Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026

Insights Into Late-Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis (LORA): Characteristics (Clinical and Imaging), Comorbidities, and Therapeutic Targets.

Название и аннотация: Перевод в очереди

Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление

Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Salaffi F, Carotti M, Farah S, Bandinelli F, Ceccarelli L, Di Matteo A, Di Carlo M

Аннотация

Late-onset rheumatoid arthritis (LORA) is defined as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) manifesting after the age of 65 years, although the terminology remains somewhat ambiguous. With the advent of a super-aging society and extended life expectancies, a significant increase in the incidence of LORA is anticipated. In comparison to young-onset RA (YORA), LORA is predominantly characterized by a higher incidence of acute onset, augmented disease activity and constitutional symptoms, a propensity for systemic manifestations, increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate at disease onset, reduced seropositivity, a predilection for involvement of large and proximal joints with symptoms resembling polymyalgia rheumatica, a higher frequency of erosive disease, and a more evenly distributed gender ratio. Elderly individuals, particularly those with multimorbidity and on multiple medications (polypharmacy), are at an elevated risk of developing geriatric syndromes, including sarcopenia and frailty. The response to TNF inhibitors in elderly individuals with RA is generally comparable to that in younger patients, though it may be slightly diminished. The duration of the disease appears to have a more pronounced impact on outcomes than the patient's age. For the management of LORA, it is critical to adopt a patient-specific approach. Non-frail LORA patients who are otherwise aging healthily should receive aggressive treat-to-target management. Conversely, in pre-frail and frail patients, the therapeutic focus should be on averting the progression of irreversible geriatric conditions. The confluence of multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and geriatric syndromes in this patient population necessitates a tailored therapeutic approach to maintain patient autonomy and functional status.

Перевод полного текста: Перевод в очереди

Читать найденный полный текст

This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Introduction

Italy has the second‐highest proportion of elderly individuals in Europe, following Germany. In 2013, over 12 million Italians (about 21% of the population) were aged 65 or older. By early 2018, the average age in Italy surpassed 45 years. This aging trend, seen across Europe, correlates with a rise in chronic age‐related conditions, such as musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) [ 1 , 2 ]. After adjusting for gender, approximately 13 million Italians—25% of adults—have experienced or are living with MSDs [ 2 ].

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a chronic autoimmune disease, involves persistent joint inflammation, bone erosion, and impaired joint function, severely affecting physical abilities and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]. Among inflammatory rheumatic diseases, RA is linked to the highest disability burden [ 7 , 8 ] (Figure 1 ).

FIGURE 1 Rheumatoid arthritis. Illustrative case highlighting the burden and disability that rheumatoid arthritis, although of young‐onset, can cause in older adults. This case in… — FIGURE 1 Rheumatoid arthritis. Illustrative case highlighting the burden and disability that rheumatoid arthritis, although of young‐onset, can cause in older adults. This case involves a 70‐year‐old man with a disease duration of over 30 years. The patient exhibits high titers of rheumatoid factor and anti‐cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies, and the disease has been persistently perceived as difficult‐to‐treat and multi‐refractory. (A) Clinical image of the hands and wrists shows marked swelling of the wrists and metacarpophalangeal joints. (B) Radiograph of the hands and wrists reveals advanced and destructive joint damage, including wrist arthritis (carpitis), erosions, and subluxations.

Although RA can develop at any age, its incidence rises significantly after 60 and plateaus after 80 [ 9 , 10 ]. RA onset after age 65 is termed late‐onset RA (LORA), while onset at younger ages is referred to as young‐onset RA (YORA). Although other definitions may also be used, among which the most common is elderly onset, LORA represents the terminology most widely accepted by scientific societies [ 11 ]. The application of a 65‐year cut‐off as the age of onset distinguishing LORA is itself arbitrary. In this regard, there is ongoing debate, with proposals advocating for a younger age threshold (e.g., from 60 years onward) or for definitions based on specific clinical characteristics [ 11 , 12 , 13 ]. However, about 30% of RA cases occur in people over 60, with increasing prevalence into the eighth decade [ 12 ]. This is due to both longer life expectancy and rising RA incidence in older adults. A large Japanese study found the peak age of RA onset shifted from 50–59 to 60–69 over the past decade [ 14 ].

