Table 1.

2007 Canadian practice patterns for pharmacological management of RA (N = 164).

Questionnaire ItemsMode (%)Commonly Reported Strategies (%)Comments
General
  Targets/outcomes used to guide treatment decisionsSwollen joint count (94)Morning stiffness (81), radiographs (80), tender joint count (80), ESR/CRP (76), patient global (65), HAQ (52)42% use gestalt; 28% use DAS28: < 5% use other composite measures such as ACR score, CDAI, or SDAI
  Starting therapy*
  Scenario: New DMARD-naive patient (RF+, 6 SJC, 9 TJC)MTX up to 20–25 mg (53)HCQ + MTX (45), HCQ + SSZ + MTX (21)5% start HCQ alone; < 5% start MTX + LEF; < 3% start MTX + biologic; < 2.5% start SSZ alone
  Frequency of radiographsAnnual (49)Every 6 mo 1 st yr then annual (16); annual until progression stops (11)5% obtain only if treatment changed; < 5% obtain every 6 mo until progression stops; 14% reported “other”
  Obtain MRI/US
  Scenario: New RA patient with normal radiographsMRI: No (49); US: No (64)MRI: Yes (37); US: Yes (24)MRI: 14% reported “unsure”; US: 12% reported “unsure”
Treatment with corticosteroids
  a. Situations in which believe prednisone should be used in RATemporary bridge for ≤ 12 wks (63)In whom no other options exists; longterm at lowest possible dose (23)6% considered as a DMARD; 5% hardly use due to risk/benefit ratio; 3% only use with systemic features
  b. Treatment strategy
  Scenario: New RA patient 7–10 SJC
IM or IA (44)Start prednisone 10 mg daily (30); start prednisone 5–10 mg daily (16)5% don’t use prednisone; 5% use 10 mg daily > 6 mo
Treatment with MTX
  a. Starting dose (per wk)15 mg (51)10 mg (30); 20 mg (9)< 5% start with dose < 10 mg; 3% start with dose > 20 mg
  b. Maximum dose (per wk)25 mg (84)20 mg (9)6% reported max dose of 30 mg; 1% reported max dose > 30 mg
  c. Timing for escalation10–12 wks (25)5/6 wks (22); 4 wks (17); 7/8 wks (16)10% escalate within < 4 wks; 10% escalate within 13–26 wks
  d. Use of subcutaneous (sc) MTXFrequently (56)Occasionally (26); if dose > 15 mg (18)1% reported “never”.
Reasons for using sc MTX: to improve absorption, reduce side effects, and better effectiveness. Reasons for NOT using sc MTX: patient refusal and no time to teach it
  e. Investigations prior to starting*CBC (100); creatinine (99); ALT (96) AST (91); ESR (90)CRP (84); albumin (82); ALP (76); hepatitis B/C serology (69); chest radiograph (60)43% would order a pregnancy test; 38% would order bilirubin; 10% would order TB skin
  f. Investigations for monitoring*CBC (99); ALT (93); AST (86)Creatinine (79); Alb (65); ALP (54)48% would order ESR; 38% would order CRP
  g. Frequency of monitoringEvery 4 wks (52)Every 6 or 8 wks (41)Every 12 wks (6%)
  h. Situations to suspend therapy*Female attempting conception (98)Bacterial infection requiring antibiotics (78); zoster (71)81% suspend > 3 mo prior to female attempting conception; 76% suspend in male with partner attempting conception; 40% do NOT suspend prior to surgery
i. MTX combinations agreed are safe and effective to use*MTX + ETN (90); MTX + ADA (88); MTX + INF (87)MTX + SSZ + HCQ (83); MTX + ABAT (62); MTX + RTX (56)37% agree that MTX + LEF is safe and effective to use
Treatment with biologics
  a. When to start anti-TNF
  Scenario: Patient with moderate to severe RA (assuming no access issues)
After failure 3–6 mo MTX + HCQ + SSZ (33)After failure 3–6 mo MTX 20–25 mg (31)16% start immediately; 14% start after failure of MTX + LEF; 6% reported “other”
  b. Factors rated as somewhat and very important when initiating a biologic*Effectiveness (99); safety (98); halt radiographic progression (96)Patient preference (87); reimbursement (86)54% rated mechanism of action
  c. Biologic side effects warn patients about*Pneumonia or serious infections (98); TB (96); site reactions (90)Lymphoma (82); opportunistic infections (72); demyelinating disease (61); congestive heart failure (36); lupus-like reactions (34); solid malignancies (34); traveling to TB endemic area (23)After an initial discussion, 30%, 66% and 4% always, occasionally, and never warn patients about biologic side effects, respectively
  d. Strategy after failure of anti-TNF*
  Scenario 1: Failure of anti-TNF+ MTX and flare of 4+ joints after 2 visits (assuming no access issues)
2nd anti-TNF + MTX (68)ABAT + MTX (21); RTX + MTX (16)5% reported “other”
  e. Treatment with RTX
  When to provide next set of 3 infusionsBeginning to flare (73)After 6 mo (15); after 9 mo (10)2% provide next infusions at full flare; 43% would retreat with a minimal first response to get a better response
F. Reason to switch biologics*SJC > 5 (70)Radiographic progression (45); SJC > 10 (36); DAS28 (36); patient decides therapy is not effective (33)Switches based on response with composite measures: DAS28 > 3.2 (21%); DAS28 > 2.6 (15%); SDAI > 11 or CDAI > 10 (< 5%); 29% would not switch therapy if patient is substantially better than when they first started the biologic regardless of disease activity
  • * Can provide more than 1 answer. ACR: American College of Rheumatology; CDAI: Clinical Disease3 Activity Index; SDAI: Simplified Disease Activity Index; HAQ: Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire; SJC: swollen joint count; TJC: tender joint count; MTX: methotrexate; HCQ: hydroxychloroquine; SSZ: sulfasalazine; LEF: leflunomide; CBC: complete blood cell count; ALT: alanine aminotransferase; ALP: alkaline phosphatase; AST: aspartate aminotransferase; ESR: erythrocyte sedimentation rate; CRP: C-reactive protein; ETN: etanercept; ADA: adalimumab; ABAT: abatacept; IM: intramuscular; IA: intraarticular; TB: tuberculosis.