Reporting disease activity in clinical trials of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: EULAR/ACR collaborative recommendations.

OBJECTIVE To make recommendations on how to report disease activity in clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) endorsed by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). METHODS The project followed the EULAR standardized operating procedures, which use a three-step approach: 1) expert-based definition of relevant research questions (November 2006); 2) systematic literature search (November 2006 to May 2007); and 3) expert consensus on recommendations based on the literature search results (May 2007). In addition, since this is the first joint EULAR/ACR publication on recommendations, an extra step included a meeting with an ACR panel to approve the recommendations elaborated by the expert group (August 2007). RESULTS Eleven relevant questions were identified for the literature search. Based on the evidence from the literature, the expert panel recommended that each trial should report the following items: 1) disease activity response and disease activity states; 2) appropriate descriptive statistics of the baseline, the endpoints and change of the single variables included in the core set; 3) baseline disease activity levels (in general); 4) the percentage of patients achieving a low disease activity state and remission; 5) time to onset of the primary outcome; 6) sustainability of the primary outcome; 7) fatigue. CONCLUSION These recommendations endorsed by EULAR and ACR will help harmonize the presentations of results from clinical trials. Adherence to these recommendations will provide the readership of clinical trials with more details of important outcomes, while the higher level of homogeneity may facilitate the comparison of outcomes across different trials and pooling of trial results, such as in meta-analyses.

[1]  M. Prevoo,et al.  Remission in a prospective study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. American Rheumatism Association preliminary remission criteria in relation to the disease activity score. , 1996, British journal of rheumatology.

[2]  C. Bombardier,et al.  Minimal clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state for subjective outcome measures in rheumatic disorders. , 2007, The Journal of rheumatology.

[3]  A. Zwinderman,et al.  Long-term course and outcome of functional capacity in rheumatoid arthritis: the effect of disease activity and radiologic damage over time. , 1999, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[4]  Désirée van der Heijde,et al.  A proposed revision to the ACR20: the hybrid measure of American College of Rheumatology response. , 2007, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[5]  J J Anderson,et al.  The American college of rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials , 1993 .

[6]  L. Kiemeney,et al.  The relationship between disease activity, joint destruction, and functional capacity over the course of rheumatoid arthritis. , 2001, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[7]  H. Kautiainen,et al.  Nottingham health profile questionnaire incorporates important aspects of the patient perspective into outcome assessment in rheumatoid arthritis. , 2008, Clinical and experimental rheumatology.

[8]  P. Tugwell,et al.  World Health Organization and International League of Associations for Rheumatology core endpoints for symptom modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. , 1994, The Journal of rheumatology. Supplement.

[9]  E. Taal,et al.  Incorporating the patient perspective into outcome assessment in rheumatoid arthritis--progress at OMERACT 7. , 2005, The Journal of rheumatology.

[10]  M. Uffmann,et al.  Acute phase reactants add little to composite disease activity indices for rheumatoid arthritis: validation of a clinical activity score , 2005, Arthritis research & therapy.

[11]  F Guillemin,et al.  EULAR standardised operating procedures for the elaboration, evaluation, dissemination, and implementation of recommendations endorsed by the EULAR standing committees , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[12]  M. Dougados,et al.  Methods of deriving EULAR/ACR recommendations on reporting disease activity in clinical trials of patients with rheumatoid arthritis , 2008, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[13]  J J Anderson,et al.  American College of Rheumatology. Preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1995, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[14]  R N Maini,et al.  Evidence of radiographic benefit of treatment with infliximab plus methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis patients who had no clinical improvement: a detailed subanalysis of data from the anti-tumor necrosis factor trial in rheumatoid arthritis with concomitant therapy study. , 2005, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[15]  M. A. van 't Hof,et al.  Judging disease activity in clinical practice in rheumatoid arthritis: first step in the development of a disease activity score. , 1990, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[16]  Michael M Ward,et al.  Measuring function in rheumatoid arthritis: Identifying reversible and irreversible components. , 2006, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[17]  P. Tugwell,et al.  A simplified disease activity index for rheumatoid arthritis for use in clinical practice. , 2003, Rheumatology.

[18]  G. Koch,et al.  Reporting disease activity in clinical trials of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: EULAR/ACR collaborative recommendations , 2008, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.