CLINICIANS’ PERSPECTIVE ON APPLYING THE TREAT-TO-TARGET STRATEGY IN SPONDYLOARTHRITIS PATIENTS

Claudia Cobilinschi; Cristian Cobilinschi; Rashad Hilou; Andra Bălănescu; Ruxandra Ionescu

doi:10.33695/rjcr.v5i1.81

Claudia Cobilinschi Sf. Maria Clinical Hospital, Rheumatology and Internal Medicine Department, Bucharest, Romania & Carol Davila University of Medicine. Bucharest, Romania
Cristian Cobilinschi Carol Davila University of Medicine. Bucharest, Romania & Bucharest Clinical Emergency Hospital, ICU Department, Bucharest, Romania
Rashad Hilou Carol Davila University of Medicine. Bucharest, Romania
Andra Bălănescu Sf. Maria Clinical Hospital, Rheumatology and Internal Medicine Department, Bucharest, Romania & Carol Davila University of Medicine. Bucharest, Romania
Ruxandra Ionescu Sf. Maria Clinical Hospital, Rheumatology and Internal Medicine Department, Bucharest, Romania & Carol Davila University of Medicine. Bucharest, Romania

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33695/rjcr.v5i1.81

Keywords: spondyloarthritis, treat-to-target strategy, daily practice

Abstract

The treat-to-target (T2T) strategy is valuable in rheumatic conditions since it can prevent damage accrual. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinicians’ perspective on this concept in spondyloarthritis (SpA) patients and its implementation in daily practice. A 10-item questionnaire was distributed among clinicians caring for rheumatic patients, investigating the use of disease indices, top priorities in disease assessment, optimal timeframe to target achievement or encountered difficulties when using T2T strategy. A number of 65 physicians digitally filled the questionnaire, working in both public and private workplaces. Most were familiarized with the T2T strategy (75%) and stated as top priorities attaining proposed targets with disease activity indices with they use in every patient visit or patients’ satisfaction with the disease course. Number of painful joints or entesitis are important in peripheral SpA. A considerable percentage take into account clinical and radiological improvement. Difficulties in carrying out the T2T scheme is patients’ loss from follow-up (50.7%), national protocol regulations (26.1%) or patients’ fear of treatment (13.8%). Most physicians are acquainted with the T2T approach, applying it to more than half of SpA patients and mostly considering as essential traditional disease assessment tools and patients’ satisfaction. Enhancing rheumatologists’ adherence to applying the T2T concept can optimize long-term management of SpA patients.

References

[1] O. Akgul and S. Ozgocmen, “Classification criteria for spondyloarthropathies.,” World J. Orthop., vol. 2, no. 12, pp. 107–15, Dec. 2011.
[2] A. N. Malaviya, R. Rawat, N. Agrawal, and N. S. Patil, “The Nonradiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis, the Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis, and Ankylosing Spondylitis: The Tangled Skein of Rheumatology,” International Journal of Rheumatology, vol. 2017. 2017.
[3] H. Che et al., “Evaluation of collected outcome measures in axial spondyloarthritis in daily-care rheumatology settings: the experience of the RHEVER network.,” Clin. Exp. Rheumatol., Sep. 2015.
[4] P. M. Machado and P. Agrawal, “Recent advances in managing axial spondyloarthritis,” F1000Research, vol. 9. 2020.
[5] M. M. Schoels et al., “Treating axial and peripheral spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis, to target: results of a systematic literature search to support an international treat-to-target recommendation in spondyloarthritis.,” Ann. Rheum. Dis., vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 238–42, Jan. 2014.
[6] C. Fernández-Carballido et al., “Impact of Comorbidity on Physical Function in Patients With Ankylosing Spondylitis and Psoriatic Arthritis Attending Rheumatology Clinics: Results From a Cross-Sectional Study,” Arthritis Care Res., vol. 72, no. 6, pp. 822–828, 2020.
[7] L. Ljung, B. Sundström, J. Smeds, M. Ketonen, and H. Forsblad-d’Elia, “Patterns of comorbidity and disease characteristics among patients with ankylosing spondylitis—a cross-sectional study,” Clin. Rheumatol., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 647–653, 2018.
[8] D. Wendling, “Treating to target in axial spondyloarthritis: defining the target and the arrow,” Expert Rev. Clin. Immunol., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 691–693, 2015.
[9] V. Bruner, M. Atteno, A. Spanò, R. Scarpa, and R. Peluso, “Biological therapies for spondyloarthritis.,” Ther. Adv. Musculoskelet. Dis., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 92–101, Jun. 2014.
[10] W. P. Maksymowych, “Progress in spondylarthritis. Spondyloarthritis: lessons from imaging.,” Arthritis Res. Ther., vol. 11, no. 3, p. 222, 2009.
[11] P. C. Robinson et al., “The window of opportunity: a relevant concept for axial spondyloarthritis,” Arthritis Res. Ther., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 109, 2014.
[12] Y. El Miedany, “Treat to target in spondyloarthritis: the time has come.,” Curr. Rheumatol. Rev., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 87–93, 2014.
[13] J. S. Smolen et al., “EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update,” Ann. Rheum. Dis., vol. 76, no. 6, pp. 960–977, 2017.
[14] H. Almoallim and A. Kamil, “Rheumatoid arthritis: Should we shift the focus from ‘treat to Target’ to ‘treat to Work?,’” Clinical Rheumatology, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 285–287, 2013.