VIDEO: Adding ultrasound to treat to target doesn’t improve RA remission outcomes

MADRID – Adding ultrasound exams to a treat to target (T2T) protocol did not improve remission outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

In fact, seven-joint ultrasound actually reduced the chance that patients would achieve clinical remission in several remission assessment tools, Alexandre Sepriano, MD, said at the European Congress of Rheumatology.

“We saw no advantage in using ultrasound of seven joints in addition to clinical examination, compared to clinical examination alone,” said Dr. Sepriano of Leiden (the Netherlands) University Medical Center. “We can speculate on the reasons why, but, in truth, this is the same message we have now seen in two other studies.”

Subclinical, ultrasound-detected synovitis has been shown to be predictive of disease flare in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), suggesting that ultrasound may have a role in defining treatment strategies, but recent trials integrating musculoskeletal ultrasound assessments into a T2T protocol have not shown better outcomes than when standard clinical definitions of remission are used.

Dr. Sepriano presented findings from BIODAM, a 2-year observational cohort of RA patients across 10 countries who are managed under a T2T protocol.

Several studies, including BIODAM, have helped to establish T2T – which intensifies treatment if patients are not in remission and eases treatment intensity when patients are in remission – as an optimal management strategy in RA. Dr. Sepriano and his colleagues set out to learn whether using ultrasound data in T2T would result in better outcomes, by creating a combined new strategy using both ultrasound and clinical measures, than does use of the established T2T strategy that uses only clinical data.

To do this, they looked at a subgroup of 130 patients from six countries who were treated at the BIODAM centers that had expertise in ultrasound. Patients’ clinical and ultrasound data were collected every 3 months through 2 years (for 1,037 visits in total) and were managed by rheumatologists under established T2T protocols. These patients were a mean of 55 years old, with a mean disease duration of 6 years.

As in the broader BIODAM study, the researchers used multiple clinical definitions of remission, including 28-joint and 44-joint Disease Activity Scores and the European League against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology–Boolean criteria. For the ultrasound measure, they used the previously validated US-7, which looks at seven joints for signs of synovitis.

In general, the proportion of patients in clinical remission rose over the study period, no matter what assessment tool was used. However, Dr. Sepriano and his colleagues found that the combined clinical and ultrasound benchmark for T2T decreased the likelihood of DAS-44 clinical remission after 3 months by 41% when compared with the conventional strategy. The story was similar for other assessments: The reduction was 49% on the DAS-28, 55% on Boolean remission, and 66% on Simple Disease Activity Index remission.

The reasons for this finding are difficult to discern, Dr. Sepriano said, and are complicated by the fact that this study was not a randomized, controlled trial but a longitudinal cohort in real-world practice settings.

Given the many variables involved, Dr. Sepriano said, “it may be not entirely linear to have an explanation as to why, when we used ultrasound, we actually got worse results.”

But, he noted, results from two randomized trials in more restricted populations of RA patients have also shown no benefit from adding ultrasound.

“What the data are telling us is that the clinician should be encouraged to use clinical data in his or her decisions – so we stress the importance of following a T2T strategy according to clinical data,” Dr. Sepriano said. “Adding ultrasound may not be an advantage in this scenario.”

Additional studies may end up changing this outlook on ultrasound, but, for now, the evidence does not exist, he said in a video interview.

Dr. Sepriano and his associates had no conflicts of interest to declare.

MADRID – Adding ultrasound exams to a treat to target (T2T) protocol did not improve remission outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

In fact, seven-joint ultrasound actually reduced the chance that patients would achieve clinical remission in several remission assessment tools, Alexandre Sepriano, MD, said at the European Congress of Rheumatology.

“We saw no advantage in using ultrasound of seven joints in addition to clinical examination, compared to clinical examination alone,” said Dr. Sepriano of Leiden (the Netherlands) University Medical Center. “We can speculate on the reasons why, but, in truth, this is the same message we have now seen in two other studies.”

Subclinical, ultrasound-detected synovitis has been shown to be predictive of disease flare in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), suggesting that ultrasound may have a role in defining treatment strategies, but recent trials integrating musculoskeletal ultrasound assessments into a T2T protocol have not shown better outcomes than when standard clinical definitions of remission are used.

Dr. Sepriano presented findings from BIODAM, a 2-year observational cohort of RA patients across 10 countries who are managed under a T2T protocol.

Several studies, including BIODAM, have helped to establish T2T – which intensifies treatment if patients are not in remission and eases treatment intensity when patients are in remission – as an optimal management strategy in RA. Dr. Sepriano and his colleagues set out to learn whether using ultrasound data in T2T would result in better outcomes, by creating a combined new strategy using both ultrasound and clinical measures, than does use of the established T2T strategy that uses only clinical data.

To do this, they looked at a subgroup of 130 patients from six countries who were treated at the BIODAM centers that had expertise in ultrasound. Patients’ clinical and ultrasound data were collected every 3 months through 2 years (for 1,037 visits in total) and were managed by rheumatologists under established T2T protocols. These patients were a mean of 55 years old, with a mean disease duration of 6 years.

