Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services

User menu

  • My Cart
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Rheumatology
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services
  • My Cart
  • Log In
  • Log Out
The Journal of Rheumatology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • Follow jrheum on Twitter
  • Visit jrheum on Facebook
  • Follow jrheum on LinkedIn
  • Follow jrheum on YouTube
  • Follow jrheum on Instagram
  • Follow jrheum on RSS
Research ArticleArticle

Five-year Favorable Outcome of Patients with Early Rheumatoid Arthritis in the 2000s: Data from the ESPOIR Cohort

Bernard Combe, Nathalie Rincheval, Joelle Benessiano, Francis Berenbaum, Alain Cantagrel, Jean-Pierre Daurès, Maxime Dougados, Patrice Fardellone, Bruno Fautrel, Rene M. Flipo, Philippe Goupille, Francis Guillemin, Xavier Le Loët, Isabelle Logeart, Xavier Mariette, Olivier Meyer, Philippe Ravaud, Alain Saraux, Thierry Schaeverbeke and Jean Sibilia
The Journal of Rheumatology October 2013, 40 (10) 1650-1657; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.121515
Bernard Combe
From the Lapeyronie Hospital, Montpellier I University, UMR 5535, EA2415, Montpellier; Paris-Bichat University Hospital, AP-HP; Paris St. Antoine University Hospital, Paris; Toulouse University Hospital, Toulouse; Paris-Descartes University; UPRES-EA 4058; Cochin Hospital, Paris; Amiens University Hospital, Amiens; Paris-Pitié Salpêtrière University Hospital, Paris; Lille University Hospital, Lille 2 University, Lille; Tours University Hospital, UMR CNRS 7292, University of Tours, Tours; Nancy University Hospital, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) CIE6, Nancy; INSERM U905, Institute for Research and Innovation in Biomedicine, Rouen University, Rouen; MSD Paris; Université Paris-Sud, AP-HP, Hôpitaux Universitaires Paris-Sud; INSERM U738, AP-HP, Hotel Dieu, Paris; Brest University Hospital, Brest; Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux; and Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: b-combe@chu-montpellier.fr
Nathalie Rincheval
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joelle Benessiano
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Francis Berenbaum
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alain Cantagrel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jean-Pierre Daurès
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maxime Dougados
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Patrice Fardellone
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bruno Fautrel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rene M. Flipo
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Philippe Goupille
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Francis Guillemin
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Xavier Le Loët
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Isabelle Logeart
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Xavier Mariette
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Olivier Meyer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Philippe Ravaud
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alain Saraux
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Thierry Schaeverbeke
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jean Sibilia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters
PreviousNext
Loading

Abstract

Objective. To report the 5-year outcome of a large prospective cohort of patients with very early rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to identify factors predictive of outcome.

Methods. Patients were recruited if they had early arthritis of < 6 months’ duration, had a high probability of developing RA, and had never been prescribed disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) or steroids. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine factors that predict outcome.

Results. We included 813 patients from December 2002 to April 2005. Age was 48.1 ± 12.6 years, delay before referral 103.1 ± 52.4 days, 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) 5.1 ± 1.3, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) 1.0 ± 0.7; 45.8% and 38.7% had rheumatoid factor or antibodies to cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP), respectively; 22% had hand or foot erosions; 78.5% fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism criteria for RA at baseline and 93.8% during followup. At 5 years, 573 patients were evaluated. The outcome was mild for most patients: disease activity (median DAS28 = 2.5) and HAQ disability (median 0.3) were well controlled over time; 50.6% achieved DAS28 remission and 64.7% low disease activity. Radiographic progression was low (2.9 Sharp unit/year) and only a few patients required joint surgery. Nevertheless, some patients developed new comorbidities. During the 5 years, 82.7% of patients had received at least 1 DMARD (methotrexate, 65.9%), 18.3% a biological DMARD, and about 60% prednisone at least once. Anti-CCP was the best predictor of remaining in the cohort for 5 years, of prescription of synthetic or biologic DMARD, and of radiographic progression.

Conclusion. The 5-year outcome of an early RA cohort in the 2000s was described. Anti-CCP was a robust predictor of outcome. The generally good 5-year outcome could be related to early referral and early effective treatment, key processes in the management of early RA in daily practice.

Key Indexing Terms:
  • ESPOIR COHORT
  • RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
  • EARLY ARTHRITIS
  • UNDIFFERENTIATED ARTHRITIS
  • TREATMENT
  • OUTCOME

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most frequent inflammatory arthritis, affecting 0.3% to 0.8% of the population1. Patients experience significant disability and handicap after a few years of disease progression. Results published before 2000 showed that at 10 years, more than 80% of patients had greatly decreased functional ability, 50% needed personal aid for some daily life activities, and many have to quit their professional activities or alter their jobs2,3,4,5,6. In addition, patients with active and severe disease showed increased cardiovascular morbidity and reduced life expectancy7.

