scholarly journals Measuring Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priscilla C. H. Wong ◽  
Ying-Ying Leung ◽  
Edmund K. Li ◽  
Lai-Shan Tam
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
The Past ◽  
Composite Measures

Over the past decade, the assessment of the disease activity in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has rapidly evolved in view of the need for valid, feasible, and reliable outcome measures that can be ideally employed in longitudinal cohorts, clinical trials, and clinical practice as well as the growing paradigm of tight disease control and treating to target in the management of PsA. This paper reviews the currently available measures used in the assessment of the disease activity in PsA. The composite measures for PsA that are under development are also discussed.

Composite Measures for Routine Clinical Practice in Psoriatic Arthritis: Testing of Shortened Versions in a UK Multicenter Study

2021 ◽  
pp. jrheum.201675
Author(s):  
William Tillett ◽  
Oliver FitzGerald ◽  
Laura C. Coates ◽  
Jon Packham ◽  
Deepak R. Jadon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Routine Clinical Practice ◽  
Performance Characteristics ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Composite Measures ◽  
Patient Reported

Objective To test shortened versions of the psoriatic arthritis (PsA) composite measures for use in routine clinical practice. Methods Clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed in patients with PsA at 3 consecutive follow-up visits in a UK multicenter observational study. Shortened versions of the Composite Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Index (CPDAI) and Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) Composite Exercise (GRACE) measures were developed using PROMs and tested against the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), composite Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis, and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data (RAPID3). Discrimination between disease states and responsiveness were tested with the t-score, standardized response mean (SRM), and effect size (ES). Data were presented to members at the GRAPPA 2020 annual meeting and members voted on the recommended composite routine practice. Results The SRM for the GRACE, 3 visual analog scale (VAS), and 4VAS were 0.67, 0.77, and 0.63, respectively, and for CPDAI and shortened CPDAI (sCPDAI) were 0.54 and 0.55, respectively. Shortened versions of the GRACE increased the t-score from 7.8 to 8.7 (3VAS) and 9.0 (4VAS), but reduced the t-score in the CPDAI/sCPDAI from 6.8 and 6.1. The 3VAS and 4VAS had superior performance characteristics to the sCPDAI, DAS28, Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis, and RAPID3 in all tests. Of the members, 60% agreed that the VAS scales contained enough information to assess disease and response to treatment, 53% recommended the 4VAS for use in routine care, and 26% the 3VAS, while leaving 21% undecided. Conclusion Shortening the GRACE to VAS scores alone enhances the ability to detect status and responsiveness and has the best performance characteristics of the tested composite measures. GRAPPA members recommend further testing of the 3VAS and 4VAS in observational and trial datasets.

scholarly journals Evolution of psoriatic arthritis study patient population characteristics in the era of biological treatments

RMD Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e000779 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann-Sophie Vandendorpe ◽  
Kurt de Vlam ◽  
Rik Lories
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Patient Population ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Chronic Inflammatory Disease ◽  
Population Characteristics ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Study Patient

ObjectivesPsoriatic arthritis is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects the musculoskeletal system. It can include arthritis, spondylitis, dactylitis and enthesitis, and is strongly associated with the presence of psoriasis. The introduction of biological therapies as a treatment option has brought a significant improvement in disease control for patients with psoriatic arthritis. Here, we aimed to detect emerging differences in demographic and clinical characteristics of the psoriatic arthritis patient study population since the introduction of biologicals. We hypothesised that evolving views on control of disease activity and increased experience in the management of psoriatic arthritis have affected the patient population considered for clinical trials and that this may serve as a proxy for changes in clinical practice.MethodsWe systematically searched for and selected 12 phase II and phase III trials and divided them into three treatment periods based on different time periods and working mechanisms of the particular biologicals. We made a selection of patient and disease parameters for which data were available in all three periods, calculated those data per period and looked for statistically significant differences between the treatment periods.ResultsStatistical analysis showed significant differences in patient characteristics, disease characteristics, disease activity, disease effects and use of prior treatments between the patient populations of the three periods.ConclusionThis study shows a clear evolution of the patient population considered for clinical trials since the introduction of biologicals. Further research is needed to see if those changes can be detected in the daily clinical practice.

Patient’s Global Assessment as an Outcome Measure for Psoriatic Arthritis in Clinical Practice: A Surrogate for Measuring Low Disease Activity?