As in the broader BIODAM study, the researchers used multiple clinical definitions of remission, including 28-joint and 44-joint Disease Activity Scores and the European League against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology–Boolean criteria. For the ultrasound measure, they used the previously validated US-7, which looks at seven joints for signs of synovitis.

In general, the proportion of patients in clinical remission rose over the study period, no matter what assessment tool was used. However, Dr. Sepriano and his colleagues found that the combined clinical and ultrasound benchmark for T2T decreased the likelihood of DAS-44 clinical remission after 3 months by 41% when compared with the conventional strategy. The story was similar for other assessments: The reduction was 49% on the DAS-28, 55% on Boolean remission, and 66% on Simple Disease Activity Index remission.

The reasons for this finding are difficult to discern, Dr. Sepriano said, and are complicated by the fact that this study was not a randomized, controlled trial but a longitudinal cohort in real-world practice settings.

Given the many variables involved, Dr. Sepriano said, “it may be not entirely linear to have an explanation as to why, when we used ultrasound, we actually got worse results.”

But, he noted, results from two randomized trials in more restricted populations of RA patients have also shown no benefit from adding ultrasound.

“What the data are telling us is that the clinician should be encouraged to use clinical data in his or her decisions – so we stress the importance of following a T2T strategy according to clinical data,” Dr. Sepriano said. “Adding ultrasound may not be an advantage in this scenario.”

Additional studies may end up changing this outlook on ultrasound, but, for now, the evidence does not exist, he said in a video interview.

Dr. Sepriano and his associates had no conflicts of interest to declare.

MADRID – Adding ultrasound exams to a treat to target (T2T) protocol did not improve remission outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

In fact, seven-joint ultrasound actually reduced the chance that patients would achieve clinical remission in several remission assessment tools, Alexandre Sepriano, MD, said at the European Congress of Rheumatology.

“We saw no advantage in using ultrasound of seven joints in addition to clinical examination, compared to clinical examination alone,” said Dr. Sepriano of Leiden (the Netherlands) University Medical Center. “We can speculate on the reasons why, but, in truth, this is the same message we have now seen in two other studies.”

Subclinical, ultrasound-detected synovitis has been shown to be predictive of disease flare in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), suggesting that ultrasound may have a role in defining treatment strategies, but recent trials integrating musculoskeletal ultrasound assessments into a T2T protocol have not shown better outcomes than when standard clinical definitions of remission are used.

Dr. Sepriano presented findings from BIODAM, a 2-year observational cohort of RA patients across 10 countries who are managed under a T2T protocol.

Several studies, including BIODAM, have helped to establish T2T – which intensifies treatment if patients are not in remission and eases treatment intensity when patients are in remission – as an optimal management strategy in RA. Dr. Sepriano and his colleagues set out to learn whether using ultrasound data in T2T would result in better outcomes, by creating a combined new strategy using both ultrasound and clinical measures, than does use of the established T2T strategy that uses only clinical data.

To do this, they looked at a subgroup of 130 patients from six countries who were treated at the BIODAM centers that had expertise in ultrasound. Patients’ clinical and ultrasound data were collected every 3 months through 2 years (for 1,037 visits in total) and were managed by rheumatologists under established T2T protocols. These patients were a mean of 55 years old, with a mean disease duration of 6 years.

As in the broader BIODAM study, the researchers used multiple clinical definitions of remission, including 28-joint and 44-joint Disease Activity Scores and the European League against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology–Boolean criteria. For the ultrasound measure, they used the previously validated US-7, which looks at seven joints for signs of synovitis.

In general, the proportion of patients in clinical remission rose over the study period, no matter what assessment tool was used. However, Dr. Sepriano and his colleagues found that the combined clinical and ultrasound benchmark for T2T decreased the likelihood of DAS-44 clinical remission after 3 months by 41% when compared with the conventional strategy. The story was similar for other assessments: The reduction was 49% on the DAS-28, 55% on Boolean remission, and 66% on Simple Disease Activity Index remission.

The reasons for this finding are difficult to discern, Dr. Sepriano said, and are complicated by the fact that this study was not a randomized, controlled trial but a longitudinal cohort in real-world practice settings.

Given the many variables involved, Dr. Sepriano said, “it may be not entirely linear to have an explanation as to why, when we used ultrasound, we actually got worse results.”

But, he noted, results from two randomized trials in more restricted populations of RA patients have also shown no benefit from adding ultrasound.

“What the data are telling us is that the clinician should be encouraged to use clinical data in his or her decisions – so we stress the importance of following a T2T strategy according to clinical data,” Dr. Sepriano said. “Adding ultrasound may not be an advantage in this scenario.”

Additional studies may end up changing this outlook on ultrasound, but, for now, the evidence does not exist, he said in a video interview.

Dr. Sepriano and his associates had no conflicts of interest to declare.