Citations

ABSTRACT Background Polypharmacy is common in autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs) and increases adverse drug events (ADEs), but comparative evidence across diseases is limited. We aimed to quantify ADE burden and identify medications associated with ADE risk across six ARDs, and to examine shared and disease-specific patterns across diseases. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary medical center (2010–2024). Adults with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Sjögren’s disease (SjD), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), or systemic sclerosis (SSc) were identified using diagnostic codes. ADEs were ascertained using validated case definitions. Medications were mapped to Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classes; active exposure was defined within 30 days before the index date. Polypharmacy was defined as ≥5 concurrent medications (minor 5–10; major >10). Within each ARD, nested case–control analyses matched on encounter type (1:4) were performed, and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were estimated using conditional logistic regression. Findings Among 10,578 patients, 3,154 (29.8%) experienced at least one ADE. ADE burden varied across diseases, with the highest prevalence observed in SSc (35.9%). Polypharmacy was common (57.3% minor, 39.4% major) and medication burden was consistently higher in ADE cases across encounter types (eg, SLE outpatient median 12 vs 6; inpatient 20 vs 10; emergency 17 vs 8). Across ARDs, the strongest associations with ADEs were observed for supportive and symptom-directed therapies (acid suppressors, pain adjuncts, and sedative-hypnotic/psychotropic medications), whereas conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) showed weaker associations. Disease-specific signatures included gastrointestinal agents in SSc (metoclopramide aOR 12.32), antibiotics and respiratory agents in AS (ciprofloxacin aOR 13.71, fluticasone aOR 8.88). Interpretation ADEs affect nearly one-third of ARD patients and increase with medication burden. Risk concentrates in supportive and symptom-directed therapies rather than DMARDs, with both shared and disease-specific patterns. Optimizing prescribing, particularly for pain management and corticosteroid use, can reduce medication-related harm.

Abstract Background. Pain drives disability and medication use in autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs), even when inflammation is controlled. The extent of pain-related polypharmacy across ARDs and chronic overlapping pain conditions (COPCs) remains poorly characterized. We aimed to quantify first-year pain medication burden following ARD diagnosis and examine variations by disease, COPC status, and time. Methods. Using the Merative MarketScan Commercial Claims database, we identified adults newly diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, Sjögren’s disease, or systemic sclerosis (2008–2021). We analyzed pain-related medications across ten pharmacologic categories during the first year post-diagnosis. Polypharmacy measures included distinct medication counts, medication categories, ≥ 5 and ≥ 10 medication thresholds, and the Medication Quantification Scale. Findings. Among 149,742 adults with newly diagnosed ARDs, 57.6% had at least one COPC. During the first year after diagnosis, patients filled a mean of 9.0 distinct pain medications and 47.9% met criteria for ≥ 5 medications; 30.5% met criteria for ≥ 10 medications. Ankylosing spondylitis demonstrated the highest medication burden (mean 11.6 medications; 57.5% with ≥ 5 medications; 37.9% with ≥ 10 medications). Patients with fibromyalgia had consistently higher medication burden across ARDs and were the only COPC group in whom prescribing increased after 2015. Overall medication burden rose from 2008 to 2014–2015 and declined thereafter; however, absolute levels remained high. Interpretation. Pain-related polypharmacy is common early after ARD diagnosis and varies substantially by disease and pain phenotype. Despite modest declines after 2015, medication burden remains high, underscoring the need for phenotype-informed, nonpharmacologic, and deprescribing strategies in rheumatology. Funding. NIAMS (K01AR079039).