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (12) ◽  
pp. 2332-2338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ennio Lubrano ◽  
Fabio Massimo Perrotta ◽  
Wendy J. Parsons ◽  
Antonio Marchesoni
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Global Assessment ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Low Disease Activity

Objective.To assess the low disease activity (LDA) in a group of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) receiving antitumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) by using the patient’s global assessment (PtGA) in clinical practice, and to compare PtGA with minimal disease activity (MDA) and other outcome measures.Methods.Patients with PsA classified by the ClASsification for Psoriatic ARthritis (CASPAR) criteria and consecutively admitted to an outpatient clinic dedicated to biologic therapy were assessed during their routine followup. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients achieving a PtGA ≤ 20 at 4-, 8-, and 12-month followups. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients achieving MDA and other outcome measures. Correlation of PtGA with MDA and other process and outcome measures were also performed.Results.During the period of observation, 124 patients were evaluated. PtGA ≤ 20 was achieved in 25.7% at 4 months, 48.9% at 8 months, and 65.3% at 12 months of followup. The percentage of PtGA ≤ 20 statistically improved throughout the 3 timepoint assessments and it was statistically correlated to MDA. A significant correlation with the Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, and Health Assessment Questionnaire was also observed. MDA, DAPSA, and Disease Activity Score at 28 joints with C-reactive protein remission were achieved at 12 months in 64%, 36%, and 71% of patients, respectively.Conclusion.PtGA can estimate the LDA status and could be considered as a surrogate of outcome measures for the assessment of global disease activity in patients with PsA receiving anti-TNF therapy during routine clinical practice. These data suggest that PtGA might be used in outpatient settings, being a simple, reliable, and not time-consuming instrument.

scholarly journals International patient and physician consensus on a psoriatic arthritis core outcome set for clinical trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 673-680 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana-Maria Orbai ◽  
Maarten de Wit ◽  
Philip Mease ◽  
Judy A Shea ◽  
Laure Gossec ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Systemic Inflammation ◽  
Skin Disease ◽  
Core Domain ◽  
Core Domain Set

ObjectiveTo identify a core set of domains (outcomes) to be measured in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) clinical trials that represent both patients' and physicians' priorities.MethodsWe conducted (1) a systematic literature review (SLR) of domains assessed in PsA; (2) international focus groups to identify domains important to people with PsA; (3) two international surveys with patients and physicians to prioritise domains; (4) an international face-to-face meeting with patients and physicians using the nominal group technique method to agree on the most important domains; and (5) presentation and votes at the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) conference in May 2016. All phases were performed in collaboration with patient research partners.ResultsWe identified 39 unique domains through the SLR (24 domains) and international focus groups (34 domains). 50 patients and 75 physicians rated domain importance. During the March 2016 consensus meeting, 12 patients and 12 physicians agreed on 10 candidate domains. Then, 49 patients and 71 physicians rated these domains' importance. Five were important to >70% of both groups: musculoskeletal disease activity, skin disease activity, structural damage, pain and physical function. Fatigue and participation were important to >70% of patients. Patient global and systemic inflammation were important to >70% of physicians. The updated PsA core domain set endorsed by 90% of OMERACT 2016 participants includes musculoskeletal disease activity, skin disease activity, pain, patient global, physical function, health-related quality of life, fatigue and systemic inflammation.ConclusionsThe updated PsA core domain set incorporates patients' and physicians' priorities and evolving PsA research. Next steps include identifying outcome measures that adequately assess these domains.

Composite Measures for Clinical Trials in Psoriatic Arthritis: Testing Pain and Fatigue Modifications in a UK Multicenter Study

2021 ◽  
pp. jrheum.201674
Author(s):  
William Tillett ◽  
Oliver FitzGerald ◽  
Laura C. Coates ◽  
Jon Packham ◽  
Deepak R. Jadon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Disease Status ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Multicenter Observational Study ◽  
Composite Measures ◽  
Patient Reported

