Faculty Bibliography

The two major advances over the 1990s in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were a shift in strategy from a 'pyramid', in which disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were deferred for several years, to the early aggressive use of DMARDs and widespread acceptance of methotrexate as the DMARD with the most long-term effectiveness and safety. Methotrexate courses are continued far longer than those of any other DMARD, an excellent indicator of greater effectiveness and safety. In one recent series, methotrexate was the first DMARD used in more than 80% of patients with RA. Studies which document the superiority of combinations of methotrexate with biological agents to methotrexate monotherapy select for only a minority of contemporary patients with RA who have severe disease activity and incomplete responses to methotrexate. In one locale, only 5% of patients met criteria for the Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Trial in RA with Concomitant Therapy (ATTRACT) trial and only 30% met the criteria for the Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (ERA) trial. In studies comparing methotrexate directly with biological agents, the biological agents have greater efficacy in patients with very severe disease, but the best results are seen in patients who take a combination of methotrexate and biologic agents. These data establish that methotrexate is the anchor drug and probably should be the first DMARD used in the majority of patients with RA at this time

Several databases of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been established in the USA. The University of Tennessee at Memphis Cohort was organized in 1967-1971 to enroll 50 young adults (16-44 years) with symptom onset of < or = 6 months who met the 1958 American Rheumatism Association (ARA) criteria for at least probable RA. Two important observations from this database were that many patients seen within the first 6 months of meeting the criteria for probable RA have a self-limited rather than progressive disease, and that progressive disease is predicted by a high number of baseline swollen and tender joints. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) cohort of patients with peripheral synovitis for > or = 6 weeks but < 12 months in at least one peripheral joint was established in 1994. At the one-year follow-up, 45% of the patients met the RA criteria, 9% had reactive arthritis, 6% had psoriatic arthritis, 5% had other rheumatic diseases, and 35% had undifferentiated arthritis. The number of active joints, rather than meeting the criteria for RA, was the primary determinant of function and performance after one year. The Western Consortium of Practicing Rheumatologists (CPR) was established in 1993 to enroll patients with an RA duration < 1 year, positive rheumatoid factor, > or = 6 swollen and > or = 9 tender joints, and no previous treatment with disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Data from this cohort indicated the validity of self-report joint counts. American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) responses were seen in 50% of patients at 6 months and in 57% of patients at 24 months, while antinuclear antibodies (ANA) were seen in 69% of patients prior to the availability of biologic agents. The North American Cohort of Patients with Early RA (SONORA), which included patients with symptoms for > 3 but < 12 months, indicated that methotrexate (MTX) was the most frequently prescribed DMARD, being taken by more than half the patients. The Consortium for the Longitudinal Evaluation of African-Americans with RA (CLEAR) registry and DNA repository has enrolled 123 African-American patients with early RA of less than 2 years' duration to analyze genetic and non-genetic factors associated with disease severity. The Early RA Treatment Evaluation Registry (ERATER) of patients with early RA (< 3 years) was established in 2001. In this registry, MTX was the first DMARD used in 83% of patients, and most patients would not meet the criteria for inclusion in recent clinical trials of biological agents. Further observation of recent cohorts of patients with early RA over the next decade should be informative regarding whether aggressive intervention strategies and new DMARDs and biologic agents lead to improved long-term outcomes

