Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Leeds NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Oct;76(10):1688-1692. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-211137. Epub 2017 Jun 12.
We aimed to evaluate the dynamics of treatment response with different composite measures in the TIght COntrol of inflammation in early Psoriatic Arthritis (TICOPA) trial.
Participants with early disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-naïve psoriatic arthritis (PsA) were randomised 1:1 to either tight control (TC; 4 weekly review with therapy escalation if criteria not met) or standard care (SC; 12 weekly review). We calculated modified versions of the Psoriatic ArthritiS Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) Composite scorE (GRACE) and Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI) at baseline and 12 weekly to 48 weeks by blinded assessor. For missing data, we used the last observation carried forward. Comparison between groups was made by analysis of covariance and comparison of area under the curve (AUC).
206 people were randomised to TC (n=101) or SC (n=105). Significant differences between treatment groups were seen (p<0.0001 for all composite measures). AUC analysis demonstrated a significant difference between groups for the PASDAS but not GRACE and CPDAI. For participants with oligoarthritis, a significant difference between groups was seen for each measure, although the significance levels were greatly diminished (PASDAS, p=0.04; GRACE p=0.01; CPDAI p=0.04). For oligoarthritis using AUC analysis, none of the measures could distinguish between groups.
Composite measures of disease activity were able to distinguish between TICOPA treatment arms, although differences were diminished for those with oligoarthritis. Further data are needed to inform the preferred composite measure for use as the primary outcome in PsA trials.
ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01106079) and ISCRCTN registry (ISCRCTN30147736).
我们旨在评估 TICOPA 试验中不同综合指标的治疗反应动态。
患有早期疾病修饰抗风湿药-naive 银屑病关节炎(PsA)的参与者被随机分配 1:1 接受严格控制(TC;如果未达到标准则每 4 周进行一次复查并进行治疗升级)或标准护理(SC;每 12 周进行一次复查)。我们通过盲法评估者在基线和 12 周至 48 周时计算改良的银屑病关节炎疾病活动评分(PASDAS)、银屑病关节炎研究和评估组(GRAPPA)综合评分(GRACE)和综合银屑病疾病活动指数(CPDAI)的修订版本。对于缺失数据,我们采用了末次观测值结转。采用协方差分析和曲线下面积(AUC)比较比较组间差异。
206 人被随机分配到 TC(n=101)或 SC(n=105)组。治疗组之间存在显著差异(所有综合指标均为 p<0.0001)。AUC 分析表明,在 PASDAS 方面,两组之间存在显著差异,但在 GRACE 和 CPDAI 方面则没有。对于寡关节炎患者,每种指标均显示组间存在显著差异,尽管显著性水平大大降低(PASDAS,p=0.04;GRACE,p=0.01;CPDAI,p=0.04)。对于寡关节炎患者,使用 AUC 分析,没有一种指标可以区分两组。
疾病活动的综合指标能够区分 TICOPA 治疗组,尽管对于寡关节炎患者,差异有所缩小。需要进一步的数据来确定作为 PsA 试验主要结局的首选综合指标。
ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT01106079)和 ISCRTN 登记处(ISCRTN30147736)。