In the past 10 years, tremendous changes have occurred in the management of RA. These changes are explained by the scientific validation of important processes (very early treatment, tight control, intensive strategies)8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16, effective treatments such as biologics17,18,19,20, and the development of international guidelines aiming for remission16,21,22,23. These concepts have been validated by clinical trials, but outside of clinical trials, little is known about the outcome of RA in patients whose disease began in the last decade, and whose treatment was based on standard care.

In 2002, the French Society of Rheumatology initiated the development of a large national multicenter cohort, the ESPOIR cohort, for investigating diagnostic and prognostic markers and also pathogenic mechanisms and economic consequences among patients with early undifferentiated, inflammatory arthritis that could later progress to RA24. ESPOIR is an acronym for Etude et Suivi des POlyarthrites Indifférenciées Récentes (Study and Monitoring of Early Undifferentiated Arthritis). The primary objective of our current study was to report the 5-year outcome of patients included in the ESPOIR cohort and to identify factors that predict outcome: remaining in the cohort, 5 years disability, prescription of synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD), and 3-year radiographic evidence of damage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

ESPOIR is a longitudinal prospective cohort of adults with possible early RA who are ≥ 18 and < 70 years old. Patients were referred by rheumatologists and general practitioners to one of 14 regional centers in France. The objective and design of the cohort have been described in detail24.

The primary objective was to establish a multicenter cohort of patients with early arthritis (< 6 months’ disease duration) that could result in a database for studying early RA, including diagnosis, prognosis, medicoeconomic factors, genetics, and pathogenesis.

The main inclusion criteria were at least 2 inflammatory joints for at least 6 weeks up to 6 months; clinical diagnosis of RA as certain or probable or undifferentiated arthritis potentially becoming RA; never prescribed DMARD or glucocorticoids except if the latter were prescribed for < 2 weeks with a maximum mean dosage of 20 mg/day prednisone or intraarticular injection < 4 weeks before inclusion.

The main exclusion criteria were other inflammatory rheumatism or connective tissue diseases clearly determined according to usual criteria.

Sample size calculation

A sufficient number of subjects would allow reasonable conclusions after 10 years of followup and reliable subgroup analyses. A compromise has been formulated to obtain at least 300 patients with RA on a 10-year term, to first evaluate the clinical and structural severity of the disease including main comorbidities and the predictive factors of outcome. Data from the literature, as well as previous cohort study experiences, have shown that proportion of loss to followup is in the range of 5% to 8% during the first 3 years, then stabilizes between 1% and 5%, depending on many different factors. Using intermediate estimates, it would be necessary to start with 400 patients. Given the probability that 50% of patients will not have RA after 2 years, it was planned to include 800 patients with early arthritis.

Patient recruitment and followup

Patients were routinely treated and followed by their rheumatologists according to standard care and without predefined therapeutic strategies. All patients were referred to each regional center every 6 months during the first 2 years, then every year, and were seen by the same investigator in each center. Procedures were set up to avoid patients lost to followup as much as possible. At baseline and at each visit, we recorded data for a set of clinical and biological variables recommended for the management of early arthritis24. At each visit, RA was classified according to the 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria25 and retrospectively to the 2010 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria26. Patients underwent testing by the same procedures in a central laboratory for baseline erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) level (normally < 10 mg/dl), IgM and IgA rheumatoid factors (RF; determined by ELISA; positive > 9 IU/ml), antibodies to cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP; determined by ELISA; positive > 50 U/ml), and HLA-DRB1* alleles (Immunology Department, Montpellier University Hospital).

At each visit, patients completed function and quality-of-life self-administered questionnaires including the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales version 2 short form27, a medicoeconomic questionnaire, and globally assessed disease, pain at rest and pain during motion on a visual analog scale (VAS). Patients underwent radiographs of the hand and wrist (face) and foot (face and oblique). Radiographs were stored in the radiological coordinating center (Brest) and then were evaluated by the van der Heijde-modified Sharp score12,28.

The protocol of the ESPOIR cohort study was approved in July 2002 by the ethics committee of Montpellier (no. 020307). All patients gave their signed informed consent before inclusion.

Our study describes the 5-year course for the 813 included patients. The primary outcomes were the clinical and functional variables. Secondary outcomes included radiographic damage, immunologic changes, therapeutic management, and comorbidities. We also aimed to identify predictive factors of outcome.

Statistical analysis

Univariate analysis of the association of all baseline values and outcome measures involved Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact test. Continuous variables were transformed into categorical variables with the median value as the cutoff (or the cutoff provided by the manufacturer for biological data). Unconditional logistic regression analysis was used to determine independent baseline variables to predict outcome. Five different analyses were performed to explain the outcomes: remaining in the cohort for 5 years, poor HAQ-DI score (higher than median value), prescription of a synthetic or a biologic DMARD, and 3-year radiographic progression. The explanatory variables included in each model were selected at p < 0.15 from results of the univariate analysis. A (forward) stepwise procedure was used to select variables to be retained in the multivariate model. Significance was defined as p < 0.05 for variables in the multivariate model. Data were analyzed by use of SAS 9.2 (SAS Institute) by the EA2415 biostatistical team of Montpellier I University.