OBJECTIVE:To determine the incidence of disease flare during the first year of etanercept treatment for 88 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and compare it with the incidence of flare in those same patients in the year before etanercept use. METHODS:The outpatient clinic charts of all patients with RA who were prescribed etanercept in or before September 1999, who also had at least one year's follow up in the same outpatient clinic, were surveyed. The primary outcome measure was the number of disease flares in one year before and after etanercept use. The secondary outcome measures included the number of patients who did and did not flare, how flares were treated, and the drug alterations that were necessary during the same two time intervals. RESULTS:The total number of flares for all patients in the year before etanercept treatment was 214 (mean (SD) 2.43 (1.75)). The number of flares in the first year of etanercept treatment decreased to 83 (mean 0.94 (1.07)) (p<0.0001). The total number of patients who had at least one flare in the year before etanercept use was 80; eight had no flares. In their first year of etanercept treatment, 50 patients had at least one flare; 38 had no flares (p<0.0001). Twenty one patients (24%) stopped using etanercept before completing one year's treatment. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study of patients with RA in the "real world" shows that etanercept is effective in reducing the number of RA flares.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a pilot study to identify rheumatologists' treatment preferences for first-line rheumatoid arthritis (RA) therapy and determine whether pharmacoeconomic variables modify physician choice(s). METHODS: A questionnaire describing 3 different RA scenarios was mailed to American College of Rheumatology members within 4 geographic regions of the US. Physicians were asked to identify their choice(s) of first-line therapy for each of the cases, first taking cost into consideration, second without considering the influence of cost, and third identifying the therapy that would be chosen for either themselves or a family member. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-five questionnaires out of a total of 994 (37.7%) were returned between 3/12/00 and 4/25/00. Hydroxychloroquine was the most commonly cited medication for a mild disease activity/severity presentation, and methotrexate for a moderate-to-severe disease activity/severity presentation. For the severe disease activity/severity presentation, when cost was not considered, 217 (65%) rheumatologists included new disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (leflunomide, etanercept, and infliximab) in their choice of first-line agents; this number decreased to 47 (14%) when cost was a consideration. CONCLUSION: Pharmacoeconomics appear to play a dominant role in rheumatologists' choice of treatment regimens, at times contrary to the physician's perception of the effectiveness of a drug. Future studies should address physician preferences in more depth with respect to cost and its various components.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients are frequently seen by multiple physicians and at multiple times. In each instance, most of the information important in clinical decision-making is gathered from the patient. There are no studies looking at reporting consistency of certain aspects of SLE patients' history. We studied this by administering the same nine-item questionnaire 4 months apart to the same cohort of SLE patients. In addition, a retrospective chart review was done to correlate the information obtained by prospective questioning and with that on the charts. Our results showed overall good consistency in the areas of general medical history, SLE-specific history and social history. The information gathered by the chart review, in general, went in parallel with that obtained by prospective questioning. This was also true for the poor correlation observed in the family history questions. Many studies and databases depend rather heavily on patient reporting and the quality of this information is usually not substantiated. Our study suggests that, even though SLE patients are generally consistent reporters of certain aspects of their histories, family history information provided is frequently not consistent with previous reporting.

The hallmark of the inflammatory myopathies is muscle weakness. Although this feature can lead to significant disability and impairment of activities of daily living, its initial presentation may not be recognized early. Older individuals, in particular, may feel that the changes caused by myositis reflect the effects of aging rather than those of a disease process, and diagnosis, therefore, may be delayed. This factor has negative impact on the response to therapy. Inclusion body myositis, with its insidious onset in older people, and laboratory findings which may not be markedly abnormal, presents a diagnostic challenge. DM, with its characteristic symptomatic rash, is generally brought to medical attention more quickly. Another area of diagnostic concern occurs when associated organ involvement precedes myopathy. This has been observed, for example, with interstitial lung disease, and again represents a challenge to physicians. In this connection, the antisynthetase syndrome presenting with fevers, Raynaud's features, arthritis, or pulmonary involvement may not initially be recognized as a manifestation of inflammatory muscle disease. Each subgroup of IIM may present with a variety of extramuscular features that can complicate diagnosis and alter therapy and prognosis. This is particularly true for the pulmonary, GI, and cardiac manifestations and when cancer is associated with myositis. For these reasons, such features of IIM should be carefully evaluated, treated, and monitored over the course of the illness; in some cases these may play a greater role in determining the outcome of patients with IIM than the muscle involvement itself. It is hoped that in the future increased familiarity with the manifestations of the inflammatory myopathies, together with a better understanding of the underlying pathogenesis, will lead to more rapid diagnosis and more effective treatments

After careful examination, cardiac involvement can be found in certain patients with inflammatory muscle disease. The clinical significance is not always clear, although in some patients profound disturbances can become manifest. Currently, no laboratory assay can be relied on to detect cardiac disease with 100% accuracy. Cardiac troponin I is, however, the best test currently available