Objective To examine real‐world patterns in pain management among adults with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), we focused on the sequencing of pain modalities, polypharmacy, and demographic variation. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of electronic health records from adults with SLE treated at a single academic medical center between 2005 and 2024. We included patients who received at least one pain‐related therapy, including glucocorticoids, opioids, nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antidepressants, anticonvulsants, muscle relaxants, and nonpharmacologic interventions. We used sequence analysis and Sankey diagrams to map treatment trajectories and compared patterns across two periods: 2005 to 2014 and 2015 to 2024. Polypharmacy was defined as receiving five or more pain‐related prescriptions within 12 months. We examined trends by age, sex, and race or ethnicity. Results Among 769 patients, initiation of glucocorticoids and opioids declined over time (58%–51% and 28%–22%, respectively), whereas NSAID use increased (19%–29%). The median number of pain prescriptions decreased, and polypharmacy prevalence dropped from 53% to 45%. In recent years, younger adults and men received more prescriptions, with 69% of men receiving five or more compared with 43% of women. Racial disparities narrowed overall in recent years but persisted in sensitivity analyses excluding glucocorticoids. Conclusion Pain management in SLE is shifting away from high‐risk therapies; however, prescribing intensity remains high and varies by demographic group. Visualizations serve as a complementary lens to traditional prescription counts, allowing representation of polypharmacy not only by volume but also by the diversity and sequencing of therapeutic classes over time.

INTRODUCTION: Spondyloarthritis (SpA), the most common extraintestinal manifestation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), is reported in up to 39% of patients with IBD. Despite this high prevalence, risk factors of developing SpA in patients with IBD are not well described. In this study, we aimed to determine the factors associated with SpA symptoms and their prevalence in an IBD cohort. METHODS: Two validated screening questionnaires for the detection of SpA in IBD (DETAIL = DETection of Arthritis in Inflammatory boweL diseases, IBIS-Q = IBD Identification of Spondyloarthritis Questionnaire) were administered to patients with IBD without a prior diagnosis of SpA in 6 US academic medical centers. Demographic data, IBD characteristics, and medication history were recorded. RESULTS: Screening questionnaires were completed by 588 patients (220 ulcerative colitis, 349 Crohn's disease, and 19 IBD-unclassified), with a median age of 40 years (interquartile range 30–53) and median disease duration of 12 years (interquartile range 6–22). The number of positive screens was 130 (22%) for DETAIL, 196 (33%) for IBIS-Q, and 204 (35%) for either DETAIL or IBIS-Q. Age, female sex, history of smoking, prior bowel surgery, and history of any biologic or targeted small molecule exposure were associated with a positive screen on univariate analysis. After multivariate analysis, female sex (odds ratio [OR] 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.41–2.93), older age (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01–1.04), history of smoking (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.04–2.69), and history of any biologic or targeted small molecule exposure (OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.34–3.84) were independently associated with positive screens. Higher number of biologic exposures was associated with higher risk of positive screens, with the highest risk seen with 3 or more exposures (OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.75–6.03). DISCUSSION: A substantial number of patients with IBD screen positive for SpA symptoms, indicating a potentially high burden of undiagnosed illness. Factors associated with SpA symptoms include older age, female sex, and more severe disease (based on increased number of advanced therapies or prior surgery), whereas IBD phenotype does not independently increase the risk of a positive SpA screen. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and better characterize SpA in IBD.

ObjectiveSpondyloarthritis (SpA) is the most common extraintestinal manifestation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The application of screening tools to detect SpA in patients with IBD may lead to earlier recognition of SpA and affect treatment decisions.MethodsA combination of two previously described SpA screening questionnaires, the Detection of Arthritis in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (DETAIL) and IBD Identification of Spondyloarthritis Questionnaire (IBIS‐Q), was administered to consecutive patients with IBD attending IBD specialty clinics in six US academic medical centers. Demographic data, IBD, and rheumatology history were extracted by chart review.ResultsA total of 669 patients were analyzed. The median age was 40 years (interquartile range [IQR] 30–54) with a median disease duration of 12 years (IQR 6–22) and moderate to severe IBD based on medication exposure and history of bowel surgery. A total of 81 patients (12%) carried a diagnosis of an inflammatory rheumatic disease, whereas 75 (11%) had consulted a rheumatologist during the previous year. Using published cutoffs, 180 out of 669 patients (27%) screened positive with DETAIL, 266 (40%) with IBIS‐Q, and 275 (41%) with either questionnaire. Axial symptoms were more frequently reported than peripheral musculoskeletal complaints. Notably, 189 out of 275 (69%) screen‐positive patients had neither a documented inflammatory rheumatic disease diagnosis nor a visit with a rheumatologist within the past year.ConclusionA substantial proportion of patients with IBD have symptoms suggestive of SpA, and many of these may have undiagnosed SpA. The IBIS‐Q questionnaire appears to identify more potential SpA cases than DETAIL. Strategies are needed to prioritize rheumatology consultations for those patients with IBD who are most likely to benefit.

Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)–associated peripheral spondyloarthritis (pSpA) decreases quality of life and remains poorly understood. Given the prevalence of this condition and its negative impact, it is surprising that evidence-based disease definitions and diagnostic strategies are lacking. This systematic review summarizes available data to facilitate development and validation of diagnostics, patient-reported outcomes, and imaging indices specific to this condition. Methods A literature search was conducted. Consensus or classification criteria, case series, cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials related to diagnosis were included. Results A total of 44 studies reporting data on approximately 1500 patients with pSpA were eligible for analysis. Data quality across studies was only graded as fair to good. Due to large heterogeneity, meta-analysis was not possible. The majority of studies incorporated patient-reported outcomes and a physical examination. A total of 13 studies proposed or validated screening tools, consensus, classification, or consensus criteria. A total of 28 studies assessed the role of laboratory tests, none of which were considered sufficiently accurate for use in diagnosis. A total of 17 studies assessed the role of imaging, with the available literature insufficient to fully endorse any imaging modality as a robust diagnostic tool. Conclusions This review highlights existing inconsistency and lack of a clear diagnostic approach for IBD-associated pSpA. Given the absence of an evidence-based approach, a combination of existing criteria and physician assessment should be utilized. To address this issue comprehensively, our future efforts will be directed toward pursuit of a multidisciplinary approach aimed at standardizing evaluation and diagnosis of IBD-associated pSpA.

SummaryBackground and aimsExtra‐intestinal manifestations (EIMs) are a common complication of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), affecting up to half of the patients. Despite their high prevalence, information on standardised definitions, diagnostic strategies, and treatment targets is limited.MethodsAs a starting point for a national EIM study network, an interdisciplinary expert panel of 12 gastroenterologists, 4 rheumatologists, 3 ophthalmologists, 6 dermatologists, and 4 patient representatives was assembled. Modified Delphi consensus methodology was used. Fifty‐four candidate items were derived from the literature review and expert opinion focusing on five major EIMs (erythema nodosum, pyoderma gangrenosum, uveitis, peripheral arthritis, and axial arthritis) were rated in three voting rounds.ResultsFor use in a clinical practice setting and as part of the creation of a prospective registry of patients with EIMs, the panel developed definitions for erythema nodosum, pyoderma gangrenosum, uveitis, peripheral arthritis, and axial arthritis; identified the appropriate and optimal subspecialists to diagnose and manage each; provided methods to monitor disease course; offered guidance regarding monitoring intervals; and defined resolution and recurrence.ConclusionsConsensus criteria for appropriate and optimal means of diagnosing and monitoring five EIMs have been developed as a starting point to inform clinical practice and future trial design. Key findings include straightforward diagnostic criteria, guidance regarding who can appropriately and optimally diagnose each, and monitoring options that include patient and physician‐reported outcomes. These findings will be used in a national multicenter study network to optimise the management of EIMs.