RESULTS

Baseline patient characteristics

The main baseline characteristics of the whole cohort are reported in Table 1. The mean age of the 813 patients was 48.1 ± 12.6 years (median 50.1); 76.7% (n = 624) were women. In total, 50 (6.1%) patients had a personal history of psoriasis and 129 (15.9%) a familial history of inflammatory arthritis (RA = 113). Cardiovascular diseases were the main comorbidity (Table 2). The mean time between the first occurrence of swollen joints (diagnosed by a physician) and the referral was 103.12 ± 52.42 days. Patients had active disease, with a mean 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) of 5.11 ± 1.31 (median 5.1, range 1.5–8.8) and a mean HAQ-DI score of 0.98 ± 0.68 (median 0.9, range 0–2.9). In all, 71.3% (n = 578) patients fulfilled the 1987 ACR criteria for RA and 78.5% (n = 641) the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria for RA. ESR and CRP levels were increased; 316 patients (38.9%) had abnormal CRP level; 45.8% patients (n = 372) were positive for IgM RF, and 38.7% (n = 315) had anti-CCP. A total of 54.4% of patients (56.7% with RA based on 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria) were positive for HLA-DRB1*01 or *04 RA-associated alleles with the following genotypes: 01/X (16.4%), 04/X (29.4%), 01/01 (0.6%), 01/04 (4.9%), 04/04 (3.1%), and X/X (45.6%; where X = neither 01 nor 04 HLA DRB1*-associated alleles). At baseline, the total van der Heijde-modified Sharp score28 was 4.97 ± 7.14; 22.3% of patients (160 of 715) had typical RA erosions on hands and/or feet, as defined by each rheumatologist investigator.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Characteristics of the ESPOIR cohort with early rheumatoid arthritis at baseline. Data are mean ± SD, median (range), unless otherwise indicated.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Past and present comorbidities in the ESPOIR cohort.

No significant differences among regional centers were observed.

Patients lost to followup

We could evaluate data for 573 of 813 patients with RA or undifferentiated arthritis at 5 years in the regional centers: 49 patients missed the 5-year visit but were still followed in ESPOIR, 62 patients (7.5%) received a diagnosis other than RA or undifferentiated arthritis and were excluded, and 9 patients died. In all, 120 patients were truly lost to followup (n = 44, 5.4%) or had moved or refused to continue the planned longitudinal followup (n = 76, 9.3%). For patients who stayed in the cohort and were seen at 5 years, at baseline (Table 1) they were significantly older (p = 0.029); were more often positive for anti-CCP, IgM or IgA RF (p < 0.0001), and HLA-DRB1-associated alleles (p = 0.005); and had more radiographic damage (p = 0.012) than the whole cohort. On multivariate analysis, predictors of being in the cohort at 5 years were baseline anti-CCP (OR 3.59, 95% CI 2.31–5.80, p < 0.0001), age > 50 years (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.24–2.62, p = 0.0019), and pain during motion on a 100 mm VAS (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.46–0.98, p = 0.041).

Clinical and functional outcome

At 5 years, most patients (92.8%, 532/573) met the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria, and among the whole cohort of 813 patients, 763 (93.8%) had fulfilled these criteria at least once during followup (Table 3). Because this high rate of patients fulfilling the RA classification criteria was in line with the inclusion criteria, the whole cohort was considered an early RA cohort.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Disease activity, functional and structural outcome in the ESPOIR cohort over 5 years. Data are mean ± SD except where indicated.

Most of the time, disease activity was well controlled. DAS28 decreased to 3.4 ± 1.4 (median 3.3, range 0–7.4) at month 6 and 2.7 ± 1.3 (median 2.5, range 0–7.1) at 5 years. HAQ-DI score decreased to 0.5 ± 0.6 (median 0.4, range 0–2.5) at month 6 and 0.5 ± 0.6 (median 0.3, range 0–2.5) at 5 years. Scores for patient global assessment on a 0–10 VAS, ESR, and CRP levels were improved as well. At the 2-year and 5-year visits, 47.6% (n = 321) and 50.6% (n = 290) of patients, respectively, achieved DAS28 remission, and 64.6% (n = 437) and 64.7% (n = 371) had DAS28 low disease activity. At 5 years, 33.0% of patients (n = 189) had achieved sustained (> 12 months) DAS28 remission.

Because of efficient data management, the rate of missing data was low (0.16% to 0.65%; Table 3).

Predictors of poor 5-year HAQ disability were baseline HAQ-DI score, older age, female sex, and joint pain at rest (VAS; Table 4).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4.

Baseline predictors of outcome in the ESPOIR cohort (multivariate analysis).

Radiographic outcome

Structural progression was weak, with a mean change of 8.8 in total modified Sharp score [smallest detectable difference (SDD) = 1] and 2.6 in erosion score during the first 3 years. During this time, 79% (n = 447) showed progression of the total Sharp score and 53.7% (n = 304) change of at least 5 points. HAQ-DI and radiographic scores were not associated.