RA patients are seven times more likely to experience disability than age‐ and gender‐matched peers [ 15 ]. Treating RA in the elderly is challenging due to added risks from age‐related conditions like depression, frailty, cognitive decline, falls, malnutrition, and overall weakness [ 16 , 17 ].

This narrative review outlines the main pathogenetic, clinical, and therapeutic aspects of LORA, along with its common comorbidities.

Inflammaging and Rheumatoid Arthritis

In 2000, Franceschi et al. introduced the term inflammaging—a chronic, sterile, low‐grade inflammatory state linked to aging and increased risk of age‐related diseases [ 18 ]. It results from impaired clearance of cellular debris and self‐molecules, triggering autoimmune responses. This highlights inflammation as a key factor in aging and its related conditions [ 19 , 20 ].

Aging alters both innate and adaptive immunity. The innate system becomes overactive, fueling chronic inflammation and comorbidities [ 21 , 22 ], while the adaptive system deteriorates, reducing immune tolerance and increasing autoimmune disease risk [ 23 , 24 , 25 ]. Age‐related immune changes include T‐cell alterations, weakened responses, apoptosis defects, cytokine imbalance, and diminished antigen presentation—leading to lower protective responses and increased autoimmunity [ 26 ].

Self‐tolerance also declines with age. Thymic involution reduces T‐cell proliferation, cytokine production, and post‐vaccination antibody synthesis. In LORA, elevated interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) levels correlate with dehydroepiandrosterone and androstenedione production, contributing to its acute onset [ 27 ]. Punzi et al. found higher IL‐6 in LORA synovial fluid than in YORA, though IL‐1 and IL‐8 levels were similar [ 28 ].

Immunopathological differences exist between YORA and LORA. Gamerith et al. reported a higher prevalence of rheumatoid factor (RF) in YORA, due to a greater ratio of antigen‐bound to free anti‐IgG‐Fab antibodies (aFab), suggesting age‐specific immune mechanisms in RA development [ 29 ].

Clinical Features of LORA

Recent studies report greater disease activity and severity in LORA compared to YORA, with worse clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes [ 30 ]. LORA more often involves both large and small joints at onset, with higher disease activity scores, elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C‐reactive protein (CRP), and more frequent bone erosions in early stages [ 31 ] (Table 1 ).

TABLE 1
Comparison of main characteristics of late‐onset rheumatoid arthritis (LORA) and young‐onset rheumatoid arthritis (YORA).
Abbreviations: ACPA, anti‐citrullinated protein antibodies; CDAI, clinical disease activity index; CRP, C‐reactive protein; DAS28, 28‐joint disease activity score; ESR, erythrocyte sedimentation rate; LORA, late‐onset rheumatoid arthritis; PMR, polymyalgia rheumatica; RS3PE, remitting seronegative synovitis with pitting edema; SDAI, simplified disease activity index; YORA, young‐onset rheumatoid arthritis.

Characteristics	LORA	YORA
Onset age	After 65 years	30–50
Prevalence	2%	0.5%–1%
Female/male ratio (gender ratio)	2/1	3/1
Disease onset	Acute and infectious‐like	Gradual
Number of joints involved	Polyarticular (may be oligoarticular)	Polyarticular
Characteristics of joint involvement	Large/proximal joint	Small joints of the hands and feet
PMR symptoms	More frequent	Less frequent
Systemic manifestations (fatigue, weight loss)	More prominent	Less prominent
Rheumatoid factor positivity	Lower incidence	Higher incidence
ACPA positivity	Lower incidence	Higher incidence
Bone erosions	More frequent	Frequent
Elevated ESR/CRP	More frequent	Frequent
Higher DAS28, CDAI, SDAI	More frequent	Frequent
Clinical patterns	Classical RA, PMR like, RS3PE like	Classical RA
Comorbidity/polyfarmacy/frailty	More frequent	Less frequent
Prognosis and outcome	Worse	Good or worse

LORA is generally associated with lower serum levels of anti‐citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA). A study that stratified patients with RA by age groups demonstrated a significant reduction in both RF and ACPA titers with increasing age at diagnosis, concluding that age itself is a predictor of seronegativity in female, normal‐weight, and non‐smoking individuals [ 32 ].

