Early introduction of SAARDs may be more beneficial than delayed introduction for patients with recently diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis.

Background: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of antagonists to tumour necrosis factor a (TNFa) showed high response percentages in the groups treated with active drugs. Objective: To compare the efficacy of anti-TNF treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in RCTs and in daily clinical practice, with an emphasis on the efficacy for patients eligible and not eligible for RCTs of anti-TNF treatments. Methods: First, randomised placebo-controlled trials written in English for etanercept, infliximab and adalimumab for patients with RA were selected by a systematic review. Second, the DREAM (Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring) register with patients starting for the first time on one of the TNF-blocking agents was used. Patient characteristics, doses of medication and co-medication as well as the ACR20 response percentages were compared between RCTs and DREAM data, stratified for trial eligibility. Results: In 10 of 11 comparisons, the ACR20 response percentages were lower in daily clinical practice than in the RCT active drug group, which was significant in five of 11 comparisons. Only 34-79% of DREAM patients fulfilled the selection criteria for disease activity in the several RCTs examined. DREAM patients eligible for RCTs had higher response percentages than ineligible DREAM patients. ACR20 response percentages of eligible DREAM patients were comparable with the ACR20 response percentages of the RCT active drug group in 10 of 11 comparisons. Conclusion: The efficacy of TNF-blocking agents in RCTs exceeded the efficacy of these drugs in clinical practice. However, in clinical practice more patients with lower disease activity were treated with TNFblocking agents compared with those treated in RCTs. For daily practice patients who were eligible for RCTs, responses were more similar to responses reached in RCTs.

Objectives-To determine the eVects of patient education on compliance and on health in patients with active, recent onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods-A randomised, controlled, assessor blinded, one year trial. The experimental group followed an education programme. All patients started on sulphasalazine therapy. Compliance with sulphasalazine was measured by pill counting. Compliance rates with regimens of physical exercise, endurance activities, and energy conservation were measured by questionnaires. Compliance with prescriptions of joint protection was scored using a test for joint protection performance. Health was measured by a Disease Activity Score (function of erythrocyte sedimentation rate, Ritchie score, and number of swollen joints), C reactive protein, Dutch-AIMS scores, and M-HAQ scores, range of motion of shoulder, elbow, and knee joints. Parameters were scored at baseline and after three, six, and 12 months. Results-Sixty of 65 patients gave informed consent, five of them withdrew from follow up. Compliance with sulphasalazine exceeded 80% with no diVerences between groups. Compliance with physical exercise (at three months), energy conservation (at three and at 12 months), and joint protection (at three months) improved significantly more in the experimental group. The improvements of health were not diVerent in the groups. Conclusion-Compliancewith sulphasalazine among patients with active, recent onset RA is high, whether formal patient education is followed or not. Compliance with physical exercise, energy conservation, and joint protection was increased by patient education. Formal patient education did not improve health status.

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis must learn to adjust their exercise, rest and medication to the varying activity of the disease. Patient education can help patients in making the right decisions about adjustments in their treatment regimen and in attaining "self-management" behaviors. We developed a group education program based on social learning theory and the 'Arthritis Self-Management Course' developed in the USA by Lorig. Goal of the program is the strengthening of self-efficacy, outcome expectations and self-management behaviors of RA patients which may lead to better health status. The program has been evaluated in an experimental design. We established significant positive effects of the group training on functional disability, joint tenderness, practice of relaxation and physical exercises, self-management behavior, outcome expectations, self-efficacy function and knowledge. After 14 months we still found effects on practice of physical exercises, self-efficacy function and knowledge.

Objective. Clinical remission is the ultimate therapeutic goal in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Although clinical trials have proven this to be a realistic goal, the concept of targeting at remission has not yet been implemented. The objective of this study was to develop, implement, and evaluate a treat-to-target strategy aimed at achieving remission in very early RA in daily clinical practice.Methods. Five hundred thirty-four patients with a clinical diagnosis of very early RA were included in the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring remission induction cohort study. Treatment adjustments were based on the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), aiming at a DAS28 of <2.6 (methotrexate, followed by the addition of sulfasalazine, and exchange of sulfasalazine with biologic agents in case of persistent disease activity). The primary outcome was disease activity after 6 months and 12 months of followup, according to the DAS28, the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria, and the modified American College of Rheumatology (ACR) remission criteria. Secondary outcomes were time to first DAS28 remission and outcome of radiography.Results. Six-month and 12-month followup data were available for 491 and 389 patients, respectively. At 6 months, 47.0% of patients achieved DAS28 remission, 57.6% had a good EULAR response, and 32.0% satisfied the ACR remission criteria. At 12 months, 58.1% of patients achieved DAS28 remission, 67.9% had a good EULAR response, and 46.4% achieved ACR remission. The median time to first remission was 25.3 weeks (interquartile range 13.0-52.0). The majority of patients did not have clinically relevant radiographic progression after 1 year.Conclusion. The successful implementation of this treat-to-target strategy aiming at remission demonstrated that achieving remission in daily clinical practice is a realistic goal.Clinical remission has proven to be an achievable therapeutic goal in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the setting of randomized controlled trials. Ultimately, remission should be achieved in daily clinical practice as well, and, therefore, it has been proposed as the primary target of treatment in recent guidelines and recommendations for RA (1-3). Nevertheless, the concept of targeting at remission has not yet been implemented in all rheumatology units.