Predictors of 3-year radiographic progression were baseline anti-CCP positivity and erosion score (Table 4).

Immunologic changes

Autoantibody positivity showed no significant change over time: at baseline and 5 years, 45.8% and 43.2% of patients, respectively, were positive for IgM RF and 38.7% and 45.7% for anti-CCP.

Disease management

Most patients (82.7%, n = 672) from the whole cohort had received at least 1 synthetic DMARD during the followup. This rate increased to 90.4% when only patients (n = 573) with a visit at 5 years were considered. Most started this therapy during the first 6 months after the first synovitis.

The most commonly prescribed synthetic DMARD (65.9%, n = 536) was methotrexate [MTX; median dosage 12.97 (range 5–25) mg/week], then hydroxychloroquine (20.8%, n = 169), sulfasalazine (18.1%, n = 147), leflunomide (15.6%, n = 127), and injectable gold (4.1%, n = 33); 69 patients (8.49%) received a combination of at least 2 synthetic DMARD. The patients had received 1.83 ± 1.05 DMARD, on average.

Predictors of prescription of at least 1 synthetic DMARD were baseline anti-CCP, meeting 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria, and increased pain at rest (VAS; Table 4).

During the 5-year followup, 149 patients (18.3%) of the whole cohort received a biological DMARD (21.8% of the 573 patients with a visit at 5 years), mainly a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blocker (etanercept 78, adalimumab 85, infliximab 16); 49 patients (6.0%) had received > 1 biologic and some received a non-anti-TNF DMARD (abatacept 4, rituximab 15, tocilizumab 1). Finally, 40 of these patients (26.8%) received the biologic as monotherapy, without any associated synthetic DMARD.

Predictors of prescription of at least 1 biologic DMARD were baseline anti-CCP, increased number of tender joints, increased pain at rest level (VAS), and IgM RF positivity (Table 4).

As for glucocorticoids, more than half the patients (59.8%, n = 486) had received prednisone at least once; 45.3% of those (n = 368) received steroids during the first 6 months. In total, 38.5% of patients (n = 312) had received daily oral steroids for more than 1 year and 11.2% (n = 64) continuously during the whole 5 years. For patients taking steroids, the mean prednisone dosage was 8.8 ± 7.7 mg/day (median 6, range 1.0–60.0).

In total, 24 (3%) patients required joint surgery as a result of their arthritis: 4 hip arthroplasties, 3 knee arthroplasties, 7 synovectomies, 5 foot or wrist arthrodesis, and 5 forefoot procedures.

Nine patients died: 3 from preexisting severe cardiovascular disease, 3 severe infections, 2 malignancies, and 1 car accident. Compared to baseline, at 5 years, some patients showed new comorbidities, mainly hyperlipidemia and hypertension, and despite low number of events, myocardial ischemia and strokes (Table 2).

DISCUSSION

Although our report is mainly descriptive and has some limitations, including the absence of a comparison group, it provides the 5-year outcome for 813 patients with very early arthritis who received the standard of care available from 2003 to 2010 from their rheumatologists. At baseline, 78.5% of patients fulfilled the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria for RA, and 93.8% did so at least once during followup. At baseline, 71% of patients met the 1987 ACR criteria for RA; the discrepancies between the 2 sets of criteria in the ESPOIR cohort have recently been published and discussed29.

Patients had active arthritis at entry, as confirmed by the DAS28 score and HAQ-DI. The 5-year outcome was rather mild in most of the patients, and disease activity was well controlled. At 5 years, the median DAS28 was 2.5, HAQ-DI score was within normal limits for > 50% of patients (median 0.3), and the annual rate of radiographic disease progression was low (van der Heijde-modified Sharp score 2.9 units/year), even though 79% of patients showed structural disease progression (smallest detectable difference 1). Almost half the patients achieved DAS28 remission in the first 2 years, one-third showed sustained remission (> 1 year) at 5 years, and only a few patients required joint surgery. However, some patients developed new comorbidities, mainly hyperlipidemia and cardiovascular diseases, which seems in line with some previous reports of early RA30. Only 573 of the 813 selected patients at baseline were followed up. The loss of followup patients may induce bias in the data interpretation. However, the baseline characteristics of the whole cohort and of the patients who were seen at 5 years did not indicate major differences between these 2 groups. Further, anti-CCP and radiographic damage, which usually indicate more severe disease, were significantly higher in the followup patients, suggesting that the missing patients may have had milder disease.