Objective To test the addition of pain and fatigue to the Composite Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity (CPDAI) and the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and PsA (GRAPPA) Composite Exercise (GRACE) composite measures of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Methods Clinical and patient-reported outcome measures were assessed in patients with PsA at 3 consecutive follow-up visits over 6 months in a UK multicenter observational study. A pain visual analog scale and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue scale were added as modifications to the CPDAI and GRACE composite measures. Original and modified versions were tested against the PsA Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) and the Disease Activity Index for PsA (DAPSA). Discrimination between disease states and responsiveness were tested with t-scores, standardized response means (SRMs), and effect sizes. Data were presented to members at the 2020 annual meeting who then voted on the GRAPPArecommended composite and treatment targets for clinical trials. Results One hundred forty-one patients were recruited with a mean PsA disease duration of 6.1 years (range 0–41 yrs). The SRMs for the GRACE and modified GRACE (mGRACE) were 0.67 and 0.64, respectively, and 0.54 and 0.46, respectively, for the CPDAI and modified CPDAI (mCPDAI). The t-scores for the GRACE and mGRACE were unchanged at 7.8 for both, and 6.8 and 7.0 for the CPDAI and mCPDAI, respectively. The PASDAS demonstrated the best responsiveness (SRM 0.84) and discrimination (t-scores 8.3). Most members (82%) agreed the composites should not be modified and 77% voted for the PASDAS as the GRAPPA-recommended composite for clinical trials, with 90% minimal disease activity (MDA) as the target. Conclusion Modifying the CPDAI and GRACE with the addition of pain and fatigue does not enhance responsiveness nor the measures’ ability to detect disease status in terms of requiring treatment escalation. GRAPPA members voted for the PASDAS as the composite measure in clinical trials and MDA as the target.

Performance of three composite measures for disease activity in peripheral spondyloarthritis

2021 ◽  
pp. jrheum.210075
Author(s):  
Esther Beckers ◽  
Marin Been ◽  
Casper Webers ◽  
Annelies Boonen ◽  
Peter M. ten Klooster ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Disease Activity Score ◽  
Activity Score ◽  
Composite Measures ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Peripheral Spondyloarthritis

Objective To investigate concurrent validity and discrimination of the Disease Activity Psoriatic Arthritis score (DAPSA), Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) in peripheral spondyloarthritis (pSpA) in clinical practice. Methods Data from a Dutch registry for SpA (SpA-Net) were used. Predefined hypotheses on concurrent validity of the composite measures with 15 other outcome measures of disease activity, physical function and health-related quality of life were tested. Concurrent validity was considered acceptable if ≥75% of the hypotheses were confirmed. Discrimination was assessed by stratifying patients in DAPSA, PASDAS and ASDAS predefined disease activity states and studying mean differences in health outcomes by one-way ANOVA. Furthermore, the concordance in disease activity states was determined. All analyses were repeated in subgroups with and without psoriasis. Results DAPSA, PASDAS and ASDAS scores were available for 191, 139 and 279 patients with pSpA, respectively. The concurrent validity and discrimination of all composite measures were acceptable as the strength of correlations were as hypothesized in ≥75% of the studied correlations. With increasing disease activity states, scores in nearly all outcome measures worsened significantly. The DAPSA, PASDAS and ASDAS classified 22%, 56% and 48% of the patients, respectively, in the two highest disease activity states. Stratified analyses for concomitant psoriasis revealed no relevant subgroup differences. Conclusion The performance of DAPSA, PASDAS and ASDAS in pSpA was acceptable, and independent of concomitant psoriasis. Due to discrepancy in classification, the validity of existing thresholds for disease activity states warrants further study in pSpA.

scholarly journals AB0542 EVALUATION OF APREMILAST USE IN THE ROUTINE CLINICAL PRACTICE IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS NAÏVE TO BIOLOGICAL TREATMENTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1303.2-1304
Author(s):  
J. Gratacos-Masmitja ◽  
J. L. Álvarez Vega ◽  
E. Beltrán ◽  
A. Urruticoechea-Arana ◽  
C. Fito-Manteca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Routine Clinical Practice ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Psychiatric Disease ◽  
Biological Therapies ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Disease Evolution ◽  
Biological Treatments