Despite the lower prevalence of ACPA, some studies identify a higher degree of erosions in patients with LORA. Sugihara et al. identified predictors of radiographic progression at 1 year in LORA, including ACPA positivity, baseline DAS28‐ESR, baseline erosion score, lack of EULAR response at 12 weeks, and failure to reach low disease activity (LDA) at 24 weeks [ 33 ].

Over 25% of ACPA‐positive LORA patients developed bone erosions despite achieving remission by clinical disease activity index (CDAI) or simplified disease activity index (SDAI) at 1 or 2 years—compared to under 10% in YORA—suggesting these remission criteria may not fully prevent erosions in ACPA‐positive LORA [ 32 ].

Greater joint damage and functional decline in LORA may partly stem from age‐related comorbidities, which are more common in LORA than in YORA. These include lung disease, osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease, cancer, body composition changes, and neuropsychiatric disorders [ 34 , 35 , 36 ]. The interplay between RA and immune senescence likely exacerbates these outcomes.

Differential Diagnosis for LORA

Given the prevalence of both inflammatory and noninflammatory rheumatic diseases in older adults, a thorough differential diagnosis is essential for LORA [ 37 ] (Table 2 ). Inflammatory arthritis may signal other systemic conditions. Symptoms like sicca syndrome, skin changes, sclerodactyly, parotid swelling, Raynaud's phenomenon, or myopathy should prompt evaluation for diseases such as systemic sclerosis, dermatomyositis, or Sjögren's syndrome. Assessment should include a full physical exam and relevant lab tests.

TABLE 2
Conditions in differential diagnosis with late‐onset rheumatoid arthritis (LORA).
Abbreviations: CPPD, calcium pyrophosphate dehydrate crystal deposition disease; RS3PE, remitting seronegative synovitis with pitting edema.

Hand osteoarthritis

Polymyalgia rheumatica

RS3PE syndrome

Crystal arthritides (gout, CPPD)

Spondyloarthropaties

Connective tissue diseases

Systemic vasculitides

Hypertrophic osteoarthropathy

Sarcoidosis

Infectious arthritis (viral and bacterial infections)

Paraneoplastic syndromes

Multiple myeloma

In older patients, RA symptoms may indicate a paraneoplastic syndrome [ 38 ]. Cancer‐related arthritis often mimics RA but can resolve after tumor treatment. Multicentric reticulohistiocytosis resembles RA with severe arthritis and distinctive facial and periungual papules; it has strong ties to malignancy. Palmar fasciitis, linked to ovarian and breast cancers, causes rapid flexion contractures and painful hand swelling. MRI shows fascial and tendon thickening, especially in muscles like the flexor carpi ulnaris (Figure 2 ). Amyloid arthropathy, a possible sign of multiple myeloma, may present as RA‐like arthritis, carpal tunnel syndrome, or shoulder enlargement.

FIGURE 2 Paraneoplastic syndrome. Palmar fasciitis with polyarthritis (PFPA) associated with ovarian cancer. A 68‐year‐old woman with a 4‐month history of spontaneous left‐hand di… — FIGURE 2 Paraneoplastic syndrome. Palmar fasciitis with polyarthritis (PFPA) associated with ovarian cancer. A 68‐year‐old woman with a 4‐month history of spontaneous left‐hand digital contractures. (A) Clinical image showing the palmar surfaces was hard and wooden feeling with deepening of the palmar crease causing a “groove sign.” (B) Axial T1‐weighted images of the hand of the patient showed an ill‐defined area of low signal intensity within the subcutaneous tissues of the palmar aspect of the hand consistent with diffuse fibromatosis.