Most patients (90.4%) had received at least 1 DMARD during the 5-year followup, mainly MTX, according to the usual guidelines21,22. DMARD were mainly prescribed as monotherapy (89.7%), which could seem very high. French rheumatologists do not really trust the effectiveness of synthetic DMARD combinations, which have been used extensively, with disappointing results. In addition, such combinations are still not strongly recommended by our national and EULAR guidelines22. Most of the patients started DMARD during the first 6 months; we previously showed with this cohort that patients who received their first DMARD within 3 months after the onset of the first synovitis had better radiographic outcome at 1 year12. In the current study, 21.8% of patients at their 5-year visit had received a biological DMARD, one-quarter as monotherapy; this relatively high rate could be related to the French guidelines, which place almost no limit on the prescription of licensed biologics. Finally, about 60% of the whole cohort had received prednisone at least once during the 5 years, with a mean dosage 8.8 ± 7.7 mg/day. Unfortunately, this seems quite high with reference to the national and international guidelines, which recommend that glucocorticoids be used with caution and preferably for only short periods, in combination with synthetic DMARD22.

The proportion of patients with positivity for RF and anti-CCP at baseline, 45.8% and 38.8%, respectively, remained stable during followup, which suggests no need to recheck for these autoantibodies. These rates are lower than those for a previous smaller early RA cohort started in France in 199331 and for other early RA cohorts, with positivity for RF and anti-CCP of about 60% and 50%, respectively32,33. This difference may be related to our rate of patients fulfilling RA classification criteria at baseline: 78.5% versus 100% for the other RA cohorts. Nevertheless, our results are in line with the autoantibody positivity reported for other early arthritis inception cohorts34,35.

Despite the absence of a comparison group, the favorable 5-year outcome that we observed in this early arthritis cohort may be related to several factors that have been highlighted in recommendations for managing RA16,20,21. These factors include early referral to a rheumatologist (mean 103.1 days after the first symptoms; about half the patients were seen by a rheumatologist within the EULAR-recommended timeframe36); early effective treatment (DMARD: 82.7%; MTX: 65.9%)30; and a high rate of remission. The trend toward milder disease in RA since the beginning of the year 2000 has been suggested by some clinical studies but never demonstrated in real life32,37,38,39. The trend is probably attributable to better therapeutic strategies, including the extensive use and optimization of effective antirheumatic treatment such as MTX. Because fewer than 20% of our patients received biologics, the benefit of these relatively new therapies on RA outcome is difficult to evaluate.

Our data also confirm anti-CCP positivity as a robust predictor of outcome with early RA. Anti-CCP positivity at baseline was the best predictor of remaining in the cohort after 5 years, prescription of synthetic or biologic DMARD, and 3-year radiographic disease progression. The finding that anti-CCP were associated with the prescription of synthetic DMARD is probably explained by the diagnostic value of this biomarker, which was highlighted by the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for RA26, and because international guidelines strongly recommend the prescription of a DMARD as soon as the diagnosis of RA is made21,22. Older age and female sex were mainly associated with HAQ disability, as reported40,41. Age > 50 years was also predictive of being in the cohort at 5 years. Despite some discrepancies, older age has been frequently reported as a poor prognostic marker in patients with RA40,41,42. In addition, it has been shown that in patients with early undifferentiated arthritis, age was an independent predictive variable for persistence and development of RA43. Baseline pain at rest was selected as a predictive factor of HAQ disability but also of both synthetic and biologic DMARD prescriptions, which confirms the importance of patient perspective in treatment decisions in RA. Interestingly, the extensive biological database of the ESPOIR cohort will help determine other biomarkers associated with outcome. Indeed, we recently showed that, along with anti-CCP positivity, baseline interleukin 6 level was an independent risk factor of structural disease progression44.

We report the 5-year outcome of a large cohort that was established in the early 2000s of patients with very early RA. Anti-CCP was a robust predictor of outcome, including remaining in the cohort for 5 years, prescription of synthetic or biologic DMARD, and radiographic progression. The favorable outcomes for this cohort support the need for early referral and early effective treatment in managing early RA in daily practice.

Acknowledgment

We thank G. Tobon and C. Lukas for expert radiograph reading, S. Martin for centralized analysis of C-reactive protein level and IgA and IgM rheumatoid factor and anticitrullinated protein antibody positivity, and M.C. Boissier, P. Boumier, G. Falgaronne and F. Lioté for patient recruitment.

Footnotes

  • Supported by an unrestricted grant from Merck Sharp and Dohme for the first 5 years of the cohort study. Two additional grants from INSERM supported part of the biological database. The French Society of Rheumatology, Abbott, Pfizer, and Roche-Chugaï supported the ESPOIR cohort. Dr. Logeart is an employee of Pfizer.

  • Accepted for publication May 13, 2013.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Roux CH,
    2. Saraux A,
    3. Le Bihan E,
    4. Fardellone P,
    5. Guggenbuhl P,
    6. Fautrel B,
    7. et al.
    Rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthropathies: Geographical variations in prevalence in France. J Rheumatol 2007;34:117–22.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Pincus T,
    2. Callahan LF,
    3. Sale WG,
    4. Brooks AL,
    5. Payne LE,
    6. Vaughn WK
    . Severe functional declines, work disability, and increased mortality in seventy-five rheumatoid arthritis patients studied over nine years. Arthritis Rheum 1984;27:864–72.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Dellhag B,
    2. Bjelle A
    . A five-year followup of hand function and activities of daily living in rheumatoid arthritis patients. Arthritis Care Res 1999;12:33–41.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Wolfe F,
    2. Hawley DJ
    . The longterm outcomes of rheumatoid arthritis: Work disability: a prospective 18 year study of 823 patients. J Rheumatol 1998;25:2108–17.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Barrett EM,
    2. Scott DG,
    3. Wiles NJ,
    4. Symmons DP
    . The impact of rheumatoid arthritis on employment status in the early years of disease: A UK community-based study. Rheumatology 2000;39:1403–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Jantti J,
    2. Aho K,
    3. Kaarela K,
    4. Kautiainen H
    . Work disability in an inception cohort of patients with seropositive rheumatoid arthritis: A 20 year study. Rheumatology 1999;38:1138–41.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Wolfe F,
    2. Mitchell DM,
    3. Sibley JT,
    4. Fries JF,
    5. Bloch DA,
    6. Williams CA,
    7. et al.
    The mortality of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1994;37:481–94.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Lard LR,
    2. Visser H,
    3. Speyer I,
    4. vander Horst-Bruinsma IE,
    5. Zwinderman AH,
    6. Breedveld FC,
    7. et al.
    Early versus delayed treatment in patients with recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis: Comparison of two cohorts who received different treatment strategies. Am J Med 2001;111:446–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Bukhari MA,
    2. Wiles NJ,
    3. Lunt M,
    4. Harrison BJ,
    5. Scott DG,
    6. Symmons DP,
    7. et al.
    Influence of disease modifying therapy on radiographic outcome in inflammatory polyarthritis at 5 years: Results from a large observational inception study. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:46–53.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Nell VP,
    2. Machold KP,
    3. Eberl G,
    4. Stamm TA,
    5. Uffmann M,
    6. Smolen JS
    . Benefit of very early referral and very early therapy with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology 2004;43:906–14.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Finckh A,
    2. Liang MH,
    3. van Herckenrode CM,
    4. de Pablo P
    . Long-term impact of early treatment on radiographic progression in rheumatoid arthritis: A meta-analysis. Arthritis Rheum 2006;55:864–72.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Lukas C,
    2. Combe B,
    3. Ravaud P,
    4. Sibilia J,
    5. Landewe R,
    6. van der Heijde D
    . Favorable effect of very early disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatment on radiographic progression in early inflammatory arthritis: Data from the Étude et Suivi des polyarthrites indifférenciées récentes (study and followup of early undifferentiated polyarthritis). Arthritis Rheum 2011;63:1804–11.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Grigor C,
    2. Capell H,
    3. Stirling A,
    4. McMahon AD,
    5. Lock P,
    6. Vallance R,
    7. et al.
    Effect of a treatment strategy of tight control for rheumatoid arthritis (the TICORA study): A single-blind randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004;364:263–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Schipper LG,
    2. Kievit W,
    3. den Broeder AA,
    4. van der Laar MA,
    5. Adang EM,
    6. Fransen J,
    7. et al.
    Treatment strategies aiming at remission in early rheumatoid arthritis patients: Starting with methotrexate monotherapy is cost-effective. Rheumatology 2011;50:1320–30.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Landewe RB,
    2. Boers M,
    3. Verhoeven AC,
    4. Westhovens R,
    5. van de Laar MA,
    6. Markusse HM,
    7. et al.
    COBRA combination therapy in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: Long-term structural benefits of a brief intervention. Arthritis Rheum 2002;46:347–56.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Smolen JS,
    2. Aletaha D,
    3. Bijlsma JW,
    4. Breedveld FC,
    5. Boumpas D,
    6. Burmester G,
    7. et al; and
    8. T2T Expert Committee
    . Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: Recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:631–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. Emery P,
    2. Breedveld FC,
    3. Hall S,
    4. Durez P,
    5. Chang DJ,
    6. Robertson D,
    7. et al.
    Comparison of methotrexate monotherapy with a combination of methotrexate and etanercept in active, early, moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (COMET): A randomised, double-blind, parallel treatment trial. Lancet 2008;372:375–82.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. St. Clair EW,
    2. van der Heijde DM,
    3. Smolen JS,
    4. Maini RN,
    5. Bathon JM,
    6. Emery P,
    7. et al.
    Combination of infliximab and methotrexate therapy for early rheumatoid arthritis: A randomized, controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2004;50:3432–43.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Breedveld F,
    2. Kavanaugh AF,
    3. Cohen SB,
    4. Pavelka K,
    5. van Vollenhoven R,
    6. Perez JL,
    7. et al.
    Early treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with adalimumab plus methotrexate vs adalimumab alone or methotrexate alone: The PREMIER study. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:26–37.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Smolen JS,
    2. Aletaha D,
    3. Koeller M,
    4. Weisman MH,
    5. Emery P
    . New therapies for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet 2007;370:1861–74.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Combe B,
    2. Landewe R,
    3. Lukas C,
    4. Bolosiu H,
    5. Breedveld F,
    6. Dougados M,
    7. et al.
    EULAR evidence recommendations for the management of early arthritis. Report of a task force of the European Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutics. Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:34–45.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Smolen JS,
    2. Landewé R,
    3. Breedveld FC,
    4. Dougados M,
    5. Emery P,
    6. Gaujoux-Viala C,
    7. et al.
    EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:964–75.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    1. Singh JA,
    2. Furst DE,
    3. Bharat A,
    4. Curtis JR,
    5. Kavanaugh AF,
    6. Kremer JM,
    7. et al.
    2012 update of the 2008 American College of Rheumatology recommendations for the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and biologic agents in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res 2012;64:625–39.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. 24.↵
    1. Combe B,
    2. Benessiano J,
    3. Berenbaum F,
    4. Cantagrel A,
    5. Daures JP,
    6. Dougados M,
    7. et al.
    The ESPOIR cohort: A ten-year follow-up of early arthritis in France. Methodology and baseline characteristics of the 813 included patients. Joint Bone Spine 2007;74:440–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Arnett FC,
    2. Edworthy SM,
    3. Bloch DA,
    4. McShane DJ,
    5. Fries JF,
    6. Cooper NS,
    7. et al.
    The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1988;31:315–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Aletaha D,
    2. Neogi T,
    3. Silman AJ,
    4. Funovits J,
    5. Felson DT,
    6. Bingham CO,
    7. et al.
    2010 rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: An American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:1580–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. Guillemin F,
    2. Coste J,
    3. Pouchot J,
    4. Gezail M,
    5. Bregeon C,
    6. Sany J,
    7. et al.
    The AIMS2-SF: A short form of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2. Arthritis Rheum 1997;40:1267–74.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. van der Heijde DM,
    2. van Leeuwen MA,
    3. van Riel PL,
    4. Koster AM,
    5. van ‘t Hof MA,
    6. van Rijswijk MS,
    7. et al.
    Biannual radiographic assessments of hands and feet in a three-year prospective followup of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1992;35:26–34.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Fautrel B,
    2. Combe B,
    3. Rincheval N,
    4. Dougados M; and
    5. ESPOIR Scientific Committee
    . Level of agreement of the 1987 ACR and 2010 ACR/EULAR rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: An analysis based on ESPOIR cohort data. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:386–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. Symmons DP,
    2. Silman AJ
    . Aspects of early arthritis. What determines the evolution of early undifferentiated arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis? An update from the Norfolk Arthritis Register. Arthritis Res Ther 2006;8:214.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Combe B,
    2. Dougados M,
    3. Goupille P,
    4. Cantagrel A,
    5. Eliaou JF,
    6. Sibilia J,
    7. et al.
    Prognostic factors for radiographic damage in early rheumatoid arthritis. A multiparameter prospective study. Arthritis Rheum 2001;44:1736–43.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Welsing PM,
    2. Fransen J,
    3. van Riel PL
    . Is the disease course of rheumatoid arthritis becoming milder? Time trends since 1985 in an inception cohort of early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2005;52:2616–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. de Vries-Bouwstra JK,
    2. Goekoop-Ruiterman YP,
    3. Verpoort KN,
    4. Schreuder GM,
    5. Ewals JA,
    6. Terwiel JP,
    7. et al.
    Progression of joint damage in early rheumatoid arthritis: Association with HLA-DRB1, rheumatoid factor, and anti-citrullinated protein antibodies in relation to different treatment strategies. Arthritis Rheum 2008;58:1293–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Verstappen SM,
    2. Lunt M,
    3. Bunn DK,
    4. Scott DG,
    5. Symmons DP
    . In patients with early inflammatory polyarthritis, ACPA positivity, younger age and inefficacy of the first non-biological DMARD are predictors for receiving biological therapy: Results from the Norfolk Arthritis Register. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:1428–32.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. 35.↵
    1. Funovits J,
    2. Aletaha D,
    3. Bykerk V,
    4. Combe B,
    5. Dougados M,
    6. Emery P,
    7. et al.
    The 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: Methodological report phase I. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:1589–95.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.↵
    1. Fautrel B,
    2. Benhamou M,
    3. Foltz V,
    4. Rincheval N,
    5. Rat AC,
    6. Combe B,
    7. et al.
    Early referral to the rheumatologist for early arthritis patients: Evidence for suboptimal care. Results from the ESPOIR cohort. Rheumatology 2010;49:147–55.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    1. Pincus T,
    2. Sokka T,
    3. Kautiainen H
    . Patients seen for standard rheumatoid arthritis care have significantly better articular, radiographic, laboratory, and functional status in 2000 than in 1985. Arthritis Rheum 2005;52:1009–19.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    1. Finckh A,
    2. Choi HK,
    3. Wolfe F
    . Progression of radiographic joint damage in different eras: Trends towards milder disease in rheumatoid arthritis are attributable to improved treatment. Ann Rheum Dis 2006;65:1192–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. 39.↵
    1. Uhlig T,
    2. Heiberg T,
    3. Mowinckel P,
    4. Kvien TK
    . Rheumatoid arthritis is milder in the new millennium: Health status in patients with rheumatoid arthritis 1994–2004. Ann Rheum Dis 2008;67:1710–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    1. Camacho EM,
    2. Verstappen SM,
    3. Lunt M,
    4. Bunn DK,
    5. Symmons DP
    . Influence of age and sex on functional outcome over time in a cohort of patients with recent-onset inflammatory polyarthritis: Results from the Norfolk Arthritis Register. Arthritis Care Res 2011;63:1745–52.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  41. 41.↵
    1. Michaud K,
    2. Wallenstein G,
    3. Wolfe F
    . Treatment and nontreatment predictors of health assessment questionnaire disability progression in rheumatoid arthritis: A longitudinal study of 18,485 patients. Arthritis Care Res 2011;63:366–72.
    OpenUrl
  42. 42.↵
    1. Bukhari M,
    2. Lunt M,
    3. Barton A,
    4. Bunn D,
    5. Silman A,
    6. Symmons D
    . Increasing age at symptom onset is associated with worse radiological damage at presentation in patients with early inflammatory polyarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:389–93.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. 43.↵
    1. van der Helm-van Mil AH,
    2. le Cessie S,
    3. van Dongen H,
    4. Breedveld FC,
    5. Toes RE,
    6. Huizinga TW
    . A prediction rule for disease outcome in patients with recent-onset undifferentiated arthritis: How to guide individual treatment decisions. Arthritis Rheum 2007;56:433–40.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. 44.↵
    1. Gottenberg JE,
    2. Dayer JM,
    3. Lukas C,
    4. Ducot B,
    5. Chiocchia G,
    6. Cantagrel A,
    7. et al.
    Serum IL-6 and IL-21 are associated with markers of B cell activation and structural progression in early rheumatoid arthritis: Results from the ESPOIR cohort. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:1243–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 40, Issue 10
1 Oct 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by Author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Rheumatology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Five-year Favorable Outcome of Patients with Early Rheumatoid Arthritis in the 2000s: Data from the ESPOIR Cohort
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Rheumatology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Rheumatology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Five-year Favorable Outcome of Patients with Early Rheumatoid Arthritis in the 2000s: Data from the ESPOIR Cohort
Bernard Combe, Nathalie Rincheval, Joelle Benessiano, Francis Berenbaum, Alain Cantagrel, Jean-Pierre Daurès, Maxime Dougados, Patrice Fardellone, Bruno Fautrel, Rene M. Flipo, Philippe Goupille, Francis Guillemin, Xavier Le Loët, Isabelle Logeart, Xavier Mariette, Olivier Meyer, Philippe Ravaud, Alain Saraux, Thierry Schaeverbeke, Jean Sibilia
The Journal of Rheumatology Oct 2013, 40 (10) 1650-1657; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.121515

