pegol (a novel PEGylated anti-tumor necrosis factor agent) as adjunctive therapy to methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to MTX therapy alone. METHODS: In this 52-week, phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, 982 patients were randomized 2:2:1 to receive treatment with subcutaneous certolizumab pegol at an initial dosage of 400 mg given at weeks 0, 2, and 4, with a subsequent dosage of 200 mg or 400 mg given every 2 weeks, plus MTX, or placebo plus MTX. Co-primary end points were the response rate at week 24 according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% criteria for improvement (ACR20) and the mean change from baseline in the modified total Sharp score at week 52. RESULTS: At week 24, ACR20 response rates using nonresponder imputation for the certolizumab pegol 200-mg and 400-mg groups were 58.8% and 60.8%, respectively, as compared with 13.6% for the placebo group. Differences in ACR20 response rates versus placebo were significant at week 1 and were sustained to week 52 (P < 0.001). At week 52, mean radiographic progression from baseline was reduced in patients treated with certolizumab pegol 200 mg (0.4 Sharp units) or 400 mg (0.2 Sharp units) as compared with that in placebo-treated patients (2.8 Sharp units) (P < 0.001 by rank analysis). Improvements in all ACR core set of disease activity measures, including physical function, were observed by week 1 with both certolizumab pegol dosage regimens. Most adverse events were mild or moderate. CONCLUSION: Treatment with certolizumab pegol 200 or 400 mg plus MTX resulted in a rapid and sustained reduction in RA signs and symptoms, inhibited the progression of structural joint damage, and improved physical function as compared with placebo plus MTX treatment in RA patients with an incomplete response to MTX.

Kaltwasser JP, Nash P, Gladman D, Rosen CF, Behrens F, Jones P, Wollenhaupt J, Falk FG, Mease P, Anonymous00102. · Abteilung Rheumatologie, Medizinische Klinik III, Zentrum der Innere Medizin, J. W. Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #15188371 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: Current treatment options for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) are limited. Leflunomide, an oral pyrimidine synthesis inhibitor, is highly effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, and small studies have suggested similar efficacy in PsA. We undertook this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of leflunomide in patients with PsA and psoriasis. METHODS: One hundred ninety patients with active PsA and psoriasis (at least 3% skin involvement) were randomized to receive leflunomide (100 mg/day loading dose for 3 days followed by 20 mg/day orally) or placebo for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients classified as responders by the Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC). Additional efficacy (joint and skin involvement), safety, and quality-of-life assessments were performed. RESULTS: At 24 weeks, 56 of 95 leflunomide-treated patients (58.9%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 48.4-68.9) and 27 of 91 placebo-treated patients (29.7% [95% CI 20.6-40.2]) were classified as responders by the PsARC (P < 0.0001). Significant differences in favor of leflunomide were also observed in the proportions of patients achieving modified American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria, improvement in the designated psoriasis target lesion, and mean changes from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores and quality-of-life assessments. Diarrhea and alanine aminotransferase increases occurred at higher rates in the leflunomide group. No cases of serious liver toxicity were observed. CONCLUSION: Leflunomide is an effective treatment for PsA and psoriasis, providing a safe and convenient alternative to current therapies.

Mease P. · Seattle Rheumatology Associates, Division of Rheumatology Research, Swedish Medical Center, University of Washington School of Medicine Seattle, WA, USA. · Ther Clin Risk Manag. · Pubmed #18360651 links to  free full text

Abstract: Elucidation of the cellular immunopathology and cytokine profile of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), a chronic inflammatory disease associated with psoriasis, has resulted in the development of a number of novel biologic therapies. Among these biologics, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) inhibitors have been used successfully to treat patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis or psoriasis. The pivotal role of TNF-alpha in the pathogenesis and progression of PsA suggested that anti-TNF-alpha agents could be effective in controlling PsA. The results from two large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in patients with moderate to severe PsA indicated that the anti-TNF-inhibitor, infliximab, can control both the joint and skin manifestations of the disease. This review focuses on the clinical development of infliximab as a treatment for PsA. The development of other anti-TNF-alpha biologics is also discussed.

Taylor W, Gladman D, Helliwell P, Marchesoni A, Mease P, Mielants H, Anonymous00006. · University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #16871531 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of existing classification criteria for the diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and to construct new criteria from observed data. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from consecutive clinic attendees with PsA and other inflammatory arthropathies. Subjects were classified by each of 7 criteria. Sensitivity and specificity were compared using conditional logistic regression analysis. Latent class analysis was used to calculate criteria accuracy in order to confirm the validity of clinical diagnosis as the gold standard definition of "case"-ness. Classification and Regression Trees methodology and logistic regression were used to identify items for new criteria, which were then constructed using a receiver operating characteristic curve. RESULTS: Data were collected on 588 cases and 536 controls with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 384), ankylosing spondylitis (n = 72), undifferentiated arthritis (n = 38), connective tissue disorders (n = 14), and other diseases (n = 28). The specificity of each set of criteria was high. The sensitivity of the Vasey and Espinoza method (0.97) was similar to that of the method of McGonagle et al (0.98) and greater than that of the methods of Bennett (0.44), Moll and Wright (0.91), the European Spondylarthropathy Study Group (0.74), and Gladman et al (0.91). The CASPAR (ClASsification criteria for Psoriatic ARthritis) criteria consisted of established inflammatory articular disease with at least 3 points from the following features: current psoriasis (assigned a score of 2; all other features were assigned a score of 1), a history of psoriasis (unless current psoriasis was present), a family history of psoriasis (unless current psoriasis was present or there was a history of psoriasis), dactylitis, juxtaarticular new bone formation, rheumatoid factor negativity, and nail dystrophy. These criteria were more specific (0.987 versus 0.960) but less sensitive (0.914 versus 0.972) than those of Vasey and Espinoza. CONCLUSION: The CASPAR criteria are simple and highly specific but less sensitive than the Vasey and Espinoza criteria.

Mease P. · Seattle Rheumatology Associates, Seattle, WA 98104, USA. · Ann Rheum Dis. · Pubmed #15194567 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.