Gout, common in the elderly, can mimic RA when chronic, with erosive deformities and persistent synovitis. Unlike RA's marginal erosions and osteopenia, gout shows distant, sclerotic erosions [ 39 , 40 ]. Calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate (CPPD) crystal deposition disease, increasingly common with age, causes inflammatory arthritis, especially in knees, shoulders, and wrists [ 41 , 42 ] (Figure 3 ). Diagnosis relies on crystal identification via tissue, imaging, or synovial fluid analysis.

FIGURE 3 Calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate (CPPD) crystal deposition disease. An 85‐year‐old woman with recent onset of polyarthritis and episodes of inflammatory cervical pain. (A,… — FIGURE 3 Calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate (CPPD) crystal deposition disease. An 85‐year‐old woman with recent onset of polyarthritis and episodes of inflammatory cervical pain. (A, B) Radiographic images of the wrists reveal the presence of calcification of the triangular fibrocartilage complex. (C, D) Radiographic images of the knees show meniscal chondrocalcinosis. (E, F) Computed tomography multiplanar reconstructions images obtained in the coronal (E) and sagittal (F) planes demonstrate calcific deposits in the ligaments surrounding the odontoid process of the axis, consistent with crowned dens syndrome.

LORA may have distinct pathophysiology from YORA, showing greater overlap with polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) and remitting seronegative symmetrical synovitis with pitting edema (RS3PE) syndrome (Table 3 ). PMR and LORA can both involve shoulder inflammation. PMR presents with shoulder/pelvic girdle pain and stiffness, lacks ACPA, rheumatoid nodules, and small joint involvement [ 43 , 44 ], and affects extracapsular structures such as bursae and tendons [ 45 , 46 ] (Figure 4 ). LORA typically involves large joints and is ACPA‐positive. Imaging evidence of synovitis supports LORA; bursitis or peritendinitis favors PMR. RS3PE, affecting those over 60, features acute symmetrical synovitis, hand/ft edema, negative RF and ACPA, no erosions, and strong steroid response with potential spontaneous remission [ 47 , 48 , 49 ] (Figure 5 ).

TABLE 3
Different clinical and laboratory features of late‐onset rheumatoid arthritis (LORA), polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR), and remitting seronegative synovitis with pitting edema (RS3PE).
Note: −, absent; +, occasional; ++, frequent; +++, very frequent. Abbreviations: LORA, late‐onset rheumatoid arthritis; PMR, polymyalgia rheumatica; RS3PE, remitting seronegative synovitis with pitting edema.

Characteristics	LORA	PMR	RS3PE
Involvement of the shoulder and pelvic girdles	+	+++	−
Peripheral joint symptoms	+++	+	+++
Tenosynovitis/peritendinitis	++	+/−	+++
Pitting edema on the back of the hands	+	+	+++
Rheumatoid factor presence	+/−	−	−
Anti‐citrullinated protein antibodies presence	+/−	−	−
High erythrocyte sedimentation rate/C‐reactive protein	+	+++	+

FIGURE 4 Polymyalgia rheumatica. An 80‐year‐old man with recent onset of inflammatory pain involving the shoulder and pelvic girdles, accompanied by a biological inflammatory synd… — FIGURE 4 Polymyalgia rheumatica. An 80‐year‐old man with recent onset of inflammatory pain involving the shoulder and pelvic girdles, accompanied by a biological inflammatory syndrome. Transverse ultrasound (US) (A, right and B, left) and axial T2‐weighted gradient echo magnetic resonance images (MRI) (C, right and D, left) sequences of shoulders showing a representative example of bilateral long head of the biceps tenosynovitis. Notably, the widening of both tendon sheaths is due to anechoic (US) or hyperintense (MRI) signals, indicating an abnormal accumulation of synovial fluid. Asterisk indicates tendon of long head of the biceps.

FIGURE 5 Remitting seronegative symmetrical synovitis with pitting edema (RS3PE) syndrome. An 85‐year‐old woman with recent onset of inflammatory pain associated with swelling of … — FIGURE 5 Remitting seronegative symmetrical synovitis with pitting edema (RS3PE) syndrome. An 85‐year‐old woman with recent onset of inflammatory pain associated with swelling of the hands and feet. (A) Clinical image showing the presence of bilateral pitting edema on the dorsum of the hands. (B) Ultrasound image (linear probe, 6–18 MHz) at the level of the third metacarpophalangeal joint of the right hand, demonstrating subcutaneous soft tissue swelling in the absence of clear signs of joint inflammation. m, metacarpal bone; p, base of the proximal phalanx.

Hand osteoarthritis (HOA) usually causes mild symptoms (Figure 6 ), but its erosive form—characterized by central erosions and inflammation—can mimic RA [ 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 ]. Erosive HOA affects 2.8% of those over 55 and 10.2% of patients with symptomatic HOA, surpassing RA prevalence in this group [ 54 , 55 ].

FIGURE 6 Hand osteoarthritis. A 79‐year‐old man presenting with predominantly mechanical pain and ‘hard’ swelling of the second and third metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints of the r… — FIGURE 6 Hand osteoarthritis. A 79‐year‐old man presenting with predominantly mechanical pain and ‘hard’ swelling of the second and third metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints of the right hand. The clinical picture, initially interpreted as seronegative rheumatoid arthritis, was refractory to multiple lines of treatment with both conventional synthetic and biologic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs. Subsequent re‐evaluation—including radiographic, clinical (noting the patient's occupational history as a plumber), and laboratory assessments—allowed for the exclusion of rheumatoid arthritis, supporting a diagnosis of hand osteoarthritis. (A) Clinical image showing swelling of the second and third right MCP joints. (B) Radiographic detail of the right metacarpal region demonstrating osteoarthritic changes (marked joint space narrowing, particularly at the third MCP joint, osteophyte formation, and subchondral sclerosis).

Multimorbidity, Polypharmacy and Frailty

LORA is frequently accompanied by multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and frailty. RA in older adults accelerates immunosenescence, increasing comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease, interstitial lung disease (ILD), infections, cancer, depression, and cognitive decline [ 56 ]. The term multimorbidity is preferred over comorbidity to reflect complex interactions among conditions [ 57 ]. Distinguishing age‐ versus RA‐related diseases is difficult, but both limit treatment options due to contraindications [ 58 ]. In the Netherlands, 60% of people over 60 have ≥ 2 conditions, and polypharmacy risks grow with age and multimorbidity.

LORA patients often experience overlapping rheumatic and non‐rheumatic diseases, complicating care [ 12 , 59 ]. Common coexisting conditions include diabetes, thyroid disease, metabolic syndrome, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, sarcopenia, depression, and hypertension. This complexity calls for a multidisciplinary approach.

Polypharmacy, defined as ≥ 5 medications, is common in LORA due to multimorbidity and treatment needs. It is linked to falls, disability, hospitalization, and mortality [ 60 , 61 ].

A particular mention should be made of treatment with glucocorticoids, which are frequently prescribed within polypharmacological treatment regimens, co‐responsible for significant comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease, Type II diabetes mellitus, infections, and osteoporosis, to name only the main ones. It has been shown that in steroid‐naïve patients, prednisone doses greater than 5 mg/day, higher cumulative doses, and longer treatment duration are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events [ 62 ]. Low‐dose treatment (< 10 mg/day of prednisone) results in an increased risk of serious infectious events in one out of 83 patients during the first 6 months of therapy [ 63 ].

Over half of those aged 65+ are prescribed > 6 medications; 20% receive inappropriate prescriptions [ 64 , 65 ]. Polypharmacy has been reported in ~34% of RA patients and ~50% at treatment onset in RA and PsA cohorts [ 60 , 66 , 67 ].

Frailty, a syndrome of decreased physiological reserves and increased vulnerability, is gaining attention in rheumatology [ 68 , 69 , 70 ]. It increases risks of falls, disability, post‐surgical mortality, and graft rejection [ 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 ]. In RA, frailty prevalence is 27.6%, with pre‐frailty at 32.4%, similar to older populations [ 75 , 76 , 77 ]. It correlates with comorbidities, age, and disease activity [ 69 ]. Contributing factors include inflammation, hormonal decline, fatigue, pain, depression, cognitive impairment, and sarcopenia [ 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 ]. Cytokines may directly impact the CNS, worsening fatigue [ 83 ].

Sarcopenia, defined in 2018 by European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 (EWGSOP2) as loss of muscle mass and strength, increases risks of falls and frailty [ 84 ]. Its prevalence in RA is ~31% [ 85 ], and it is strongly linked to aging and inflammation [ 84 , 86 , 87 , 88 ]. Diagnostic tools include dual energy x‐ray absorptiometry (DXA), bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), ultrasound (US), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (Figure 7 ) [ 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 ]. US can assess muscle echogenicity via grayscale pixel analysis [ 92 , 93 ] (Figure 8 ), while MRI provides detailed images of muscle mass, quality, and composition (e.g., myosteatosis, myofibrosis) [ 94 , 95 ]. Automated segmentation of muscles on T1‐weighted MRI can aid accurate sarcopenia detection (Figure 9 ) [ 93 ].

FIGURE 7 Sarcopenia assessment. Flowchart for case‐finding, making a diagnosis and quantifying severity in rheumatological practice (adapted from [ 89 ]).MRI, magnetic resonance i… — FIGURE 7 Sarcopenia assessment. Flowchart for case‐finding, making a diagnosis and quantifying severity in rheumatological practice (adapted from [ 89 ]).MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; SARC‐F, Strength, Assistance with walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs, Fall and calf circumference; SPPB, Short Physical Performance Battery; US, ultrasound.

FIGURE 8 Sarcopenia assessment using ultrasound (US). Images acquired with a linear probe (3–13 MHz). Comparison between a healthy subject (40‐year‐old woman who regularly engages… — FIGURE 8 Sarcopenia assessment using ultrasound (US). Images acquired with a linear probe (3–13 MHz). Comparison between a healthy subject (40‐year‐old woman who regularly engages in sports activities) and a sarcopenic subject (88‐year‐old woman with rheumatoid arthritis). Transverse (A, C) and longitudinal (B, D) US images of the anterior thigh compartment muscles (rectus femoris, vastus intermedius). Images (A) and (B) correspond to the healthy subject; images C and D correspond to the sarcopenic subject. (C) and (D) images show a reduced thickness of muscles bellies, and an increased muscles echogenicity compared to (A) and (B) (i.e., Grade III of the Heckmatt scale [i.e., marked increased muscle echo with reduced bone echo] vs. Grade I of the Heckmatt scale [i.e., normal hypoechoic muscle], respectively).f, femur; r, rectus femoris; v, vastus intermedius.

FIGURE 9 Sarcopenia assessment using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Example of segmentation of the mid‐thigh muscles on a single MRI image in a sarcopenic patient using the sof… — FIGURE 9 Sarcopenia assessment using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Example of segmentation of the mid‐thigh muscles on a single MRI image in a sarcopenic patient using the software Horos.

To assess frailty in RA, we developed the Comprehensive Rheumatologic Assessment of Frailty (CRAF), based on the Frailty Index (FI) and cumulative deficit models [ 96 , 97 , 98 ]. Variables for CRAF were selected using the Delphi method [ 99 ]. Key domains include nutrition, muscle strength, fall history, comorbidities, polypharmacy, social activity, pain, exhaustion, physical function, and depression.

