Clinical Rheumatology

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 453–460

Radiographic progression in weight-bearing joints of patients with rheumatoid arthritis after TNF-blocking therapies

  • Eiko Seki
  • Isao Matsushita
  • Eiji Sugiyama
  • Hirohumi Taki
  • Koichiro Shinoda
  • Hiroyuki Hounoki
  • Hiraku Motomura
  • Tomoatsu Kimura
Original Article
  • 265 Downloads

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to assess the influence of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-blocking therapies on weight-bearing joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Changes in clinical variables and radiological findings in 213 weight-bearing joints (69 hip joints, 63 knee joints, and 81 ankle joints) of 42 consecutive patients were investigated at baseline and at 1 year of TNF-blocking therapies. Structural damage to the weight-bearing joints was assessed using the Larsen scoring method. Detailed comparisons of the sizes and locations of erosions were performed for each set of radiographs of the respective joints. Assessment of radiographs of the 213 weight-bearing joints indicated progression of the Larsen grade in eight joints. Another five joints without Larsen grade progression showed apparent radiographic progression of joint damage based on increases in bony erosions. Overall, 13 joints (6%) of eight patients (19%) showed progression of joint damage after 1 year of TNF-blocking therapies. Analysis of each baseline grade indicated that radiographic progression of joint damage was inhibited in most grade 0–II joints. On the other hand, all hip and knee joints with pre-existing damage of grade III/IV showed apparent progression even in patients with good response. The results further suggested that radiographic progression may occur in less damaged joints when the patients were non-responders to the therapy. Among the weight-bearing joints, ankle joints showed different radiographic behavior and four ankle joints displayed improvement of radiographic damage. Early initiation of anti-TNF therapy should be necessary especially when the patients are starting to show early structural damage in weight-bearing joints.

Keywords

Anti-TNF therapy Etanercept Infliximab Radiographic progression Rheumatoid arthritis Weight-bearing joint 

References

  1. 1.
    Welsing PM, van Gestel AM, Swinkels HL et al (2001) The relationship between disease activity, joint destruction, and functional capacity over the course of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 44:2009–2017PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bathon JM, Martin RW, Fleischmann RM et al (2000) A comparison of etanercept and methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 343:1586–1593PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lipsky PE, van der Heijde DM, St Clair EW et al (2000) Infliximab and methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 343:1594–1602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smolen JS, van der Heijde DM, St. Clair EW et al (2006) Predictors of joint damage in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis treated with high-dose methotrexate with or without concomitant infliximab: results from the ASPIRE trial. Arthritis Rheum 54:702–710PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Landewe R, van der Heijde D, Klareskog L et al (2006) Disconnect between inflammation and joint destruction after treatment with etanercept plus methotrexate: results from the trial of etanercept and methotrexate with radiographic and patient outcomes. Arthritis Rheum 54:3119–3125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kuper HH, van Leeuwen MA, van Riel PL et al (1997) Radiographic damage in large joints in early rheumatoid arthritis: relationship with radiographic damage in hands and feet, disease activity, and physical disability. Br J Rheumatol 36:855–860PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Drossaers-Bakker KW, Kroon HM, Zwinderman AH et al (2000) Radiographic damage of large joints in long-term rheumatoid arthritis and its relation to function. Rheumatology 39:998–1003PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arnett FC, Edworthy SM, Bloch DA et al (1988) The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 31:315–324PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miyasaka N, Takeuchi T, Eguchi K (2005) Official Japanese guidelines for the use of infliximab for rheumatoid arthritis. Mod Rheumatol 15:4–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miyasaka N, Takeuchi T, Eguchi K (2006) Guidelines for the proper use of etanercept in Japan. Mod Rheumatol 16:63–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Larsen A, Dale K, Eek M (1977) Radiographic evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis and related conditions by standard reference films. Acta Radiol Diagn 18:481–491Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guth A, Coste J, Chagnon S et al (1995) Reliability of three methods of radiologic assessment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Invest Radiol 30:181–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scott DL, Laasonen L, Priolo F et al (1997) The radiological assessment of rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 15(Suppl 17):S53–S61PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rau R, Wassenberg S, Herborn G et al (2001) Identification of radiologic healing phenomena in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheum 28:2608–2615PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ideguchi H, Ohno S, Hattori H et al (2006) Bone erosions in rheumatoid arthritis can be repaired through reduction in disease activity with conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Arthritis Res 8:R76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    van der Heijde DM, van’t Hof MA, van Riel PL et al (1990) Judging disease activity in clinical practice in rheumatoid arthritis: first step in the development of a disease activity score. Ann Rheum Dis 49:916–920PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Prevoo ML, van’t Hof MA, Kuper HH et al (1995) Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts: development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 38:44–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    van Gestel AM, Prevoo ML, van’t Hof MA et al (1996) Development and validation of the European League Against Rheumatism response criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: comparison with the preliminary American College of Rheumatology and the World Health Organization/International League Against Rheumatism Criteria. Arthritis Rheum 39:34–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kaufmann J, Kielstein V, Kilian S et al (2003) Relation between body mass index and radiological progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 30:2350–2355PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    van der Helm-van Mil AH, van der Kooij SM, Allaart CF et al (2008) A high body mass index has a protective effect on the amount of joint destruction in small joints in early rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 67:769–774PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Keystone EC, Kavanaugh AF, Sharp JT et al (2004) Radiographic, clinical, and functional outcomes of treatment with adalimumab (a human anti-tumor necrosis factor monoclonal antibody) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis receiving concomitant methotrexate therapy: a randomized, placebo-controlled, 52-week trial. Arthritis Rheum 50:1400–1411PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Breedveld FC, Weisman MH, Kavanaugh AF et al (2006) The PREMIER study: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind clinical trial of combination therapy with adalimumab plus methotrexate versus methotrexate alone or adalimumab alone in patients with early, aggressive rheumatoid arthritis who had not had previous methotrexate treatment. Arthritis Rheum 54:26–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goekoop-Ruiterman YPM, de Vries-Bouwstra JK, Allaart CF et al (2005) Clinical and radiographic outcomes of four different treatment strategies in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (the BeSt study): a randomized, controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 52:3381–3390PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Munneke M, de Jong Z, Zwinderman AH et al (2005) Effect of a high-intensity weight-bearing exercise program on radiologic damage progression of the large joints in subgroups of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 53:410–417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shay AK, Bliven ML, Scampoli DN et al (1995) Effects of exercise on synovium and cartilage from normal and inflamed knees. Rheumatol Int 14:183–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Akagi S, Sugano H, Ogawa R (1997) The long-term results of ankle joint synovectomy for rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Rheum 16:284–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mohing W, Kohler G, Coldewey J (1982) Synovectomy of the ankle joint. Int Orthop 6:117–121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Clinical Rheumatology 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eiko Seki
    • 1
  • Isao Matsushita
    • 1
  • Eiji Sugiyama
    • 2
  • Hirohumi Taki
    • 2
  • Koichiro Shinoda
    • 2
  • Hiroyuki Hounoki
    • 2
  • Hiraku Motomura
    • 1
  • Tomoatsu Kimura
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of ToyamaToyamaJapan
  2. 2.First Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of ToyamaToyamaJapan

Personalised recommendations