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

 Request Permissions

Share
Five-year Favorable Outcome of Patients with Early Rheumatoid Arthritis in the 2000s: Data from the ESPOIR Cohort
Bernard Combe, Nathalie Rincheval, Joelle Benessiano, Francis Berenbaum, Alain Cantagrel, Jean-Pierre Daurès, Maxime Dougados, Patrice Fardellone, Bruno Fautrel, Rene M. Flipo, Philippe Goupille, Francis Guillemin, Xavier Le Loët, Isabelle Logeart, Xavier Mariette, Olivier Meyer, Philippe Ravaud, Alain Saraux, Thierry Schaeverbeke, Jean Sibilia
The Journal of Rheumatology Oct 2013, 40 (10) 1650-1657; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.121515
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgment
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters

Keywords

ESPOIR COHORT
RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
EARLY ARTHRITIS
UNDIFFERENTIATED ARTHRITIS
TREATMENT
OUTCOME

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • One-Third of European Patients with Axial Spondyloarthritis Reach Pain Remission With Routine Care Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Treatment
  • Oral Antiviral Treatment for COVID-19 in Patients With Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases
  • The Positive Predictive Value of a Very High Serum IgG4 Concentration for the Diagnosis of IgG4-Related Disease
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • ESPOIR COHORT
  • rheumatoid arthritis
  • EARLY ARTHRITIS
  • UNDIFFERENTIATED ARTHRITIS
  • treatment
  • outcome

Content

  • First Release
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Collections
  • Audiovisual Rheum
  • COVID-19 and Rheumatology

Resources

  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Author Payment
  • Reviewers
  • Advertisers
  • Classified Ads
  • Reprints and Translations
  • Permissions
  • Meetings
  • FAQ
  • Policies

Subscribers

  • Subscription Information
  • Purchase Subscription
  • Your Account
  • Terms and Conditions

More

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • My Alerts
  • My Folders
  • Privacy/GDPR Policy
  • RSS Feeds
The Journal of Rheumatology
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
Copyright © 2022 by The Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co. Ltd.
Print ISSN: 0315-162X; Online ISSN: 1499-2752
Powered by HighWire