One in five patients with rapidly and persistently controlled early rheumatoid arthritis report poor well-being after 1 year of treatment

Kristien Van der Elst, Patrick Verschueren, Diederik De Cock, An De Groef, Veerle Stouten, Sofia Pazmino, Johanna Vriezekolk, Johan Joly, Philip Moons, René Westhovens, Kristien Van der Elst, Patrick Verschueren, Diederik De Cock, An De Groef, Veerle Stouten, Sofia Pazmino, Johanna Vriezekolk, Johan Joly, Philip Moons, René Westhovens

Abstract

Objectives: To identify and characterise a subgroup of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) reporting not feeling well 1 year after treatment initiation despite achieving optimal disease control according to current treatment standards.

Methods: This observational study included participants of the Care in early RA trial with a rapid and sustained response (DAS28CRP<2.6) from week 16 until year 1 after starting the first RA treatment. Feeling well was assessed at year 1, using five patient-reported outcomes (PROs): pain, fatigue, physical functioning, RA-related quality of life and sleep quality. K-means clustering assigned patients to a cluster based on these PROs. Cohen's d effect size estimated cluster differences at treatment initiation and week 16, for the five clustering PROs, coping behaviour, illness perceptions and social support.

Results: Analyses revealed three clusters. Of 140 patients, 77.9% were assigned to the 'concordant to disease activity' cluster, 9.3% to the 'dominant fatigue' cluster and 12.9% to the 'dominant pain and fatigue' cluster. Large differences in pain and fatigue reporting were found at week 16 when comparing the 'concordant' with the 'dominant pain and fatigue' or the 'dominant fatigue' cluster. Small differences in reporting were found for the other PROs. Illness perceptions and coping style also differed in the 'concordant' cluster.

Conclusions: Although most patients reported PRO scores in concordance with their well-controlled disease activity, one in five persistent treatment responders reported not feeling well at year 1. These patients reported higher pain and fatigue, and different illness perceptions and coping strategies early in the disease course.

Keywords: cluster analysis; fatigue; pain; patient-reported outcomes; rheumatoid arthritis; unmet needs.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Effect sizes of patient-reported outcomes at baseline and week 16 when comparing the ‘dominant pain and fatigue’ cluster with the ‘concordant to disease activity’ cluster and the ‘dominant fatigue cluster’ cluster with the ‘concordant to disease activity’ cluster. The red line represents no effect: patients in the ‘discordant’ clusters gave the same score as patients in the ‘concordant to disease activity’ cluster. The area on the left of this line represents the negative ESs: patients in the ‘discordant’ clusters reported a lower score. The area on the right represents the positive ES: patients in the ‘discordant’ clusters reported a higher score. White area: no meaningful effect (Cohen’s d 0–0.2); blue area: small effects (Cohen’s d 0.2–0.5), orange area: medium effects (Cohen’s d 0.5–0.8), green area: large effects (Cohen’s d≥0.8). BL: Baseline; W16: week 16 of treatment.

