# Subclinical psoriatic arthritis and disease interception -where are we in 2024?

Clementina López-Medina, Dennis Mcgonagle, Laure Gossec

► To cite this version:

Clementina López-Medina, Dennis Mcgonagle, Laure Gossec. Subclinical psoriatic arthritis and disease interception -where are we in 2024?. Rheumatology, 2024, pp.keae399. 10.1093/rheumatology/keae399. hal-04679184

HAL Id: hal-04679184

https://hal.sorbonne-universite.fr/hal-04679184v1

Submitted on 27 Aug 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Subclinical psoriatic arthritis and disease interception - where are we in 2024?

Clementina LÓPEZ-MEDINA¹,²,³, Dennis McGONAGLE⁴, Laure GOSSEC³,⁵

¹ University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain

² Department of Rheumatology, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Maimonides Institute for Biomedical Research of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain.

³Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique, Sorbonne Université, INSERM, Paris, France.

⁴NIHR Leeds Biomedical Research Centre; Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

⁵Rheumatology Unit, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France.

## ORCIDs

Clementina Lopez-Medina: 0000-0002-2309-5837

Dennis McGonagle: 0000-0001-7715-8226

Laure Gossec: 0000-0002-4528-310X

## Corresponding author:

Clementina López-Medina, MD, PhD

Reina Sofía University Hospital, Rheumatology Department.

Menéndez Pidal Avenue, s/n. 14004. Cordoba, Spain

Phone: +34 616503966

Address: clementinalopezmedina@gmail.com

## Disclosures

**Clementina Lopez-Medina:** has received grants or contracts from AbbVie, Lilly, Novartis, UCB, and Janssen; consulting fees from Lilly, AbbVie, Novartis and UCB; honoraria for lectures from AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis and UCB; has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD, Novartis, Lilly and UCB.

**Dennis McGonagle:** has received grants and honoraria from AbbVie, Almiral, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB.

**Laure Gossec:** has received grants or contracts from AbbVie, Biogen, Lilly, Novartis, UCB, consulting fees from AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, honoraria for lectures from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, has received medical writing support from AbbVie, Amgen, Galapagos, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB.

**Word count:** 3160

**Figures and tables:** 3 tables, 2 figures
KEY MESSAGES:

- Several initiatives have explored the concept of pre-clinical PsA, with slight differences in definitions.

- EULAR suggested a simplified concept with three stages: 'at risk', subclinical and early PsA.

- The identification of individuals 'at risk' could enable interventions to 'prevent' the appearance of PsA.
**Abstract**

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic rheumatic disease that usually appears in patients with skin psoriasis, making it a model for detection of joint disease in the pre-clinical phases in a setting where therapy for cutaneous disease may ameliorate or prevent arthritis development. Such PsA prevention appears credible due to the increasingly recognized closely shared immunopathology between the skin and joints, especially the entheses. Recently, several initiatives have explored the concept of pre-clinical PsA, and nomenclatures have been developed with the recent EULAR nomenclature proposing a simplified three stages from psoriasis to clinical PsA development, namely at risk of PsA, subclinical PsA and early PsA. A better comprehension of early PsA and the identification of individuals predisposed to its development could enable interventions to 'prevent' the appearance of PsA.

Several recent retrospective observational studies have demonstrated disease interception feasibility, i.e., treatment of people with psoriasis may prevent the appearance of PsA, in particular using biologic disease-modifying drugs. However, further data is urgently required due to unexpected findings in some studies where TNF inhibition for psoriasis does not reduce the rate of PsA development.

In this review we address the current challenges in early PsA, including comparisons of pre-PsA nomenclature sets, its risk factors, and the potential for disease interception.
# 1. Introduction

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic rheumatic disease usually associating skin psoriasis (PsO) and arthritis [1]. The heterogeneity in the clinical picture may pose challenges for PsA diagnosis, which currently rests on classification criteria rather than diagnostic criteria. PsA usually starts in patients previously presenting with skin PsO. Indeed, over their lifetime, approximately 30% of individuals with PsO will develop PsA [2]. The incidence of PsA among individuals with PsO is relatively stable over time and is estimated between 0.27 and 2.7 per 100 person-years [3]. The incidence is highest among patients aged 30-60 and is generally equally distributed between men and women [4]. Because PsO is a major risk factor for PsA, this disease can be considered a model for detection in pre-clinical phases. The interest in preventing autoimmune disease goes back decades but what is unique about PsA prevention is the requirement for skin directed psoriasis therapy, meaning that patients who are otherwise completely healthy are not receiving biological therapy for an asymptomatic disease.

Recently, several initiatives have explored the pre-clinical phase of PsA. The interconnected inflammatory pathways between PsO and PsA, as well as the recognition of pre-clinical phases, suggest a continuum in PsA development. Understanding this pathophysiology and identifying PsO patients at risk of progressing to PsA could facilitate targeted drugs interventions aimed at intercepting the arthritis. Several studies have explored the potential of disease interception in patients with PsO by treatment with disease-modifying drugs. However, their retrospective design prevents definitive conclusions. In this review we address the current challenges in early PsA, including comparisons of pre-PsA nomenclature sets, its risk factors, and the potential for disease interception.

# 2. Early identification of PsA

Early PsA identification may be challenging for clinicians due to heterogeneous manifestations, the irregular presence or absence of elevated acute phase-reactants, the absence of autoantibodies or other robust serum biomarkers and the lack of clinical synovitis in certain cases. Early diagnosis is important in the context of the management of PsA. The
concept of a 'window of opportunity' has been well-established in rheumatoid arthritis but
has less supportive data in PsA, though current guidelines recommend treating as early as
possible [5-7]. This is based on data indicating that a delay of more than 6 months from
symptoms onset to the first visit contributes to the development of peripheral joint erosions
and poorer long-term physical function [8].

Historically, the Moll and Wright criteria (inflammatory arthritis in presence of PsO and negative test for rheumatoid factor) were used to diagnose PsA, though their performance have never been confirmed [9]. Currently, the Classification Criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis (CASPAR) are widely used, mostly in research and in clinical trials [10]. However, it should be noted that these are classification criteria that should be applied after the clinical diagnosis made by the physician. These criteria necessitate the presence of articular, axial or enthesis inflammation as entry criterion, with a minimum of three points derived from the following features: current, previous, or family history of PsO, psoriatic nail dystrophy, negative rheumatoid factor, dactylitis and radiographic evidence of juxta-articular new bone formation [10].

While the CASPAR criteria offer strengths, they also come with limitations. One advantage is their ability to classify patients as PsA in those without skin PsO, incorporating elements such as positive family history of PsO and dactylitis to enhance sensitivity [11]. Moreover, their sensitivity and specificity in established PsA allows for their application as entry criterion in clinical trials and research. However, one weakness lies in their low sensitivity for detecting early PsA, as patients with short disease duration may not exhibit all the typical features. Additionally, there is no clear definition for spine inflammation in the CASPAR criteria. This is in keeping with the current lack of consensus on the definition of axial involvement in PsA [12]. The limitations around spinal diagnosis are mitigated against by the low incidence of isolated axial PsA involvement as a presenting feature of PsA [13]. For these reasons, the CASPAR criteria are not recommended as a diagnosis or screening tool for early arthritis.

Rheumatologists recognize that many inflammatory disorders including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), connective tissue diseases (CTD) related arthritis and PsA may be accompanied by preceding arthralgia ranging from "inflammatory arthralgia" (defined as joint pain in the early
morning together with morning stiffness and with improvement during the day) to non-specific joint pain [14]. Since PsA affects up to a third of people with PsO and their initial symptoms are usually arthralgia, several screening tools and questionnaires have been developed for dermatologists, who are at the forefront of screening for PsA. However, these tools are not widely used in practice. Some examples are the Psoriatic Arthritis Screening and Evaluation (PASE) questionnaire [15], the Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (PEST) [16], the Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Screening (ToPAS) [17], the Early Arthritis for Psoriatic patients (EARP) screening questionnaire [18] and the Psoriatic Arthritis UnclutteRed Evaluation (PURE-4) [19]. A study evaluating the performance of these tools found a high prevalence of undiagnosed PsA in patients with PsO (approximately 29%) [20]. However, the performance of these questionnaires in identifying patients with non-polyarticular presentations of PsA was poor [20].

### 3. Pre-clinical PsA phase: recent advances in definitions and nomenclature

PsA usually appears in patients with skin PsO and is often preceded by a preclinical phase characterized by immunological abnormalities, arthralgia, and imaging abnormalities before receiving a formal diagnosis [21]. Three working groups have proposed various terminologies to explain the transition from PsO to a formal diagnosis of PsA (Figure 1). The first one, made by Scher et al [21], proposed five distinct phases to explain the continuum PsO-PsA. The initial stage is represented by a patient with PsO and predisposing factors for PsA, such as genetics, obesity and PsO severity. However, there is no full consensus on these risk factors, which are represented in Table 1 and discussed below [21-23]. An intermediate phase is proposed only by Scher et al. (Figure 1) and is characterized by the abnormal activation of the immune system, notably involving the IL-23-IL-17 axis and TNF production. This activation could be triggered by factors originating from cutaneous tissue, intestinal mucosa (specifically the microbiome) and/or the entheses [24]. Phase three corresponds with "subclinical PsA" characterized by clinically asymptomatic imaging changes and phase four corresponds to a prodromal phase typified by arthralgia and fatigue. The final phase five is represented by a clinical diagnosis of PsA.
Then, in 2021, many of the same authors in the Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Clinics Multicenter Advancement Network (PPACMAN) and the Preventing Arthritis in a Multicenter Psoriasis At-Risk Population (PAMPA) study group proposed updated terminology (Figure 1) [22]. The PAMPA proposal put less emphasis on genetics and immunological aberrations prior to PsA development since these are thus far poorly defined. This second iteration placed an emphasis on "synovio-entheseal complex inflammation" but did not reference or define what this specifically meant, but we assume it references the functionally integration of the synovium and enthesis that leads to entheseal inflammation manifesting as synovitis [25]. The term "synovio-entheseal inflammation" has been chosen rather than "enthesio-sinovial inflammation" since the manifestation of joint swelling or synovitis is what is readily recognized [14]. It is noteworthy that imaging evidence of inflammation is present in up to 50% of PsO patients at any given time, yet the lifetime prevalence of PsA is 30% that clearly attests to a large burden of potential inflammatory changes that will not develop PsA. Also, this group lacked a working definition for what constituted early PsA.

Recently in 2023, a EULAR task force proposed points to consider for the definition of clinical and imaging features suspicious for progression to PsA and developed a simplified nomenclature for the stages before PsA onset to be used in clinical trials aimed at PsA prevention (Figure 1)[23]. The EULAR definition recognised that patients with PsO might be at potential risk of PsA development at some point, which is pragmatic and in keeping with clinical practice where new onset PsA may present with minimal or hitherto undiagnosed psoriasis. An important distinction in the EULAR definition was that some risk factors such as psoriasis, obesity, nail disease and family history were not imminent risk factor for PsA development but represented more long-term factors for planning prevention studies [23].

According to the EULAR task force, the second phase is represented by subclinical inflammation, which was named "subclinical PsA" [23]. The subclinical PsA phase was defined as PsA with arthralgia on the basis that this is associated with a more imminent or immediate risk of PsA development with supportive data coming from the EULAR SLR and other papers [14,26]. The EULAR taskforce also stated that imaging evidence of synovial or entheseal inflammation without clinical synovitis was part of the subclinical phase [23,27]. In practice, many but not all patients with arthralgia have imaging abnormalities [14]. However, some
limited data have suggested progression to PsA subjects with imaging changes alone [28,29]. Hence EULAR used terminology that reflected this lack of certainty of the role of imaging by using the terminology that subclinical PsA represented arthralgia "and/or" imaging evidence of inflammation [14,23]. The EULAR taskforce felt that such simplification would help move the trial landscape in a positive way given that this arthralgia and imaging abnormal group would represent a best strategy for rationally designed studies including regression of arthralgia and improvement in imaging as an outcome or for the development of PsA that the EULAR taskforce also defined. Also, given that abnormal ultrasound or MRI imaging is present in many ACPA+ arthralgia patients destined to develop RA supports similar potential mechanisms for synovitis development in PsA.

The presence of definite clinical inflammation represents an established disease. However, differences in the three proposals exist: Scher et al consider clinical inflammation as the appearance of synovitis, enthesitis or dactylitis (Figure 1). The PAMPA consensus combined the third (prodromal) and fourth phase (clinical inflammation) in only one stage defined as individuals with PsO and musculoskeletal symptoms not explained by other diagnosis. However, the EULAR taskforce only considered the presence of clinical synovitis for a PsA diagnosis. This was based on the EULAR systematic literature review [26] and data from 300 PsA arthralgia patients most of whom presented with a clinical synovitis as the presenting diagnosis of PsA [14]. So, for the first time EULAR suggested that the outcome of synovitis was the most likely presentation of PsA in arthralgia subjects with synovitis encompassing the dactylitic lesion and synovitis also representing an easier pathology to more objectively identify compared to enthesitis and axial inflammation.

## 4. Identification of patients “at risk” of PsA

Several risk factors of PsA in patients with PsO have been identified, though there is no final consensus (Table 1) [21-23]. Of note, initial signs or symptoms of joint inflammation such as arthralgia or subclinical imaging changes are not included in the table, since these elements may be considered more the first elements of PsA than risk factors per se.

Experts agree that individuals with PsO who have first-degree relatives with PsA have an increased risk of developing arthritis [21-23]. This genetic predisposition may be associated
with MHC class-I alleles. Some genes have been identified, such as the HLA-B*08, HLA-B*27, HLA-B*38 or HLA-B*39 [30]. However, the EULAR task force does not include genetics as risk factor due to the incomplete understanding of the immunogenetic link to disease evolution (Table 1).

The presence of a psoriatic plaque is one of the most important clinical markers for future synovio-entheseal inflammation. Specific clinical features of PsO, such as the presence of nail disease, extent of PsO, or its location (i.e., nail, scalp, or skin folds), can help identify patients with PsO “at risk” of developing PsA [21,31]. There is a notable association between obesity and the development of PsA, with obesity serving as a recognized independent risk factor for PsA [29]. The impact of obesity on PsA appears to be dose-dependent, with body mass index (BMI) associated with an increased risk of PsA development [26], possibly due to the increment in the biomechanical stress of enthesis.

Physical trauma is a well-known potential trigger of PsA. The Koebner phenomenon can occur in patients with PsO where psoriatic plaques emerge in regions exposed to trauma or microtrauma. Notably, enthesis show microanatomical similarities with skin, including an avascular zone (fibrocartilage), making it susceptible to the Koebnerisation responses [32]. At this stage of the PsO/PsA continuum, infections and other environmental factors (such as smoking and trauma) may also serve as additional causal factors in the development of PsA, however there is currently no consensus on this point and the role of smoking is contentious as a PsA risk factor [21-23]. As stated, what differentiated with EULAR taskforce findings was the recognition that some risk factors are linked to PsA but not imminent or immediate risk whereas the presence of arthralgia may increase risk for formal PsA diagnosis.

## 5. Physiopathology of the transition from PsO to PsA

Understanding the cellular and molecular pathways involved in the transition from PsO to synovio-entheseal inflammation presents an opportunity to establish the basis for preventing PsA in patients with PsO. It assumes that cutaneous immunity and entheseal immunity in subjects with psoriasis are very closely related or strongly overlapping and there is good supporting evidence for this (Figure 2). However, given that the intestinal and skin have large resident microbiotal communities but the entheses and joints are sterile points towards
potentially disparate immune homeostasis between the enthesis and the skin. There is limited data on enthesal immunity in early PsA thus far, but data has started to emerge especially comparing immunity in the normal skin and normal enthesis.

In the pathophysiology of PsA, both the innate and adaptive immune systems play crucial roles. Like the skin, recent studies have demonstrated resident macrophages, neutrophils and Plasmacytoid dendritic cells in the normal enthesis confirming innate immune populations at both locations. Innate immune or intermediate lymphocytes including group 3 ILCs, γδ T cells and MAIT cells are present in the entheses, intestinal mucosa and skin, pointing to similar innate effector mechanisms at all these sites [33-39]. These different innate lymphocytes can be activated by interleukin 23 (IL-23) via IL-23 receptors (IL-23R) present in these cells with induction of IL-17A and Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) and other cytokines, leading to an inflammatory process that, in the case of PsA, will predominate at the enthesal level [40]. The cytokine IL-17A (as well as IL-17F) is a pleiotropic effector cytokine, promoting intestinal homeostasis, joint and skin inflammation, bone destruction and pathological bone formation (Figure 2) [40,41].

With respect to adaptive immunity, both conventional CD4 and CD8 T-cells have been described in the normal enthesis [41]. T cells, particularly CD8+ T, play a pivotal role in PsO pathogenesis supported by the strong disease associations between HLA class I alleles and the expansion of oligoclonal CD8+ T cell populations and of noted CD8+ T-cell expansion has also recently been reported in PsA [40]. These conventional T- cells have considerable potential for elaboration of IL-17. It is now appreciated that conventional T cells (i.e., CD4 and CD8 T-cells may often represent tissue resident memory (TRM in both the joints and skin [42,43]. These shared immunological findings suggest that certain therapies may be effective in the phases preceding clinical PsA and/or the earliest stages of PsO-associated inflammatory arthritis [32].

## 6. Interception of PsA

Currently, several biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) blocking specific cytokines (e.g., TNF, IL-17, IL-23) are licensed for use in either PsO or PsA (Table 2) [44]. The concept of interception refers to the prevention of clinical PsA in patients with PsO
by treating patients in the third and fourth stages of the transition PsO-PsA (i.e., those asymptomatic with imaging abnormalities or with a prodromal PsA) (Figure 1). However, in patients with PsO but without joint symptoms, imaging abnormalities are very common. Thus, using imaging techniques in all patients with PsO it is not recommended and should only be performed in PsO patients with arthralgia. There are now data indicating that treating PsO patients with targeted drugs could have the potential to intercept the development of PsA [45] (Table 3).

**6.1. Initial smaller studies**

In a study by Gisondi et al. which involved 464 patients with PsO, the annual incidence rate of PsA was found to be lower in patients treated with bDMARDs compared to patients receiving phototherapy [46], confirming a potential delay or reduction in the risk of incident PsA in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque PsO (Table 3) [46]. Similarly, Acosta-Felquer et al. found in 1719 PsO patients that the risk of developing PsA in those treated with bDMARDs was significantly lower compared to topical treatments, but not significantly different from those treated with conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) [47]. This is very interesting given that conventional DMARDs are not thought to be effective for enthesitis but probably prevent its evolution which raises novel questions about early PsA therapy. Finally, Rosenthal et al. found similar results in 1326 patients within a 10-year follow-up period [48].

**6.2. Recent larger studies**

Singla et al. analysed 15,501 patients with PsO from a national sample in USA, derived from the electronic health records of the TriNetX database (Cambridge, MA, USA) [49]. Among these patients, 976 (6.3%) developed inflammatory arthritis over a mean follow-up of 2.4 years. In multivariable regression analyses, the risk of developing inflammatory arthritis was significantly lower in patients prescribed bDMARDs not targeting TNF, specifically IL-12/23 inhibitors or IL-23 compared to those prescribed TNF inhibitors. Thus, treatment with IL-12/23 inhibitors or IL-23 inhibitors was associated with a reduced risk of progression to inflammatory arthritis compared with TNF inhibitors and IL-17 inhibitors. However, we must consider that these drugs are also effective in treating PsA. Thus, patients may have developed PsA, but they don't show symptoms because the arthritis is also being treated. Future studies to evaluate
whether the PsA appears after the withdrawing these drugs would be useful to confirm this
hypothesis. A recent abstract suggested a difference among the modes of action. Lebwohl et
al analysed 7144 biologic-naïve PsO patients and found that patients treated with IL-23
inhibitors were significantly less likely to develop PsA in comparison with patients treated with
IL17, IL12/23 or TNF inhibitors [50]. This work is not yet published as full text. In contrast,
Meer et al. analysed 193,709 patients with PsO from a US claims registry and found an
increased incidence of PsA among users of biologics compared to those initiating oral
DMARDs/phototherapy [51]. These findings are contradictory compared to the conclusions
from previous studies which raises some questions (Table 3).

Of note, all of these results are from claims databases or retrospective studies. There is a need
for caution when interpreting outcomes from retrospective studies, since several confounders
and sources of bias should be taken in consideration, such as confounding by indication and
the protopathic bias (when a drug is prescribed for an early manifestation of the disease that
has not yet been diagnostically confirmed) [52]. Ongoing randomised placebo-controlled,
interventional, preventive trials will provide stronger evidence on the role of bDMARDs in
preventing clinical musculoskeletal inflammation [53].

**7. Conclusion**

The current focus of many international efforts is on pre-PsA, in the context of some promising findings is PsA disease interception. Recent definitions of “pre-PsA” aim to facilitate research focused on the various stages preceding clinical PsA and its interception. We believe that the EULAR strategy with a subclinical PsA phase, the middle of three stages, offers a robust method for studies looking into PsA prevention. The next years will show if a homogenised use of nomenclature facilitates comparisons. In terms of intercepting PsA and where the knowledge is at, two large recent analyses evidenced conflicting results whereas smaller studies were mostly positive. More knowledge on whether PsA can be intercepted by targeting specific pathways involved in the pathogenesis of the disease is needed.

**Data availability:** There are now new data associated with this article.

**Funding:** No specific funding was received from anybody in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors to carry out the work described in this article.
**Disclosure statement:** CLM has received grants or contracts from AbbVie, Lilly, Novartis, UCB, and Janssen; consulting fees from Lilly, AbbVie, Novartis and UCB; honoraria for lectures from AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis and UCB; has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD, Novartis and UCB. DMG has received grants and honoraria from AbbVie, Almiral, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB. LG has received grants or contracts from AbbVie, Biogen, Lilly, Novartis, UCB, consulting fees from AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, honoraria for lectures from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, has received medical writing support from AbbVie, Amgen, Galapagos, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB.

REFERENCES

1. Ritchlin CT, Colbert RA, Gladman DD. Psoriatic Arthritis. N Engl J Med 2017;376;(10):957-970

2. FitzGerald O, Ogdie A, Chandran V, et al. Psoriatic arthritis. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2021;7(1):59

3. Alinaghi F, Calov M, Kristensen LE, et al. Prevalence of psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational and clinical studies. J Am Acad Dearmatol 2019;80(1):251-265

4. Ogdie A, Langan S, Love T, et al. Prevalence and treatment patterns of psoriatic arthritis in the UK. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2013;52(3):568-75

5. Smolen JS, Schöls M, Braun J, et al. Treating axial spondyloarthritis and peripheral spondyloarthritis, specially psoriatic arthritis, to target: 2017 update of recommendations by an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77(1):3-17

6. Coates LC, Soriano ER, Corp N, et al. Group of Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA): updated treatment recommendations for psoriatic arthritis 2021. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2022;18(8):465-479.

7. Gossec L, Baraliakos X, Kerschbaumer A, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2019 update. Ann Rheum Dis 2020;79(6):700-712

8. Haroon M, Gallagher P, Fitzgerald O. Diagnostic delay of more than 6 months contributes to poor radiographic and functional outcome in psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74(6):1045-50

9. Moll JM, Wright V. Psoriatic arthritis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 1973;3(1):55-78

10. Taylor W, Gladman D, Helliwell P, et al. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54(8):2665-2673

11. Coates LC, Conaghan PG, Emery P, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of the classification of psoriatic arthritis criteria in early psoriatic arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64(10):3150-3155

12. Torgutalp M, Gladman DD, FitzGerald O, et al. Project highlights from the GRAPPA 2022 Annual Meeting: education initiatives and axial involvement in psoriatic arthritis. J Rheumatol 2023;50(Suppl 2):33-35

13. Kwok TSH, Sutton M, Pereira D, et al. Isolated axial disease in psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis with psoriasis. Ann Rheum Dis 2022;81(12):1678-1684

14. Zabotti A, Fagni F, Gossec L, et al. Risk of developing psoriatic arthritis in psoriasis cohorts with arthralgia: exploring the subclinical psoriatic arthritis stage. RMD Open 2024;10(2):e004314
15. Dominguez PL, Husni ME, Holt EW, et al. Validity, reliability, and sensitivity-to-change properties of the psoriatic arthritis screening and evaluation questionnaire. Arch Dermatol Res 2009;301(8):573-9.

16. Helliwell PS. Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (PEST): a report from the GRAPPA 2009 annual meeting. J Rheumatol 2011;38(3):551-2

17. Gladman DD, Schentag CT, Tom BD, et al. Development and initial validation of a screening questionnaire for psoriatic arthritis: the Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Screen (ToPAS). Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:497-501.

18. Tinazzi I, Adami S, Zanolin EM, et al. The early psoriatic arthritis screening questionnaire: a simple and fast method for the identification of arthritis in patients with psoriasis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2012;51(11):2058-63

19. Audureau E, Roux F, Lons Danic D, et al. Psoriatic Arthritis screening by the dermatologist: development and first validation of the "PURE-4 scale". J Eur Academícela Dermatologías Venereol 2018;32(11):1950-1953

20. Haroon M, Kirby B, FitzGerald. High prevalence of psoriatic arthritis in patients with severe psoriasis with suboptimal performance of screening questionnaires. Ann Rheum Dis 2013;72(5):736-740

21. Scher JU, Oldie A, Merola JF, et al. Preventing psoriatic arthritis: focusing on patients with psoriasis at increased risk of transition. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2019;15(3):153-166

22. Perez-Chada LM, Haberman RH, Chandran V, et al. Consensus terminology for preclinical phases of psoriatic arthritis for use in research studies: results from a Delphi consensus study. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2021;17(4):238-243

23. Zabotti A, De Marco G, Gossec L, et al. EULAR points to consider for the definition of clinical and imaging features suspicious for progression from psoriasis to psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2023;82:1162-1170

24. Schett G, Rahman P, Ritchlin C, et al. Psoriatic arthritis from a mechanistic perspective. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2022;18(6):311-325

25. McGonagle D, Lories RJU, Tan AL, et al. The concept of a "synovio-entheseal complex" and its implications for understanding joint inflammation and damage in psoriatic arthritis and beyond. Arthritis Rheum 2007;56(8):2482-91

26. Zabotti A, De Lucia O, Sakellariou G, et al. Predictors, risk factors, and incidence rates of Psoriatic arthritis development in psoriasis patients: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Rheumatol Ther 2021;8(4):1519-1534

27. Gisondi P, Tinazzi I, El-Dalati G, et al. Lower limb enthesopathy in patients with psoriasis without clinical signs of arthropathy: a hospital-based case-control study. Ann Rheum Dis 2008;67(1):26-30

28. Elnady B, El Shaarawy NK, Dawound NM, et al. Subclinical synovitis and enthesitis in psoriasis patients and controls by ultrasonography in Saudi Arabia; incidence of Psoriatic arthritis during to years. Clin Rheumatol 2019;38:1627-35

29. Simon D, Vascular K, Kleyer A, et al. Association of structural entheseal lesions with an increased risk of progression from psoriasis to psoriatic arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol 2022;74:253-62

30. FitzGerald O, Haroon M, Giles JT, et al. Concepts of pathogenesis in psoriatic arthritis: genotype determines clinical phenotype. Arthritis Res Ther 2015;7:17(1):115

31. Eder L, Haddad A, Rosen CF, et al. The incidence and risk factors for psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis: a prospective cohort study. Arthritis Rheumatol 2016;68(4):915-923.
32. McGonagle DG, Zabotti A, Watad A, et al. Intercepting psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis: buy one get one free? Ann Rheum Dis 2022;81(1):7-10

33. Cuthbert RJ, Fragkakis EM, Dunsmuir R, et al. Brief Report: group 3 innate lymphoid cells in human entesitis. Arthritis Rheumatol 2017;69(9):1816-1822

34. Reindhart A, Yevsa T, Worbs T, et al. Interleukin-23-dependent gamma/delta T cells produce interleukin-17 and accumulate in the enthesis, aortic valve, and ciliary body in mice. Arthritis Rheumatol 2016;68(10):2476-86

35. Cuthbert RJ, Watad A, Fragkakis EM, et al. Evidence that tissue resident human enthesis γδT-cells can produce IL-17A independently of IL-23R transcript expression. Ann Rheum Dis 2019;78(11):1559-1565

36. Rosine N, Rowe H, Koturan S, et al. Characterization of blood mucosal-associated invariant T cells in patients with axial spondyloarthritis and of resident mucosal-associated invariant T cells from the axial entheses of non-axial spondyloarthritis control patients. Arthritis Rheumatol 2022;74(11):1786-1795

37. Bridgewood C, Watad A, Russell T, et al. Identification of myeloid cells in the human enthesis as the main source of local IL-23 production. Ann Rheum Dis 2019;78(7):929-933

38. Stavre Z, Bridgewood C, Zhou Q, et al. A role for neutrophils in early enthesitis in spondyloarthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 2022;24(1):24

39. Zhou Q, Vadakekolathu J, Watad A, et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces psoriatic arthritis flares and enthesitis resident plasmocytoid dendritic cell type-1 interferon inhibition by JAK antagonism offer novel spondyloarthritis pathogenesis insights. Front Immunol 2021;12:635018

40. Bridgewood C, Sharif K, Sherlock, et al. Interleukin-23 pathway at the enthesis: the emerging story of enthesitis in spondyloarthropathy. Immunol Rev 2020;294(1):27-47

41. Taams LS, Steel KJA, Srenathan U, et al. IL-17 in the immunopathogenesis of spondyloarthritis. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2018;14(8):453-466

42. Watad A, Rowe H, Russell T, et al. Normal human enthesis harbours conventional CD4+ and CD8+ T cells with regulatory features and inducible IL-17A and TNF expression. Ann Rheum Dis 2020;79(8):1044-1054

43. Dong C, Lin L, Du J. Characteristics and sources of tissue-resident memory T cells in psoriasis relapse. Curr Res Immunol 2023 Sep 6:4:100067

44. Gossec L, Kerschbaumer A, Ferreira RJO, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2023 update. Ann Rheum Dis 2024 Mar 18:ard-2024-225531

45. Wendling D. Is psoriatic arthritis doomed to disappear? Joint Bone Spine 2023;90(2):105477

46. Gisondi P, Bellinato F, Targher G, et al. Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs may mitigate the risk of psoriatic arthritis in patients with chronic plaque psoriasis. Ann Rheum Dis 2022;81:68-73

47. Acosta-Felquer ML, LoGiudice L, Galimberti ML, et al. Treating the skin with biologics in patients with psoriasis decreases the incidence of psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2022;81:74-79

48. Rosenthal YS, Schwartz N, Sagy I, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2022;47(2):237-243

49. Singla S, Putman M, Liew J, et al. Association between biological immunotherapy for psoriasis and time to incident inflammatory arthritis: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Rheumatol 2023;5(4):e200-e207
50. Lebwohl M, Soliman AM, Li C, et al. Risk of developing inflammatory arthritis in psoriasis patients initiating treatment with biologics: a population based analysis. Abstract 3289. 2023 European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Congress (EADV 2023).

51. Meer E, Merola JF, Fitzsimmons R, et al. Does biologic therapy impact the development of PsA among patients with psoriasis? Ann Rheum Dis 2022;81(1):80-86

52. Bergstra SA, Sepriano A, Ramiro S, et al. Three handy tips and practical guide to improve your propensity score models. RMD Open 2019;5(1):e000953

53. Haberman RH, MacFarlane KA, Catron S, et al. Efficacy of guselkumab, a selective IL-23 inhibitor, in preventing arthritis in a multicentre psoriasis at-risk cohort (PAMPA): protocol of a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled multicentre trial. BMJ Open 2022;12(12):e063650

<table><caption>Table 1. Risk factors for PsA development according to different expert groups</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Scher et al.<br>(2019)<sup>21</sup></th><th>PAMPA terminology<br>(2021)<sup>22</sup></th><th>EULAR consensus<br>(2023)<sup>23</sup></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th>Genetic factors</th><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><th>Family history</th><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><th>Obesity</th><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><th>Mechanical stress</th><td>Yes</td><td>No</td><td>Considered</td></tr><tr><th>Infections</th><td>Yes</td><td>No</td><td>Considered</td></tr><tr><th>Nail involvement</th><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><th>Psoriasis severity</th><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr></tbody></table>

Yes: recognised link; No: no recognised link; Considered: proposed as risk factor but not included in the main definition.

<table><caption>Table 2. Drugs approved and licenced for use either in PsO or PsA in 2024<sup>44</sup>.</caption><thead><tr><th>Inhibition</th><th>Drug</th><th>Approved in PsO</th><th>Approved in PsA</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="5">TNF</td><td>Infliximab</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Adalimumab</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Golimumab</td><td>No</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Certolizumab</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Etanercept</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">IL-17A</td><td>Secukinumab</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Ixekizumab</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Brodalumab</td><td>Yes</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>IL-17A/F</td><td>Bimekizumab</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>CTLA-4</td><td>Abatacept</td><td>No</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>IL-12/23</td><td>Ustekinumab</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">IL-23</td><td>Guselkumab</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Risankizumab</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>Tildrakizumab</td><td>Yes</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>PDE4</td><td>Apremilast</td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">JAK</td><td>Tofacitinib</td><td>No</td><td>Yes</td></tr><tr><td>Upadacitinib</td><td>No</td><td>Yes</td></tr></table>

CTLA-4: Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4; JAK: Janus Kinases; IL: interleukin; PDE4: Phosphodiesterase 4.

No: drug not currently approved/licensed; Yes: drug currently approved/licensed.

<table><caption>Table 3. Interception of PsA: studies ordered by increasing number of patients.</caption><thead><tr><td>Study</td><td>Drug used and comparator</td><td>N patients in treatment and comparator arms</td><td>Incidence of PsA per 100 patient-years in the treatment group</td><td>Incidence of PsA per 100 patient-years in the comparator group</td><td>Risk of PsA in treatment vs. comparator</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Gisondi P, et al. 2022<sup>46</sup></td><td>bDMARDs vs. phototherapy</td><td>234 vs. 230</td><td>1.20 (95%CI 0.77-1.89)</td><td>2.17 (95%CI 1.53-3.06)</td><td>HR 0.53 (95%CI 0.30-0.94)</td></tr><tr><td>Acosta-Felquer ML, et al. 2022<sup>47</sup></td><td>bDMARDs vs. csDMARDs vs. topics</td><td>103 vs. 229 vs. 1719</td><td>0.43 (0.11-1.70)</td><td>csDMARDs: 1.20 (0.56-2.80)<br/>Topics: 1.67 (1.50-1.90)</td><td>bDMARDs vs. csDMARDs: IRR 0.35 (95%CI 0.04-1.96)<br/>bDMARDs vs. topics: IRR 0.26 (95%CI 0.03-0.94)</td></tr><tr><td>Rosenthal YS, et al. 2022<sup>48</sup></td><td>bDMARDs vs. no bDMARDs</td><td>663 vs. 663</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>HR 0.72 (95%CI 0.53-0.97)</td></tr><tr><td>Singla S, et al. 2023<sup>49</sup></td><td>TNFi vs. IL12/23i vs. IL23i vs IL17i</td><td>10037 vs. 2914 vs. 1149 vs. 1401</td><td>TNFi: 3.83</td><td>IL12/23i: 2.21<br/>IL23i: 2.16<br/>IL17i: 3.20</td><td>IL12/23i vs. TNFi: HR 0.58 (95%CI 0.43-0.76)<br/>IL23i vs. TNFi: HR 0.41 (95%CI 0.17-0.95)<br/>IL17i vs. TNFi: HR 0.86 (95%CI 0.54-1.38)</td></tr><tr><td>Lebwohl M, et al. 2023<sup>50</sup></td><td>IL23i vs. IL17i vs. IL12/23i vs. TNFi</td><td>2330 vs. 819 vs. 1100 vs. 2895</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>IL23i vs. IL17: HR 0.51 (95%CI 0.29-0.87)<br/>IL23i vs. IL12/23: HR 0.55 (95%CI 0.32-0.92)<br/>IL23i vs. TNFi: HR 0.44 (0.29-0.67)</td></tr><tr><td>Meer E, et al. 2022<sup>51</sup></td><td>Biologic therapy vs. oral systemic therapy or phototherapy</td><td>14569 vs. 20321</td><td>7.73</td><td>Oral systemic: 6.20<br/>Phototherapy: 2.61</td><td>Biologic therapy vs. oral systemic therapy or phototherapy: HR 4.48 (95%CI 4.23-4.75)</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote>Footnote - 95%CI: 95% confidence interval, HR: hazard ratio, IRR: incidence risk ratio. A HR below 1 indicates a 'protective' effect of the drug on the incidence of PsA</footnote>
**Figure 1. Phases proposed to explain the transition from PsO to PsA<sup>21,22,23</sup>.**

PsA: Psoriatic Arthritis; PsO: Psoriasis

**Figure 2. Emerging basis for PsA prevention based on therapy of psoriasis.**

IL: Interleukin; ILC: Innate lymphoid cells; MAIT: Mucosal-associated invariant T cell; PDE4: Phosphodiesterase-4; PsA: Psoriatic Arthritis; TNF: Tumour Necrosis Factor; TRM: Tissue-Resident Memory T cell.