Background:Apremilast is a non-biologic systemic agent approved for the treatment of plaque psoriasis, oral ulcers of Behcet’s disease and PsA with proven efficacy in clinical trials [1,2]. However, more real-world evidence of apremilast use and effectiveness is needed to identify the patient profile most likely to benefit from this treatment [3].Objectives:To evaluate the persistence of apremilast treatment in patients with PsA naïve to biological treatments in routine clinical practice and assess its effectiveness. Baseline clinical characteristics on patients who started apremilast were also evaluated.Methods:Observational, prospective, multicenter (20 centers) study including consecutive adult patients with PsA naïve to biological therapies who had started treatment with apremilast during the previous 5 to 7 months and were followed-up during 12 months. Variables recorded were persistence of treatment with apremilast at 6 months (6mo) and number of swelling joints, presence of enthesitis and dactylitis, and disease activity, measured by the Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) score and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of psoriasis, collected at baseline (BL) (i.e., apremilast treatment start) and 6mo; comorbidities were retrospectively collected at BL. Categorical and quantitative variables were compared using McNemar’s and Wilcoxon test, respectively. Data sets analyzed included all assessable patients.Results:Of the 60 patients recruited at the time of this interim analysis, 54 (90.0%) [mean (SD) age 53.4 (13.9) years] were assessable; 41 (75.9%) of these continued treatment with apremilast at 6mo. At BL, 34 (63.0%) patients had at least one comorbidity, the most frequent being cardiovascular disease (n=15, 27.8%), including hypertension (n=8, 14.8%), metabolic/endocrine disease (n=18, 33.3%), including obesity (n=8, 14.8%) and dyslipidemia (n=10, 18.5%). Psychiatric disease (i.e., depression) (n=5, 9.3%) and neoplasia (n=8, 14.8%) were also observed. The number of swelling joints decreased from median (Q1, Q3) 4.0 (2.0, 7.0) at BL to 1.5 (0.0, 4.0) at 6mo (p=0.0012). Patients with dactylitis and enthesitis decreased from 19 (35.2%) and 16 (29.6%) at BL to 10 (18.5%) and 9 (16.7%) at 6mo (p=0.0225 and p=0.0391), respectively. The distribution of patients in the different disease activity categories according to DAPSA scale changed between BL and 6mo, indicating a favorable disease evolution (Figure 1 next page). According to PGA, at BL (n=53), disease activity was categorized as mild in 18.0%, as moderate in 72.0%, and as severe in 10% of patients and, at 6mo (n=54), as mild in 70.6%, as moderate in 25.5%, and as severe in 3.9% of patients. Fifteen (27.8%) patients interrupted treatment permanently (n=13, 24.1%) or temporarily (n=2, 3.7%), due to no/partial response (n=8, 14.8%), tolerability issues leading to adverse events (n=3, 5.6%), patient decision (n=2, 3.7%), and other reasons (n=2, 3.7%) after a mean (SD) treatment of 3.05 (2.20) months.Conclusion:Forty-one (75.9%) patients with PsA naïve to biological therapies were treated with apremilast during ≥6 months. After treatment, the number of swelling joints, and dactylitis and enthesitis decreased and changes in disease activity according to DAPSA and PGA pointed to a favorable disease evolution. Apremilast treatment provides a clinical benefit to patients with PsA treated in clinical practice.References:[1]Gossec L, Smolen JS, Ramiro S, et al. European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2015 update. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016 Feb 10;75(3):499 LP-510[2]Torres T and Puig L. Apremilast: A novel oral treatment for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Am J clin Dermatol. 2018 Feb;19(1):23-32[3]Coates LC, Kavanaugh A, Mease PJ et al. Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis 2015. Treatment Recommendations for Psoriatic Arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016;68(5):1060– 71.Disclosure of Interests:Jordi Gratacos-Masmitja Speakers bureau: MSD, Pfizer, AbbVie, Janssen Cilag, Novartis, Celgene y Lilly., Consultant of: MSD, Pfizer, AbbVie, Janssen Cilag, Novartis, Celgene y Lilly., José Luis Álvarez Vega Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, MSD, Lilly, Roche, Esteve, UCB, Menarini, Pfizer, GSK, BMS, Janssen, Novartis, Gebro., Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, MSD, Lilly, Roche, Esteve, UCB, Menarini, Pfizer, GSK, BMS, Janssen, Novartis, Gebro., Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, MSD, Lilly, Roche, Esteve, UCB, Menarini, Pfizer, GSK, BMS, Janssen, Novartis, Gebro., Emma Beltrán Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Bristol, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Bristol, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, ANA URRUTICOECHEA-ARANA: None declared., C. Fito-Manteca: None declared., Francisco Maceiras: None declared., Joaquin Maria Belzunegui Otano Speakers bureau: Lilly, Amgen, Novartis, Abbvie, Janssen., J. Fernández-Melón Speakers bureau: Amgen SL, Eugenio Chamizo Carmona: None declared., Abad Hernández Speakers bureau: MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, Kern, Novartis, Biogen, Sandoz, Amgen, Sanofi, Lilly, Roche and Janssen-Cilag, Consultant of: MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, Kern, Novartis, Biogen, Sandoz, Amgen, Sanofi, Lilly, Roche and Janssen-Cilag, Grant/research support from: MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, Kern, Novartis, Biogen, Sandoz, Amgen, Sanofi, Lilly, Roche and Janssen-Cilag, Inmaculada Ros Consultant of: Amgen, Grant/research support from: MSD, Roche, Novartis, lilly, Pfizer, Amgen, Eva Pascual Shareholder of: Amgen, Employee of: Amgen, Juan Carlos Torre Speakers bureau: Amgen, Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Consultant of: Amgen, Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer.