References

    1. Smolen JS, Aletaha D, Barton A, et al. . Rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2018;4:1800110.1038/nrdp.2018.1.
    1. Lee YC, Frits ML, Iannaccone CK, et al. . Subgrouping of patients with rheumatoid arthritis based on pain, fatigue, inflammation, and psychosocial factors. Arthritis Rheumatol 2014;66:2006–1410.1002/art.v66.8.
    1. Druce KL, Bhattacharya Y, Jones GT, et al. . Most patients who reach disease remission following anti-TNF therapy continue to report fatigue: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register for Rheumatoid Arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2016;55:1786–9010.1093/rheumatology/kew241.
    1. Taylor PC, Moore A, Vasilescu R, et al. . A structured literature review of the burden of illness and unmet needs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a current perspective. Rheumatol Int 2016;36:685–9510.1007/s00296-015-3415-x.
    1. Steunebrink LMM, Oude Voshaar MAH, Taal E, et al. . Determinants of perceived health nonimprovement in early rheumatoid arthritis patients with favorable treatment outcomes. Arthritis Care Res 2018;70:510–1510.1002/acr.23305.
    1. Petrie KJ, Jago LA, Devcich DA. The role of illness perceptions in patients with medical conditions. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2007;20:163–710.1097/YCO.0b013e328014a871.
    1. Groarke A, Curtis R, Coughlan R, et al. . The role of perceived and actual disease status in adjustment to rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2004;43:1142–910.1093/rheumatology/keh262.
    1. Ferreira RJO, Duarte C, Ndosi M, et al. . Suppressing inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis: does patient global assessment blur the target? A practice-based call for a paradigm change. Arthritis Care Res 2018;70:369–7810.1002/acr.v70.3.
    1. Stouten V, Westhovens R, Pazmino S, et al. . Effectiveness of different combinations of DMARDs and glucocorticoid bridging in early rheumatoid arthritis: two-year results of CareRA. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2019;58:2284–9410.1093/rheumatology/kez213.
    1. Bruce B, Fries JF. The Stanford health assessment questionnaire: dimensions and practical applications. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003;1:20.10.1186/1477-7525-1-20.
    1. de Jong Z, van der Heijde D, McKenna SP, et al. . The reliability and construct validity of the RAQoL: a rheumatoid arthritis-specific quality of life instrument. Br J Rheumatol 1997;36:878–8310.1093/rheumatology/36.8.878.
    1. Buysse DJ, Reynolds CF 3rd, Monk TH, et al. . The Pittsburgh sleep quality index: a new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry Res 1989;28:193–21310.1016/0165-1781(89)90047-4.
    1. Schreurs P, Tellegen B, Vanderwillige G. Health, stress and coping - the development of the utrechtse coping scale. Gedrag-Tijdschr Voor Psychol 1984;12:101–17.
    1. Moss-Morris RWJ, Petrie KJ, Horne R, et al. . The revised illness perception questionnaire (IPQ-R). Psychol Health 2002;17:1–1610.1080/08870440290001494.
    1. Hill S. The illness perceptions questionnaire-revised (IPQ-R). J Physiother 2010;56:280.10.1016/S1836-9553(10)70062-X.
    1. Van Sonderen E. Het meten van sociale steun met de Sociale Steun Lijst-Interacties (SLL-I) en Sociale Steun Lijst: Discrepanties (SSL-D): een handleiding. Groningen: Noordelijk Centrum voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 1993.
    1. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd edn. Mahwah, New Jersey, United States of America: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,1988.
    1. Dempster APLN, Rubin DB. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J R Stat Soc 1977;39:1–38.
    1. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. . The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:344–910.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.008.
    1. Kirwan JR, Minnock P, Adebajo A, et al. . Patient perspective: fatigue as a recommended patient centered outcome measure in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2007;34:1174–7.
    1. Lampa J. Fatigue: the heavy backpack of many rheumatoid arthritis patients. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2015;54:962–310.1093/rheumatology/kev020.
    1. Basu N, Jones GT, Macfarlane GJ, et al. . Identification and validation of clinically relevant clusters of severe fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis. Psychosom Med 2017;79:1051–810.1097/PSY.0000000000000498.
    1. Cramp F, Hewlett S, Almeida C, et al. . Non-pharmacological interventions for fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;Aug 23; (8):CD008322.
    1. Landewe RBM. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment in rheumatology: a little caution is in order. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77:1394–6.
    1. Evers AW, Kraaimaat FW, Geenen R, et al. . Pain coping and social support as predictors of long-term functional disability and pain in early rheumatoid arthritis. Behav Res Ther 2003;41:1295–31010.1016/S0005-7967(03)00036-6.
    1. van Eijk-hustings Y, van Tubergen A, Bostrom C, et al. . EULAR recommendations for the role of the nurse in the management of chronic inflammatory arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:13–1910.1136/annrheumdis-2011-200185.
    1. Prothero L, Barley E, Galloway J, et al. . The evidence base for psychological interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review of reviews. Int J Nurs Stud 2018;82:20–910.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.03.008.
    1. Dures E, Almeida C, Caesley J, et al. . Patient preferences for psychological support in inflammatory arthritis: a multicentre survey. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:142–710.1136/annrheumdis-2014-205636.
    1. Dures E, Hewlett S, Ambler N, et al. . Rheumatology clinicians’ experiences of brief training and implementation of skills to support patient self-management. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014;15:10810.1186/1471-2474-15-108.
    1. Sandhu S, Veinot P, Embuldeniya G, et al. . Peer-to-peer mentoring for individuals with early inflammatory arthritis: feasibility pilot. BMJ Open 2013;3:310.1136/bmjopen-2012-002267.
    1. Kersten P, Kucukdeveci AA, Tennant A. The use of the visual analogue scale (VAS) in rehabilitation outcomes. J Rehabil Med 2012;44:609–1010.2340/16501977-0999.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться