Are poor prognostic factors a realistic basis for treatment decisions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis? Lessons from the IMPROVED study

Joy Ardjuna van der Pol,Cornelia F Allaart,Tom W J Huizinga,Sytske Anne Bergstra
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2024-004382
2024-06-22
RMD Open
Abstract:The European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) recommendations for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) recommend the use of poor prognostic factors (PPFs) in treatment decisions.1 PPFs are: (1) persistent moderate/high disease activity after conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), (2) high C reactive protein (CRP)/erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) levels at baseline, (3) high swollen joint counts (SJC) at baseline, (4) presence of Rheumatoid Factor (RF) and/or Anti-Citrullinated Protein Antibodies (ACPA), especially at high levels, (5) presence of early erosions or (6) failure of two or more csDMARDs.2 PPFs are associated with an increased risk of radiographic damage over time. It is recommended, if a treatment target is not achieved with the first csDMARD strategy, to treat patients without PPFs with a second csDMARD, but to switch to treatment with a biological DMARD (bDMARD) if PPFs are present. These considerations are based on expert opinion, and an investigation into the association between stratification and treatment outcomes is recommended.2 We aim to explore the presence of PPFs in early RA and to investigate their relationship with treatment response after failure of the first csDMARD strategy. In the IMPROVED study, 479 patients with RA (2010 criteria) started treatment with MTX and prednisone bridging. Patients not in early remission (Disease Activity Score (DAS) ≥1.6) after 4 months were randomised to Methotrexate (MTX)+Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)+ Sulfasalazine (SSZ) + continued low-dose ...
rheumatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?