Abstract Background Management delays imply worse outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and, therefore, should be minimized. We evaluated changes in diagnostic and treatment delays regarding RA in the last decades in Brazil. Methods Adults fulfilling the ACR/EULAR (2010) criteria for RA were assessed. Delays in diagnosis and treatment, and the frequencies of early management initiation within thresholds (windows of opportunity) of 3, 6, and 12 months from symptoms onset were evaluated. The Mann–Kendall trend test, chi-squared tests with Cramer’s V effect sizes and analysis of variance were conducted. Results We included 1116 patients: 89.4% female, 56.8% white, mean (SD) age 57.1 (11.5) years. A downward trend was found in diagnostic (tau = - 0.677, p < 0.001) and treatment (tau = - 0.695, p < 0.001) delays from 1990 to 2015. The frequency of early management increased throughout the period, with ascending effect sizes across the 3-, 6-, and 12-month windows (V = 0.120, 0.200 and 0.261, respectively). Despite all improvements, even in recent years (2011–2015) the diagnostic and treatment delays still remained unacceptably high [median (IQR): 8 (4–12) and 11 (5–17) months, respectively], with only 17.2% of the patients treated within the shortest, 3-month window. Conclusion The delays in diagnosis and treatment of RA decreased during the last decades in Brazil. Improvements (effect sizes) were greater at eliminating extreme delays (≥ 12 months) than in attaining really short management windows (≤ 3 months). Very early treatment was still an unrealistic goal for most patients with RA.

Abstract Background Early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) offers an opportunity for better treatment outcomes. In real-life settings, grasping this opportunity might depend on access to specialized care. We evaluated the effects of early versus late assessment by the rheumatologist on the diagnosis, treatment initiation and long-term outcomes of RA under real-life conditions. Methods Adults meeting the ACR/EULAR (2010) or ARA (1987) criteria for RA were included. Structured interviews were conducted. The specialized assessment was deemed “early” when the rheumatologist was the first or second physician consulted after symptoms onset, and “late” when performed afterwards. Delays in RA diagnosis and treatment were inquired. Disease activity (DAS28-CRP) and physical function (HAQ-DI) were evaluated. Student's t, Mann-Whitney U, chi-squared and correlation tests, and multiple linear regression were performed. For sensitivity analysis, a propensity score-matched subsample of early- vs. late-assessed participants was derived based on logistic regression. The study received ethical approval; all participants signed informed consent. Results We included 1057 participants (89.4% female, 56.5% white); mean (SD) age: 56.9 (11.5) years; disease duration: 173.1 (114.5) months. Median (IQR) delays from symptoms onset to both RA diagnosis and initial treatment coincided: 12 (6–36) months, with no significant delay between diagnosis and treatment. Most participants (64.6%) first sought a general practitioner. Notwithstanding, 80.7% had the diagnosis established only by the rheumatologist. Only a minority (28.7%) attained early RA treatment (≤ 6 months of symptoms). Diagnostic and treatment delays were strongly correlated (rho 0.816; p < 0.001). The chances of missing early treatment more than doubled when the assessment by the rheumatologist was belated (OR 2.77; 95% CI: 1.93, 3.97). After long disease duration, late-assessed participants still presented lower chances of remission/low disease activity (OR 0.74; 95% CI: 0.55, 0.99), while the early-assessed ones showed better DAS28-CRP and HAQ-DI scores (difference in means [95% CI]: −0.25 [−0.46, −0.04] and − 0.196 [−0.306, −0.087] respectively). The results in the propensity-score matched subsample confirmed those observed in the original (whole) sample. Conclusions Early diagnosis and treatment initiation in patients with RA was critically dependent on early access to the rheumatologist; late specialized assessment was associated with worse long-term clinical outcomes.

Abstract Introduction Although Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) extra-articular manifestations (ExtRA) occurrence has been decreasing over time, they are still a major mortality risk factor for patients. Objective To determine the prevalence of ExtRA in a large cohort, and its association with demographic and clinical variables. Method Cross-sectional and observational study, based on a multi-centric database from a prospective cohort, in which 11 public rheumatology centres enrolled RA patients (1987 ARA or 2010 ACR-EULAR). Data collection began in 08-2015, using a single online electronic medical record. Continuous variables were compared using Mann–Whit-ney U-test, and Fisher's exact test or chi-square test, as appropriate, were used for categorical variables. The level of significance was set at 5% (p < 0.05). Results 1115 patients were included: 89% women, age [mean ± SD] 58.2 ± 11.5 years, disease duration 14.5 ± 12.2 years, positive Rheumatoid Factor (RF, n = 1108) in 77%, positive anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (ACPA, n = 477) in 78%. Regarding ExtRA, 334 occurrences were registered in 261 patients, resulting in an overall prevalence of 23.4% in the cohort. The comparison among ExtRA and Non-ExtRA groups shows significant higher age (p < 0.001), disease duration (p < 0.001), RF high titers (p = 0.018), Clinical Disease Activity index (CDAI) (p < 0.001), Disease Activity Index 28 (DAS 28) (p < 0.001), and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) (p < 0.001) in ExtRA group. Treatment with Azathioprine (p = 0.002), Etanercept (p = 0.049) Glucocorticoids (GC) (‘p = 0.002), and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (p < 0.001) were more frequent in ExtRA group. Conclusions ExtRA manifestations still show an expressive occurrence that should not be underestimated. Our findings reinforce that long-term seropositive disease, associated with significant disability and persistent inflammatory activity are the key factors related to ExtRA development.

Abstract Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic and autoimmune systemic inflammatory disease that can cause irreversible joint deformities, with increased morbidity and mortality and a significant impact on the quality of life of the affected individual. The main objective of RA treatment is to achieve sustained clinical remission or low disease activity. However, up to 40% of patients do not respond to available treatments, including bDMARDs. New therapeutic targets for RA are emerging, such as Janus kinases (JAKs). These are essential for intracellular signaling (via JAK-STAT) in response to many cytokines involved in RA immunopathogenesis. JAK inhibitors (JAKi) have established themselves as a highly effective treatment, gaining increasing space in the therapeutic arsenal for the treatment of RA. The current recommendations aim to present a review of the main aspects related to the efficacy and safety of JAKis in RA patients, and to update the recommendations and treatment algorithm proposed by the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology in 2017.

Abstract Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, also known as antimalarial drugs, are widely used in the treatment of rheumatic diseases and have recently become the focus of attention because of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Rheumatologists have been using antimalarials to manage patients with chronic immune-mediated inflammatory rheumatic diseases for decades. It is an appropriate time to review their immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory mechanisms impact on disease activity and survival of systemic lupus erythematosus patient, including antiplatelet effect, metabolic and lipid benefits. We also discuss possible adverse effects, adding a practical and comprehensive approach to monitoring rheumatic patients during treatment with these drugs.