OBJECTIVE: Physicians tend to focus on biomedical targets while little is known about issues important to patients. We aimed to identify critical concepts impacting patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

DESIGN: We performed a survey of patients with IBD in biologic therapy (n=172) and used a validated qualitative method called group concept mapping (GCM) in patient workshops. The survey included 13 questions on attitudes toward symptoms and issues related to IBD. In the eight workshops, patients (n=26) generated statements later clustered into concepts identifying issues impacting a patient's life. Patients ranked the statements.

RESULTS: In the survey, patients' mean age were 40 years (SD 13), 53% were women, and 38% had ulcerative colitis. They identified fatigue (57%) and stool frequency (46%) as the most critical symptoms impacting their daily lives regardless of disease activity. In the GCM workshops with Crohn's disease (n=13) (median age 42 years (IQR 39-51) and 62% were women), 335 statements divided among 10 concepts were generated, and the three most important concepts were 'Positive attitudes', 'Accept and recognition', and 'Sharing knowledge and experiences in life with Crohn's disease'. In the workshops with ulcerative colitis (n=13) (median age 43 years (IQR 36-49) and 69% were women), 408 statements divided into 11 concepts were generated; the most important concepts were 'Take responsibility and control over your life', 'Medication', and 'Everyday life with ulcerative colitis'.

CONCLUSION: Focusing solely on IBD symptoms, patients identified fatigue and stool frequency to impact daily life the most. However, when investigating the disease burden in a broader perspective beyond classic IBD symptoms, patients identified concepts with focus on emotional health to be most important.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev and Gentofte approved the questionnaire and methodology (work-zone no: 18015429).

BACKGROUND: Biologic disease-modifying drugs have revolutionised the treatment of a number of chronic inflammatory diseases (CID). However, up to 60% of the patients do not have a sufficient response to treatment and there is a need for optimization of treatment strategies.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if the treatment outcome of biological therapy is associated with the habitual dietary intake of fibre and red/processed meat in patients with a CID.

METHODS: In this multicentre prospective cohort study, we consecutively enrolled 233 adult patients with a diagnosis of Crohn's Disease, Ulcerative Colitis, Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), Axial Spondyloarthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis and Psoriasis, for whom biologic therapy was planned, over a 3 year period. Patients with completed baseline food frequency questionnaires were stratified into a high fibre/low red and processed meat exposed group (HFLM) and an unexposed group (low fibre/high red and processed meat intake = LFHM). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a clinical response to biologic therapy after 14-16 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS: Of the 193 patients included in our primary analysis, 114 (59%) had a clinical response to biologic therapy. In the HFLM group (N = 64), 41 (64%) patients responded to treatment compared to 73 (56%) in the LFHM group (N = 129), but the difference was not statistically significant (OR: 1.48, 0.72-3.05). For RA patients however, HFLM diet was associated with a more likely clinical response (82% vs. 35%; OR: 9.84, 1.35-71.56).

CONCLUSION: Habitual HFLM intake did not affect the clinical response to biological treatment across CIDs. HFLM diet in RA patients might be associated with better odds for responding to biological treatment, but this would need confirmation in a randomised trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: (clinicaltrials.gov), identifier [NCT03173144].

OBJECTIVE: Patients with inflammatory arthritis have a high risk of sleep disturbances and disorders. The objective was to evaluate the evidence of nonpharmacologic interventions targeting sleep disturbances or disorders in patients with inflammatory arthritis.

METHODS: A systematic search was undertaken from inception to September 8, 2020. We included randomized trials concerning nonpharmacologic interventions applied in adults with inflammatory arthritis and concomitant sleep disturbances or disorders. The primary outcome was the sleep domain, while secondary outcomes were core outcome domains for inflammatory arthritis trials and harms. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was applied, and the overall quality of the evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. Effect sizes for continuous outcomes were based on the standardized mean difference, combined using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS: Six trials (308 patients) were included in the quantitative synthesis; 3 of these reported improvement in sleep in favor of the nonpharmacologic interventions. The meta-analysis of the sleep domains indicated a large clinical effect of -0.80 (95% confidence interval -1.33, -0.28) in favor of nonpharmacologic interventions targeting sleep disturbances or disorders. The estimate was rated down twice for risk of bias and unexplained inconsistency; this risk was assessed as corresponding to low-quality evidence. None of the secondary core outcomes used in contemporary inflammatory arthritis trials indicated a clinical benefit in favor of nonpharmacologic interventions targeting sleep.

CONCLUSION: Nonpharmacologic interventions targeting sleep disturbances/disorders in patients with inflammatory arthritis indicated a promising effect on sleep outcomes, but not yet with convincing evidence.