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of abatacept to that of placebo for the treatment of giant cell arteritis (GCA).MethodsIn this multicenter trial, patients with newly diagnosed or relapsing GCA were treated with abatacept 10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1, 15, and 29 and week 8, together with prednisone administered daily. At week 12, patients in remission underwent a double‐blinded randomization to continue to receive abatacept monthly or switch to placebo. Patients in both study arms received a standardized prednisone taper, with discontinuation of prednisone at week 28. All patients remained on their randomized assignment until meeting criteria for early termination or until 12 months after enrollment of the last patient. The primary end point was duration of remission (relapse‐free survival rate).ResultsForty‐nine eligible patients with GCA were enrolled and treated with prednisone and abatacept; of these, 41 reached the week 12 randomization and underwent a blinded randomization to receive abatacept or placebo. Prednisone was tapered using a standardized schedule, reaching a daily dosage of 20 mg at week 12 with discontinuation in all patients at week 28. The relapse‐free survival rate at 12 months was 48% for those receiving abatacept and 31% for those receiving placebo (P = 0.049). A longer median duration of remission was seen in those receiving abatacept compared to those receiving placebo (median duration 9.9 months versus 3.9 months; P = 0.023). There was no difference in the frequency or severity of adverse events, including infection, between the treatment arms.ConclusionIn patients with GCA, the addition of abatacept to a treatment regimen with prednisone reduced the risk of relapse and was not associated with a higher rate of toxicity compared to prednisone alone.

Objective To compare the efficacy of abatacept to that of placebo for the treatment of Takayasu arteritis (TAK). Methods In this multicenter trial, patients with newly diagnosed or relapsing TAK were treated with abatacept 10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1, 15, and 29 and week 8, together with prednisone administered daily. At week 12, patients in remission underwent a double‐blinded randomization to continue to receive abatacept monthly or switch to placebo. Patients in both study arms received a standardized prednisone taper, reaching a dosage of 20 mg daily at week 12, with discontinuation of prednisone at week 28. All patients remained on their randomized assignment until meeting criteria for early termination or until 12 months after enrollment of the last patient. The primary end point was duration of remission (relapse‐free survival). Results Thirty‐four eligible patients with TAK were enrolled and treated with prednisone and abatacept; of these, 26 reached the week 12 randomization and underwent a blinded randomization to receive either abatacept or placebo. The relapse‐free survival rate at 12 months was 22% for those receiving abatacept and 40% for those receiving placebo ( P = 0.853). Treatment with abatacept in patients with TAK enrolled in this study was not associated with a longer median duration of remission (median duration 5.5 months for abatacept versus 5.7 months for placebo). There was no difference in the frequency or severity of adverse events, including infection, between the treatment arms. Conclusion In patients with TAK, the addition of abatacept to a treatment regimen with prednisone did not reduce the risk of relapse.

ObjectiveSystemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and other autoimmune diseases cause significant morbidity. Identifying populations at risk of developing SLE is essential for curtailing irreversible inflammatory damage. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with transition to classified disease that would inform our understanding of the risk of SLE.MethodsPreviously identified blood relatives of patients with SLE, who had <4 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for SLE at baseline, were enrolled in this follow‐up study (n = 409 unaffected relatives). Participants provided detailed family, demographic, and clinical information, including the SLE‐specific portion of the Connective Tissue Disease Screening Questionnaire (SLE‐CSQ). Serum and plasma samples were tested for the presence of lupus‐associated autoantibodies and 52 soluble mediators. Generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were applied to identify factors predictive of disease transition.ResultsOf the 409 unaffected relatives of SLE patients, 45 (11%) had transitioned to classified SLE at follow‐up (mean time to follow‐up 6.4 years). Relatives who transitioned to SLE displayed more lupus‐associated autoantibody specificities and higher SLE‐CSQ scores (P < 0.0001) at baseline than did relatives who did not transition. Importantly, those who had developed SLE during the follow‐up period also had elevated baseline plasma levels of inflammatory mediators, including B lymphocyte stimulator, stem cell factor (SCF), and interferon‐associated chemokines (P ≤ 0.02), with concurrent decreases in the levels of regulatory mediators, transforming growth factor β (TGFβ), and interleukin‐10 (P ≤ 0.03). GEE analyses revealed that baseline SLE‐CSQ scores or ACR scores (number of ACR criteria satisfied) and plasma levels of SCF and TGFβ, but not autoantibodies, were significant and independent predictors of SLE transition (P ≤ 0.03).ConclusionPreclinical alterations in levels of soluble mediators may predict transition to classified disease in relatives of SLE patients. Thus, immune perturbations precede SLE classification and can help identify high‐risk relatives for rheumatology referral and potential enrollment in prevention trials.