BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on core outcome domains for hidradenitis suppurativa (HS). Heterogeneous outcome measure instruments in clinical trials likely leads to outcome-reporting bias and limits the ability to synthesize evidence.

OBJECTIVES: To achieve global multistakeholder consensus on a core outcome set (COS) of domains regarding what to measure in clinical trials for HS.

METHODS: Six stakeholder groups participated in a Delphi process that included five anonymous e-Delphi rounds and four face-to-face consensus meetings to reach consensus on the final COS. The aim was for a 1 : 1 ratio of patients to healthcare professionals (HCPs).

RESULTS: A total of 41 patients and 52 HCPs from 19 countries in four continents participated in the consensus process, which yielded a final COS that included five domains: pain, physical signs, HS-specific quality of life, global assessment and progression of course. A sixth domain, symptoms, was highly supported by patients and not by HCPs but is recommended for the core domain set.

CONCLUSIONS: Routine adoption of the COS in future HS trials should ensure that core outcomes of importance to both patients and HCPs are collected.

Genetic absence of the urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) reduces arthritis progression in the collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) mouse model to an extent just shy of disease abrogation, but this remarkable observation has not been translated into therapeutic intervention. Our aim was to test the potential in mice of an Ab that blocks the proteolytic capacity of uPA in the CIA model and the delayed-type hypersensitivity arthritis model. A second aim was to determine the cellular origins of uPA and the uPA receptor (uPAR) in joint tissue from patients with rheumatoid arthritis. A mAb that neutralizes mouse uPA significantly reduced arthritis progression in the CIA and delayed-type hypersensitivity arthritis models. In the CIA model, the impact of anti-uPA treatment was on par with the effect of blocking TNF-α by etanercept. A pharmacokinetics evaluation of the therapeutic Ab revealed target-mediated drug disposition consistent with a high turnover of endogenous uPA. The cellular expression patterns of uPA and uPAR were characterized by double immunofluorescence in the inflamed synovium from patients with rheumatoid arthritis and compared with synovium from healthy donors. The arthritic synovium showed expression of uPA and uPAR in neutrophils, macrophages, and a fraction of endothelial cells, whereas there was little or no expression in synovium from healthy donors. The data from animal models and human material provide preclinical proof-of-principle that validates uPA as a novel therapeutic target in rheumatic diseases.

INTRODUCTION: The need for biomarkers which can predict disease course and treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is evident. We explored whether clinical and imaging responses to biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug treatment (bDMARD) were associated with the individual's mediator production in explants obtained at baseline.

METHODS: RA Patients were evaluated by disease activity score 28 joint C-reactive protein (DAS 28-)), colour Doppler ultrasound (CDUS) and 3 Tesla RA magnetic resonance imaging scores (RAMRIS). Explants were established from synovectomies from a needle arthroscopic procedure prior to initiation of bDMARD. Explants were incubated with the bDMARD in question, and the productions of interleukin-6 (IL-6), monocyte chemo-attractive protein-1 (MCP-1) and macrophage inflammatory protein-1-beta (MIP-1b) were measured by multiplex immunoassays. The changes in clinical and imaging variables following a minimum of 3 months bDMARD treatment were compared to the baseline explant results. Mixed models and Spearman's rank correlations were performed. P-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS: 16 patients were included. IL-6 production in bDMARD-treated explants was significantly higher among clinical non-responders compared to responders (P = 0.04), and a lack of suppression of IL-6 by the bDMARDS correlated to a high DAS-28 (ρ = 0.57, P = 0.03), CDUS (ρ = 0.53, P = 0.04) and bone marrow oedema (ρ = 0.56, P = 0.03) at follow-up. No clinical association was found with explant MCP-1 production. MIP-1b could not be assessed due to a large number of samples below the detection limit.

CONCLUSIONS: Synovial explants appear to deliver a disease-relevant output testing which when carried out in advance of bDMARD treatment can potentially pave the road for a more patient tailored treatment approach with better treatment effects.

OBJECTIVE: Compare arthroscopic partial meniscectomy to a true sham intervention.

METHODS: Sham-controlled superiority trial performed in three county hospitals in Denmark comparing arthroscopic partial meniscectomy to skin incisions only in patients aged 35-55 years with persistent knee pain and an MRI-confirmed medial meniscus lesion. A computer-generated table of random numbers generated two comparison groups. Participants and outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation. Exclusions were locking knees, high-energy trauma or severe osteoarthritis. Outcomes were collected at baseline, 3 and 24 months. We hypothesised no difference between groups. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in change from baseline to 2 years in the mean score across all five normalised Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales (KOOS5).

RESULTS: Forty-four patients (of the estimated 72) underwent randomisation; 22 in each group. Sixteen participants (36%) were non-blinded and eight participants (36%) from the sham group crossed over to the surgery group prior to the 2-year follow-up. At 2 years, both groups reported clinically relevant improvements (surgery 21.8, skin incisions only 13.6), the mean difference between groups was 8.2 in favour of surgery, which is slightly less than the cut-off of 10 prespecified to represent a clinically relevant difference; judged by the 95% CI (-3.4 to 19.8), a possibility of clinically relevant difference could not be excluded. In total, nine participants experienced 11 adverse events; six in the surgery group and three in the skin-incisions-only group.

CONCLUSION: We found greater improvement from arthroscopic partial meniscectomy compared with skin incisions only at 2 years, with the statistical uncertainty of the between-group difference including what could be considered clinically relevant. Because of the study being underpowered, nearly half in the sham group being non-blinded and one-third crossing over to surgery, the results cannot be generalised to the greater patient population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01264991.

OBJECTIVES: Large-scale observational cohorts may be used to study the effectiveness and rare side effects of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in ankylosing spondylitis (AS), but may be hampered by differences in baseline characteristics and disease activity across countries. We aimed to explore the research infrastructure in the five Nordic countries regarding bDMARD treatment in AS.

METHOD: This observational cohort study was based on data from biological registries in Denmark (DANBIO), Sweden (SRQ/ARTIS), Finland (ROB-FIN), Norway (NOR-DMARD), and Iceland (ICEBIO). Data were collected for the years 2010-2016. Registry coverage, registry inventory (patient characteristics, disease activity measures), and national guidelines for bDMARD prescription in AS were described per country. Incident (first line) and prevalent bDMARD use per capita, country, and year were calculated. In AS patients who started first line bDMARDs during 2010-2016 (n = 4392), baseline characteristics and disease activity measures were retrieved.

RESULTS: Registry coverage of bDMARD-treated patients ranged from 60% to 95%. All registries included extensive prospectively collected data at patient level. Guidelines regarding choice of first line drug and prescription patterns varied across countries. During the period 2010-2016 prevalent bDMARD use increased (p < 0.001), whereas incident use tended to decrease (p for trend < 0.004), with large national variations (e.g. 2016 incidence: Iceland 10.7/100 000, Finland 1.7/100 000). Baseline characteristics were similar regarding C-reactive protein, but differed for other variables, including the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) (range 3.5-6.3) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) (2.7-3.8) (both p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION: Collaboration across the five Nordic biological registries regarding bDMARD use in AS is feasible but national differences in coverage, prescription patterns, and patient characteristics must be taken into account depending on the scientific question.