J. Anderson

OBJECTIVE: Although the systematic measurement of disease activity facilitates clinical decision making in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), no recommendations currently exist on which measures should be applied in clinical practice in the US. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) convened a Working Group (WG) to comprehensively evaluate the validity, feasibility, and acceptability of available RA disease activity measures and derive recommendations for their use in clinical practice. METHODS: The Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Disease Activity Measures Working Group conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify RA disease activity measures. Using exclusion criteria, input from an Expert Advisory Panel (EAP), and psychometric analysis, a list of potential measures was created. A survey was administered to rheumatologists soliciting input. The WG used these survey results in conjunction with the psychometric analyses to derive final recommendations. RESULTS: Systematic review of the literature resulted in identification of 63 RA disease activity measures. Application of exclusion criteria and ratings by the EAP narrowed the list to 14 measures for further evaluation. Practicing rheumatologists rated 9 of these 14 measures as most useful and feasible. From these 9 measures, the WG selected 6 with the best psychometric properties for inclusion in the final set of ACR-recommended RA disease activity measures. CONCLUSION: We recommend the Clinical Disease Activity Index, Disease Activity Score with 28-joint counts (erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C-reactive protein), Patient Activity Scale (PAS), PAS-II, Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data with 3 measures, and Simplified Disease Activity Index because they are accurate reflections of disease activity; are sensitive to change; discriminate well between low, moderate, and high disease activity states; have remission criteria; and are feasible to perform in clinical settings.

BackgroundAtopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by pruritic skin lesions.ObjectiveWe sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of multiple doses of the selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor upadacitinib in patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis.MethodsIn the 16-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, dose-ranging portion of this 88-week trial in 8 countries (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02925117; ongoing, not recruiting), adults with moderate to severe disease and inadequate control by topical treatment were randomized 1:1:1:1, using an interactive response system and stratified geographically, to once-daily upadacitinib oral monotherapy 7.5, 15, or 30 mg or placebo. The primary end point was percentage improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index from baseline at week 16. Efficacy was analyzed by intention-to-treat in all randomized patients. Safety was analyzed in all randomized patients who received study medication, based on actual treatment.ResultsPatients (N = 167) enrolled from November 21, 2016, to April 20, 2017. All were randomized and analyzed for efficacy (each upadacitinib group, n = 42; placebo, n = 41); 166 were analyzed for safety (each upadacitinib group, n = 42; placebo, n = 40). The mean (SE) primary efficacy end point was 39% (6.2%), 62% (6.1%), and 74% (6.1%) for the upadacitinib 7.5-, 15-, and 30-mg groups, respectively, versus 23% (6.4%) for placebo (P = .03, <.001, and <.001). Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% (2 of 42), 2.4% (1 of 42), and 0% (0 of 42) of upadacitinib groups (vs 2.5% [1 of 40] for placebo).ConclusionsA dose-response relationship was observed for upadacitinib efficacy; the 30-mg once-daily dose showed the greatest clinical benefit. Dose-limiting toxicity was not observed. Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by pruritic skin lesions. We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of multiple doses of the selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor upadacitinib in patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. In the 16-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, dose-ranging portion of this 88-week trial in 8 countries (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02925117; ongoing, not recruiting), adults with moderate to severe disease and inadequate control by topical treatment were randomized 1:1:1:1, using an interactive response system and stratified geographically, to once-daily upadacitinib oral monotherapy 7.5, 15, or 30 mg or placebo. The primary end point was percentage improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index from baseline at week 16. Efficacy was analyzed by intention-to-treat in all randomized patients. Safety was analyzed in all randomized patients who received study medication, based on actual treatment. Patients (N = 167) enrolled from November 21, 2016, to April 20, 2017. All were randomized and analyzed for efficacy (each upadacitinib group, n = 42; placebo, n = 41); 166 were analyzed for safety (each upadacitinib group, n = 42; placebo, n = 40). The mean (SE) primary efficacy end point was 39% (6.2%), 62% (6.1%), and 74% (6.1%) for the upadacitinib 7.5-, 15-, and 30-mg groups, respectively, versus 23% (6.4%) for placebo (P = .03, <.001, and <.001). Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% (2 of 42), 2.4% (1 of 42), and 0% (0 of 42) of upadacitinib groups (vs 2.5% [1 of 40] for placebo). A dose-response relationship was observed for upadacitinib efficacy; the 30-mg once-daily dose showed the greatest clinical benefit. Dose-limiting toxicity was not observed.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is one of the few diseases where subjective patient and physician measures are the best predictors of treatment response and future health outcomes. Arguably, the most important of these is the American College of Rheumatology core measure of function. Developed in 1978, the original Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ) remains the gold standard for measuring functional status in RA (1). However, its length at 41 questions and relatively complex scoring can make clinical use difficult. We summarize the HAQ and the most common measures developed from it including the Modified HAQ, Multidimensional HAQ, HAQ-II, and Improved HAQ (2–5). Although it is not a primary measure of function, we also review the Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality of Life scale as it is the lone RA-specific quality of life measure and, whether correct or not, functional measures are often used as a substitute for quality of life in RA (6). We did not include several measures that have less recent published use and may be promising for future studies, including the visual analog scale for function (7) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System computerized adaptive test for function (8). HEALTH ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE DISABILITY INDEX (HAQ)

BACKGROUND: The Janus kinase inhibitor upadacitinib is a potential treatment for psoriatic arthritis. The efficacy and safety of upadacitinib as compared with adalimumab, a tumor necrosis factor α inhibitor, in patients who have an inadequate response to nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs are unclear. METHODS: In a 24-week, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive oral upadacitinib at a dose of 15 mg or 30 mg once daily, placebo, or subcutaneous adalimumab (40 mg every other week). The primary end point was an American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) response (≥20% decrease in the number of tender and swollen joints and ≥20% improvement in at least three of five other domains) at week 12 with upadacitinib as compared with placebo. Secondary end points included comparisons of upadacitinib with adalimumab. RESULTS: A total of 1704 patients received an active drug or placebo. The percentage of patients who had an ACR20 response at week 12 was 70.6% with 15-mg upadacitinib, 78.5% with 30-mg upadacitinib, 36.2% with placebo (P<0.001 for both upadacitinib doses vs. placebo), and 65.0% with adalimumab. The difference between groups for 15-mg upadacitinib as compared with adalimumab was 5.6 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to 11.8) and for 30-mg upadacitinib as compared with adalimumab was 13.5 percentage points (95% CI, 7.5 to 19.4). Both upadacitinib doses were noninferior to adalimumab for the ACR20 response at week 12; the 30-mg dose but not the 15-mg dose was superior to adalimumab. The incidence of adverse events through week 24 was 66.9% with 15-mg upadacitinib, 72.3% with 30-mg upadacitinib, 59.6% with placebo, and 64.8% with adalimumab. There were serious infections in 1.2%, 2.6%, 0.9%, and 0.7% of the patients, respectively. Hepatic disorders occurred in 9.1% of patients in the 15-mg upadacitinib group and 12.3% in the 30-mg upadacitinib group, but grade 3 increases in aminotransferase levels occurred in 2% of patients or fewer in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of patients with psoriatic arthritis who had an ACR20 response at week 12 was significantly higher with 15-mg or 30-mg upadacitinib than with placebo. The 30-mg dose but not the 15-mg dose was superior to adalimumab. Adverse events were more frequent with upadacitinib than with placebo. (Funded by AbbVie; SELECT-PsA 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03104400.).