Cardiovascular Risk

Increased cardiovascular risk in LORA is attributed to a combination of traditional cardiovascular risk factors, the inflammatory nature of arthritis and atherosclerosis, and the use of non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and steroids [ 58 ]. Additionally, patients with LORA display significantly higher body mass index (BMI), blood creatinine and uric acid levels, and worse metabolic indices compared to those with YORA [ 59 ]. The prevalence of ischemic heart disease and heart failure is notably higher in the RA population than in the general population, resulting in increased mortality rates [ 100 , 101 ].

A population‐based study comparing RA patients with non‐RA individuals of similar demographics revealed that the RA group had a 3.17‐fold increased risk of myocardial infarction leading to hospitalization [ 102 ]. Moreover, the incidence of heart failure in RA patients is approximately double that of the non‐RA population [ 101 ]. The heightened risk of cardiovascular disease associated with RA seems to be primarily concentrated among individuals who are positive for RF. Aging is identified as a risk factor for ischemic heart disease, with age‐related changes in the innate immune system, characterized by elevated levels of proinflammatory cytokines and CRP, potentially explaining this association [ 103 ]. Active RA contributes to this inflammatory state. Chronic inflammation is recognized as a partial mediator of the increased cardiovascular risk in RA, yet conventional cardiovascular risk factors also play significant roles [ 104 ].

Risk of Infections

Patients with LORA often experience low mobility, which is a significant risk factor for infections, particularly urogenital and respiratory infections. Additionally, the use of immunomodulatory therapy further escalates the risk of infections in RA patients [ 58 ]. Due to the immunomodulatory effects of RA itself or its associated comorbidities, patients are at a higher risk of infections compared to other members of the same community [ 105 ]. Moreover, RA treatments can suppress the immune system, augmenting the risk of infection in these patients [ 106 ]. Notably, age has been incorporated as an independent risk factor for serious infection in RA patients [ 107 ].

Lung Disease

Pulmonary complications associated with RA represent one of the most prevalent extra‐articular manifestations of the disease, encompassing conditions such as pulmonary nodules, pleural effusion, bronchiectasis, and particularly ILD [ 108 , 109 ]. Additionally, RA patients are susceptible to secondary lung complications arising from immunosuppressive therapy, which can include drug toxicity or opportunistic infections [ 110 ]. In our studied cohort of RA patients, we observed an ILD prevalence of 19.2% [ 111 ], with various studies reporting a prevalence range from 4% to 68%. Factors such as older age, older age at RA onset, high ACPA titer, and a history of smoking have been independently associated with a diagnosis of RA‐ILD [ 112 , 113 , 114 ]. Our study corroborated these findings, underscoring the link between older age at RA onset, smoking habits, and high ACPA titers [ 111 ]. It is crucial to emphasize the significant impact of ILD on the prognosis of RA patients. Those with RA‐ILD face a mortality risk that is three times higher than RA patients without ILD. ILD plays a critical role, accounting for approximately 13% of the excess mortality observed in RA patients compared to the general population [ 115 ].

Risk for Developing Malignancies

A meta‐analysis of the research conducted between 1990 and 2007 has indicated that patients with RA have a slightly but significantly increased risk of developing malignancies compared to the general population [ 116 ]. This elevated risk of cancer in RA may be attributed to immunological aging associated with the condition, largely due to the presence of chronic inflammation and impaired DNA repair mechanisms [ 58 ]. Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) revealed that individuals with RA had a 1.63‐fold increased odds of cancer incidence [ 117 ]. Skin cancer and lymphoma are among the few specific malignancies with marginally higher incidences, contributing to this slightly increased risk of cancer. The increased risk and the type of cancer show different patterns of variability depending on the countries studied. In Japan, for example, compared with other countries, methotrexate‐associated lymphoproliferative disorders (MTX‐LPD) and lymphomas are more frequent, whereas the incidence of other types of cancer (colon, rectum, and liver) is lower [ 118 , 119 , 120 ].