scholarly journals AB0564 RHEUMATOLOGISTS’ VIEWS AND EXPERIENCES IN MANAGING PsA PATIENTS BASED ON TREATING TO TARGET STRATEGY: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY IN CHINA

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1318.2-1319
Author(s):  
L. Xu ◽  
Z. Wang ◽  
J. Xue ◽  
M. Bai ◽  
H. Zhong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Western Medicine ◽  
Work Experience ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Treat To Target ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Activity Assessment ◽  
High Level

Background:Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory arthritis with progressive, erosive destruction associated with functional impairment. Principles of treat-to-target (T2T) have been widely used in rheumatoid arthritis, which has powerfully improved patient outcomes. In 2017, the concept of T2T has proposed to apply in PsA patients. However, the awareness and implementation of evidence-based T2T treatment guidelines varies across different geographical regions of China, hospital grades, professional status and specialities.Objectives:The study aimed to investigate Rheumatologists’ views and experiences in managing PsA patients with T2T strategy in china.Methods:A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of Rheumatologists in China from 5 August to 15 August 2020 was conducted for this study. Rheumatologists were contacted by WeChat (a Chinese cell/web app) and asked to complete a web-based questionnaire anonymously. The electronic questionnaire was sent out by the internet platform of WenJuanXing via WeChat (https://www.wjx.cn/). The questionnaire was designed to collect: (a) demographic information; (b) patient management in clinical practice for Rheumatologists; (c) familiarity and application of T2T strategy in Rheumatologists. P values ≤0.05 were considered significant.Results:(1) A total of 823 rheumatologists (69.87% female, 30.13% male) provided valid answers to the questionnaire. 71.09% of the participants major in Modern Western Medicine, 28.91% major in traditional chinese medicine. A total of 75.94% worked in Grade-A Tertiary Hospital. A total of 52.73% had more than 10 years of work experience and 63.55% had High-level title. (2) More than half of the patients were followed up by 69% Rheumatologists in their daily practice. The proportion of follow-up patients increased powerfully in the group of Rheumatologists who major in Modern Western Medicine (P=0.014), work in Grade-A Tertiary Hospital (P<0.001), have more than 10 years of work experience (P<0.001) and High-level title (P<0.001). (3) 36.45% Rheumatologist thought the frequency for patient disease activity assessment was every 1 month and 53.1% was every 3 months. And 41.7% Rheumatologist prefer to use PASDAS for disease activity criteria, and only 3.6% choose MDA. (4) A total of 62.43% thought they were familiar with T2T strategy, and 83.6% Rheumatologists applied T2T strategy in clinical practice. Among 135 Rheumatologists who did not apply T2T strategy, 62.2% of Rheumatologists thought that the main barrier to T2T application was that they did not fully understand the strategy. The frequency of application of T2T strategy in clinical practice was significantly different between Rheumatologists who major in Modern Western Medicine (60.75%) and traditional chinese medicine (22.84%) (P=0.023).Conclusion:In china, the management of PsA patients need to be standardized to improve patient outcomes. And the promotion of T2T strategy in PsA need to be further strengthened.References:[1]Smolen JS, Schöls M, Braun J,et al. Treating axial spondyloarthritis and peripheral spondyloarthritis, especially psoriatic arthritis, to target: 2017 update of recommendations by an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 Jan;77(1):3-17.[2]Tucker LJ, Ye W, Coates LC. Novel Concepts in Psoriatic Arthritis Management: Can We Treat to Target? Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2018 Sep 18;20(11):71.[3]Coates LC, Helliwell PS. Treating to target in psoriatic arthritis: how to implement in clinical practice. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75(4):640-643.Figure 1A. Rheumatologist priority of frequency for patient follow-up in different disease status. B. Rheumatologist priority of frequency for patient disease activity assessment in clinical practice. C. Rheumatologist priority of disease activity criteria for PsA patients.Disclosure of Interests:None declared.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document