Is a 1-year course of methotrexate in patients with arthralgia at-risk for rheumatoid arthritis cost-effective? A cost-effectiveness analysis of the randomised, placebo-controlled TREAT EARLIER trial.

Objectives: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has a considerable disease burden with life-long physical limitations, reduced work productivity and high societal costs. Trials on arthralgia at-risk for RA are therefore conducted, aiming to intercept evolving RA and reduce the disease burden. A 1-year course of methotrexate in patients with clinically suspect arthralgia (CSA) caused sustained improvements in subclinical joint inflammation and physical impairments.

Is a 1-year course of methotrexate in patients with arthralgia at-risk for rheumatoid arthritis cost-effective? A cost-effectiveness analysis of the randomised, placebo-controlled TREAT EARLIER trial.

Objectives: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has a considerable disease burden with life-long physical limitations, reduced work productivity and high societal costs. Trials on arthralgia at-risk for RA are therefore conducted, aiming to intercept evolving RA and reduce the disease burden. A 1-year course of methotrexate in patients with clinically suspect arthralgia (CSA) caused sustained improvements in subclinical joint inflammation and physical impairments.

Initial glucocorticoid bridging in rheumatoid arthritis: does it affect glucocorticoid use over time?

Objectives: To compare the use of glucocorticoids (GC) over time in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were or were not treated initially with GC bridging therapy.

Methods: Data from the BeSt, CareRA and COBRA trials were combined in an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. We compared GC use between bridgers and non-bridgers at 12, 18 and 24 months from baseline with mixed-effects regression analysis.

Meta-Analyses on the Effects of Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs on the Most Relevant Patient-Reported Outcome Domains in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Objective: Whereas in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis much evidence exists on the effects of current pharmacologic treatment on clinical outcomes, little is known about the effects on patient-reported outcomes. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effects of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on the patient-relevant domains of pain, fatigue, activity limitation, overall emotional and physical health impact, and work/school/housework ability and productivity.

Methods: A literature search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials wherein registered DMARDs were compared with placebo or methotrexate and reported the effects on patient-reported outcomes included in the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement standard set for inflammatory arthritis.

Possibilities for personalised medicine in rheumatoid arthritis: hype or hope.

Knowledge of pathophysiology of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has improved over the past decades, which resulted in new treatment options and strategies that led to better clinical outcomes. At the same time, we have come to understand that RA is a heterogeneous disease on a clinical as well as a pathophysiological level. Despite this heterogeneity, current management recommendations still adopt a 'one-size-fits-all' treatment approach, where ideally individualised treatment, or personalised medicine, is preferred.

The likelihood of attaining and maintaining DMARD-free remission for various (rheumatoid) arthritis phenotypes.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare DMARD-free remission rates (DFRs) and sustained DFRs (SDFRs), defined as, respectively, DFR for ≥6 months and ≥1 year, after 2 and 5 years, between three clinical arthritis phenotypes: undifferentiated arthritis (UA), autoantibody-negative (RA-) and autoantibody-positive RA (RA+).

Methods: All UA (n = 130), RA- (n = 176) and RA+ (n = 331) patients from the tREACH trial, a stratified single-blinded trial with a treat-to-target approach, were included in the study. (S)DFR comparisons between phenotypes after 2 and 5 years were performed with logistic regression.

Comparing cost-utility of DMARDs in autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Objectives: To evaluate the 1-year cost-effectiveness between three different initial treatment strategies in autoantibody-negative RA patients, according to 2010 criteria.

Methods: For this analysis we selected all RA patients within the intermediate probability stratum of the treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort (tREACH) trial. The tREACH had a treat-to-target approach, aiming for low DAS <2.

The impact of different (rheumatoid) arthritis phenotypes on patients' lives.

Objectives: To compare patient-reported outcome (PRO) domains between three arthritis phenotypes [undifferentiated arthritis (UA), autoantibody-negative RA (RA-) and autoantibody-positive RA (RA+)] at diagnosis, after 2 years and over time.

Methods: All UA (n = 130), RA- (n = 176) and RA+ (n = 331) patients from the tREACH trial, a stratified single-blinded trial with a treat-to-target approach, were used. PRO comparisons between phenotypes at baseline and after 2 years were performed with analysis of variance, while a linear mixed model compared them over time.

Two-year cost effectiveness between two gradual tapering strategies in rheumatoid arthritis: cost-utility analysis of the TARA trial.

Objective: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the 2-year cost-utility ratio between tapering conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) first followed by the tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibitor, or vice versa, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods: Two-year data of the Tapering strategies in Rheumatoid Arthritis trial were used. Patients with RA, who used both a csDMARD and a TNF-inhibitor and had a well-controlled disease (disease activity score ≤2.

Tapering towards DMARD-free remission in established rheumatoid arthritis: 2-year results of the TARA trial.

Objectives: To evaluate the 2-year clinical effectiveness of two gradual tapering strategies. The first strategy consisted of tapering the conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) first (i.e.

Gradual tapering TNF inhibitors versus conventional synthetic DMARDs after achieving controlled disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: first-year results of the randomised controlled TARA study.

Objectives: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of two tapering strategies after achieving controlled disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), during 1 year of follow-up.

Methods: In this multicentre single-blinded (research nurses) randomised controlled trial, patients with RA were included who achieved controlled disease, defined as a Disease Activity Score (DAS) ≤ 2.4 and a Swollen Joint Count (SJC) ≤ 1, treated with both a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) and a TNF inhibitor.

Response to glucocorticoids at 2 weeks predicts the effectiveness of DMARD induction therapy at 3 months: post hoc analyses from the tREACH study.

Objective: To investigate if a glucocorticoid (GC) response at 2 weeks, defined by EULAR response criteria, can predict active disease (Disease Activity Score (DAS)>2.4) at 3 months.

Methods: For this study, data of the Treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort study (tREACH), an ongoing clinical trial that evaluates different induction therapies in early rheumatoid arthritis, were used.