Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Sep 4;17(1):62.
doi: 10.1186/s12969-019-0362-1.

No radiographic wrist damage after treatment to target in recent-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis

P C E Hissink Muller  1   2 , W G van Braak  3 , D Schreurs  4 , C M Nusman  3   5 , S A Bergstra  6 , R Hemke  3 , D Schonenberg-Meinema  5 , J M van den Berg  5 , T W Kuijpers  5 , Y Koopman-Keemink  7 , M A J van Rossum  8   9 , L W A van Suijlekom-Smit  10 , D M C Brinkman  4 , C F Allaart  6 , R Ten Cate  4 , M Maas  3
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

No radiographic wrist damage after treatment to target in recent-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis

P C E Hissink Muller et al. Pediatr Rheumatol Online J. .

Abstract

Background: To evaluate radiographic progression of patients with new-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) in response to an early, tightly-controlled, treatment-to-target.

Methods: Patients with JIA participating in the BeSt-for-Kids-study, randomized to 3 treatment strategy arms, were eligible if at least 1 conventional wrist-radiograph was available. Bone damage as reflected by carpal length was assessed using the Poznanski-score. The BoneXpert-method was used to determine the Bone Age (BA, > 5 years) and bone mineral density (BMD) of the wrist. These scores were evaluated over time and compared between the treatment arms and mean JADAS10-score using linear mixed models corrected for age and symptom duration.

Results: In 60 patients, 252 radiographs were analysed. Baseline age and symptom duration were different between the arms. No difference in comparison to the healthy reference population was found at baseline for the Poznanski-score (IQR varying from - 0,82; 0.68), nor for BA (varying from - 0.88 to 0.74). Baseline BMD was statistically significantly lower in arm 3 (initial treatment with etanercept and methotrexate) (- 1.48; - 0.68) compared to arm 1 (- 0.84; - 0.04) and arm 2 (- 0.93; 0.15). After treatment to target inactive disease, the Poznanski-scores and the BA remained clinically unchanged, while the BMD in arm 3 improved (p < 0.05 vs arm 1).

Conclusions: Recent-onset JIA patients, treated-to-target aimed at inactive disease, showed no signs of radiographic wrist damage (Poznanski-score, BA or BMD) either at baseline or at follow-up, irrespective of treatment arm. A lower BMD at baseline in arm 3, initially treated with methotrexate and etanercept, improved significantly after treatment.

Trial registration: NTR, NL1504 (NTR1574). Registered 01-06-2009.

Keywords: Conventional radiography; Juvenile idiopathic arthritis; Radiographic outcome; Treatment to target.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The three treatment strategies compared in the BeSt for Kids study. Flow diagram of the three treatment strategies compared in the BeSt for Kids study; Revised diagnosis were localized scleroderma with arthritis (arm 1) and polyarteritis nodosa (arm 3). See patients and methods section for description of treatment groups. FU = follow-up, SSZ = sulfasalazine, MTX = methotrexate, ETN = etanercept, po = orally, sc = subcutaneous
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Poznanski measurements used to determine the RM/M2 score. RM = radiometacarpal length; M2 = length of the second metacarpal
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
a,b,c – Poznanski-score depicted in Z-scores of RM/M2 ratio. a represents patients in arm 1, b represents patients in arm 2, c represents patients in arm 3. d,e, f- Bone Age depicted in Z-score. d represents patients in arm 1, e represents patients in arm 2, f represents patients in arm 3. g,h,i. Bone Mineral Density depicted in Z-scores. g represents patients in arm 1, h represents patients in arm 2, i represents patients in arm 3. Each graph line represents one individual patient from baseline to follow-up. Each dot represents one patient with a single radiograph available
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
a: Predicted Z-score RM/M2 over time, b: Predicted Z-score Bone Age over time, c: Predicted Z-score BMD over time. All predictions are from Linear Mixed Models, corrected for age and symptom duration for Poznanski score, corrected for symptom duration for BA and BMD. BA = Bone Age, BMD = Bone Mineral Density
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Petty RE, Southwood TR, Manners P, Baum J, Glass DN, Goldenberg J, et al. International league of associations for rheumatology classification of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: second revision, Edmonton, 2001. J Rheumatol. 2004;31(2):390–392. - PubMed
    1. Magni-Manzoni S, Rossi F, Pistorio A, Temporini F, Viola S, Beluffi G, et al. Prognostic factors for radiographic progression, radiographic damage, and disability in juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;48(12):3509–3517. doi: 10.1002/art.11337. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Adib N, Silman A, Thomson W. Outcome following onset of juvenile idiopathic inflammatory arthritis: II. Predictors of outcome in juvenile arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2005;44(8):1002–1007. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keh621. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rossi F, Di Dia F, Galipo O, Pistorio A, Valle M, Magni-Manzoni S, et al. Use of the sharp and Larsen scoring methods in the assessment of radiographic progression in juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;55(5):717–723. doi: 10.1002/art.22246. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ravelli A, Ioseliani M, Norambuena X, Sato J, Pistorio A, Rossi F, et al. Adapted versions of the sharp/van der Heijde score are reliable and valid for assessment of radiographic progression in juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;56(9):3087–3095. doi: 10.1002/art.22835. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types