ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 2483

Comparison Between Composite Activity Indices to Assess Clinical Response to Biological Therapy in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis

Diego Benavent1, Chamaida Plasencia 2, Victoria Navarro-Compán 3, Diana Peiteado 4, Laura Nuño 5, Irene Monjo 6, Elisa Fernández 7 and Alejandro Balsa 2, 1Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain, 2Immuno-Rheumatology Research Group, IdiPaz & Rheumatology Department. La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain, 3University Hospital La Paz, IdiPaz, Madrid, Spain, 4Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, 5Immuno-Rheumatology research group , Institute for Health Research (IdiPAZ), Madrid, Spain, MADRID, Spain, 6FIBHULP-IdiPAZ-Hospital La Paz-Rheumatology, Madrid, Spain, 7Rheumatology Department, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Madrid, Spain

Meeting: 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

Keywords: biologic drugs and clinical practice, Disease Activity, Psoriatic arthritis

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Tuesday, November 12, 2019

Title: Spondyloarthritis Including Psoriatic Arthritis – Clinical Poster III: Psoriatic Arthritis, Clinical Features

Session Type: Poster Session (Tuesday)

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Assessment of the disease in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) remains a clinical challenge. Hence, there is no agreement on which index best correlates with the actual disease state of patients.

Objective: to assess the performance of and agreement between composite activity indices of common use in clinical practice (DAPSA and DAS66) and the physician global assessment (PhGA) to evaluate disease activity in PsA patients under biological therapy.

Methods: Patients with peripheral-only PsA initiating a first biological therapy (TNFi and IL-17i) between 2002 and 2018 in a university hospital were included. Demographic information, laboratory tests, concomitant treatments, PhGA and disease activity indexes (DAPSA and DAS66) were collected at baseline and 6 months (6 m) after starting biological treatment. At 6 m, the patients were classified in the following disease activity status: remission (DAPSA  PhGA was also determined at 6 months, and it was assorted by consensus of 3 expert rheumatologists in remission (PhGA ≤ 10), LDA (PhGA >10-≤30), moderate activity (PhGA >30≤-60) and high activity (PhGA >60). The number (%) of patients achieving the different disease activity status by each of the different indexes at 6m and the agreement between PhGA scores and disease activity indices were determined.

Results: Out of 54 included patients, 20 (37%) were males, 37 (68%) were non-smokers, 34 (63%) had a BMI ≥25, with mean (SD) baseline disease activity indices of DAS 66: 4.8 (1.2) and DAPSA: 26 (14.9). Biological therapies initiated included etanercept in 37% of the cases, infliximab in 32%, adalimumab in 20%, golimumab in 4% and secukinumab in 7%. Clinical response at 6m according to different indexes and PhGA is depicted in Figure 1. More than half of the patients achieved at least LDA disease activity after 6 months of biological treatment, regardless of the index used. Thus, physician-perceived remission or LDA was frequent (58%). DAPSA index was the most stringent in terms of classifying patients in remission. Moderate to strong positive correlation was observed between DAS 66 and PhGA (Spearman r = 0.729, p < 0.001) and a strong correlation was observed between DAPSA and PhGA (Spearman r = 0.852, p < 0.001).  The relative agreement between disease activity indexes and PhGA at 6 m for different disease activity states are shown in Figure 2. DAPSA classified better the patients in remission according to the PhGA.

Conclusion: In clinical practice, 50 % of the patients with PsA achieve at least a low activity state of the disease at 6 m after receiving a first biological therapy, and this is replicated by different indices. DAPSA based remission/LDA performed better than DAS66 to detect PhGA-defined remission or LDA.

Figure 1. Clinical response after 6 months of biological therapy, shown as percentage of the total in each group.

Figure 2. Agreement for disease activity status between disease activity indexes and PhGA.


Disclosure: D. Benavent, None; C. Plasencia, None; V. Navarro-Compán, AbbVie, 5, 8, Bristol, 8, Bristol, Roche, 8, Eli Lilly and Company, 5, 8, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Abbvie, UCB, MSD, 5, 8, MSD, 5, 8, Novartis, 5, 8, Pfizer, 5, Roche, 8, UCB, 5, 8; D. Peiteado, None; L. Nuño, None; I. Monjo, BMS, 2; E. Fernández, None; A. Balsa, BMS, 2, Roche Pharma, 2.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Benavent D, Plasencia C, Navarro-Compán V, Peiteado D, Nuño L, Monjo I, Fernández E, Balsa A. Comparison Between Composite Activity Indices to Assess Clinical Response to Biological Therapy in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/comparison-between-composite-activity-indices-to-assess-clinical-response-to-biological-therapy-in-patients-with-psoriatic-arthritis/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/comparison-between-composite-activity-indices-to-assess-clinical-response-to-biological-therapy-in-patients-with-psoriatic-arthritis/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology