Objectives To provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field. Methods An international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item. Results The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3–6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations. Conclusions These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost.

Comorbidities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are often associated with poor health outcomes and increased mortality. Treatment decisions should take into account these comorbidities due to known or suspected associations with certain drug classes. In clinical practice, it is critical to balance potential treatment benefit against the possible risks for comorbidities as well as the articular manifestations of RA. This review summarises the current literature relating to prevalence and risk factors for the important comorbidities of cardiovascular disease, infections, lymphomas and nonmelanoma skin cancers in patients with RA. The impact on patient outcomes and the interplay between these comorbidities and the therapeutic options currently available, including tumour necrosis factor inhibitors and newer biological therapies, are also explored. As newer RA therapies are developed, and patients gain wider and earlier access to advanced therapies, in part due to the emergence of biosimilars, it is important to consider the prevention or treatment of comorbidities as part of the overall management of RA.

Objective To develop EULAR points-to-consider for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). Methods The points-to-consider were developed in accordance with EULAR standardised operation procedures by a multidisciplinary task force from eight European countries, based on a systematic literature review and expert consensus. Level of evidence and strength of the points-to-consider were determined, and mean levels of agreement among the task force were calculated using a 10-point rating scale. Results Six overarching principles and 13 points-to-consider were formulated. The level of agreement among the task force for the overarching principles and points-to-consider ranged from 8.4 to 9.9.The overarching principles define TDM and its subtypes, and reinforce the underlying pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic principles, which are relevant to all biopharmaceutical classes. The points-to-consider highlight the clinical utility of the measurement and interpretation of biopharmaceutical blood concentrations and antidrug antibodies in specific clinical scenarios, including factors that influence these parameters. In general, proactive use of TDM is not recommended but reactive TDM could be considered in certain clinical situations. An important factor limiting wider adoption of TDM is the lack of both high quality trials addressing effectiveness and safety of TDM and robust economic evaluation in patients with RMDs. Future research should focus on providing this evidence, as well as on further understanding of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of biopharmaceuticals. Conclusion These points-to-consider are evidence-based and consensus-based statements for the use of TDM of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory RMDs, addressing the clinical utility of TDM.

Methotrexate (MTX) is a remarkable drug with a key role in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at every stage of its evolution. Its attributes include good overall efficacy for signs and symptoms, inhibition of structural damage and preservation of function with acceptable and manageable safety, a large dose-titratable range, options for either an oral or parenteral route of administration, and currently unrivalled cost-effectiveness. It has a place as a monotherapy and also as an anchor drug that can be safely used in combination with other conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) or used concomitantly with biological DMARDs or targeted synthetic DMARDs. MTX is not without potential issues regarding toxicity, notably hepatotoxicity and bone marrow toxicity, as well as tolerability problems for some, but not all, patients. But many of these issues can be mitigated or managed. In the face of a welcome expansion in available targeted therapies for the treatment of RA, MTX looks set to remain at the foundation of pharmacotherapy for the majority of people living with RA and other inflammatory rheumatic diseases. In this article, we provide an evidence-based discussion as to how to achieve the best outcomes with this versatile drug in the context of a treat-to-target strategy for the management of RA.

The aims were to evaluate the prevalence of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) in patients with RA or SpA experiencing secondary failure to anti-TNF therapy and to correlate ADA presence with anti-TNF concentration and clinical response. This was a cross-sectional, observational study of patients with active RA or SpA experiencing secondary failure to etanercept (ETN), infliximab (INF) or adalimumab (ADL). Concomitant non-biologic DMARDs were permitted. Serum anti-TNF and ADA levels were measured with two-site ELISA. Among 570 evaluable patients, those with RA (n = 276) were mostly female (80 vs 39%), older (56 vs 48 years), received concomitant DMARDs (83 vs 47%) and had maintained good clinical disease control for longer (202 vs 170 weeks) compared with patients with SpA (n = 294). ADA were found in 114/570 (20.0%) patients; 51/188 (27.1%) against INF and 63/217 (29.0%) against ADL; none against ETN. Of these 114 patients, 92 (81%) had no detectable serum drug concentrations. Proportionately more patients with SpA (31.3%) had anti-INF antibodies than those with RA (21.1%; P = 0.014). A significantly lower proportion of patients receiving concomitant DMARDs (16.5%) developed ADA than those on monotherapy (26.4%; P < 0.05). In patients with RA or SpA and secondary failure, the development of ADA against ADL or INF, but not ETN, appears to be one of the main reasons for secondary treatment failure, but not the only one. Further investigations are needed to determine other causes of anti-TNF failure.

Medication adherence is directly associated with health outcomes. Adherence has been reviewed extensively; however, most studies provide a narrow scope of the problem, covering a specific disease or treatment. This project’s objective was to identify risk factors for non-adherence in the fields of rheumatology, oncology, and cardiology as well as potential interventions to improve adherence and their association with the risk factors. The project was developed in three phases and carried out by a Steering Committee made up of experts from the fields of rheumatology, oncology, cardiology, general medicine, and hospital and community pharmacy. In phase 1, a bibliographic review was performed, and the articles/reviews were classified according to the authors’ level of confidence in the results and their clinical relevance. In phase 2, 20 risk factors for non-adherence were identified from these articles/reviews and agreed upon in Steering Committee meetings. In phase 3, potential interventions for improving adherence were also identified and agreed upon. The results obtained show that adherence is a dynamic concept that can change throughout the course of the disease, the treatments, and other factors. Educational interventions are the most studied ones and have the highest level of confidence in the authors’ opinion. Information and education are essential to improve adherence in all patients.