More recent evidence suggests that RA patients treated with biologic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) may have a lower cancer risk compared to the general population [ 120 ]. A Taiwanese study indicated that RA patients receiving TNF inhibitors (TNFi) had a reduced risk of cancer compared to those treated with non‐bDMARDs alone [ 121 ]. However, a meta‐analysis of observational studies found no significant change in the risk of overall malignancy in patients treated with TNFi [ 122 ], and data from the UK and Spain showed unchanged cancer mortality rates among RA patients on TNFi therapy [ 123 , 124 ]. Additionally, a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials, which included data from 63 trials and 29 423 patients, revealed no statistically significant increase in cancer risk when using biological agents compared to control groups [ 125 ]. Moreover, a real‐world multi‐database analysis examining RA patients showed no significant association between various bDMARDs or targeted synthetic (ts)DMARDs and the risk of any malignancies [ 126 ].

Cognitive Dysfunction and Depression

Depression is a prevalent comorbidity in RA patients and is a significant contributor to frailty. Approximately 66% of RA patients experience depression, and around 70% suffer from anxiety [ 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 ]. A 2013 systematic review and meta‐analysis found that 16.7% of RA patients meet the diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder [ 131 ]. Comorbid depression negatively impacts the quality of life, physical and mental health, mortality, and the severity of pain and symptoms in RA patients [ 132 ]. Depressive symptoms may also increase the likelihood of frailty by affecting behavior and activity levels, leading to increased disability and eventually frailty [ 133 ]. Sanders and colleagues demonstrated a strong correlation between depressive symptoms and pain over time, which held true regardless of age, frailty status, or follow‐up duration [ 134 ]. This relationship is sometimes referred to as the “pain‐depression dyad” [ 135 ].

Cognitive impairment is another chronic condition associated with aging and is characterized by difficulties with memory, learning, problem‐solving, concentration, or decision‐making [ 136 ]. There is a growing body of evidence linking RA to cognitive decline [ 137 , 138 ]. The mechanisms underlying the association between RA and cognitive impairment are not completely understood but may involve chronic inflammation, immune system dysregulation, medication side effects, genetic predispositions, chronic pain, and mental health issues. Neuroinflammatory reactions in the brain can be caused by immune complexes, cytokines, and autoantibodies like RF. Non‐canonical signaling pathways and interactions with receptors might allow cytokines, such as TNF alpha and IL‐1, to alter neuron excitability [ 139 , 140 ]. Additionally, IL‐6 has been reported to negatively impact cognition [ 139 ].

The premature immunosenescence in RA may contribute to cognitive dysfunction. Compared with healthy controls, patients with RA exhibit reduced memory performance, even after adjusting for age and depressive symptoms. Furthermore, memory abilities are inversely correlated with the expansion and activation of senescence‐associated T cells, such as CD8 + CD28 − cells [ 141 ]. CD8 + CD28 − T cells represent a heterogeneous population of highly differentiated lymphocytes linked to immunosenescence. Within this population, Terminally Differentiated Effector Memory T cells re‐expressing CD45RA (TEMRA) form a phenotypically defined subset, characterized by the re‐expression of CD45RA, although not all CD8 + CD28 − T cells display a TEMRA phenotype. TEMRA cells show multiple features of cellular aging, including acquisition of inflammatory characteristics typical of the senescence‐associated secretory phenotype (SASP), reduced proliferative capacity, accumulation of DNA damage, and loss of telomerase activity [ 142 ].

The development of autoantibodies against brain antigens is another immune‐related factor contributing to cognitive impairment in RA. The prevalence of autoantibodies in the bloodstream increases with healthy aging and is evident early in RA disease. Consequently, immunosenescence and cognitive decline often work in tandem, potentially shortening the lifespan of elderly individuals. Moreover, cognitive impairment in LORA patients may be linked to commonly used RA medications, such as MTX and corticosteroids [ 143 , 144 , 145 ].

Despite the incomplete understanding of the exact mechanisms behind the link between cognitive impairment and depression in RA, it is crucial for healthcare professionals to adopt preventive measures, such as routinely assessing cognitive function in individuals diagnosed with LORA.

Challenges in the LORA Treatment

Before the widespread use of bDMARDs, RA was associated with a significantly higher mortality rate, particularly in cases of greater clinical severity [ 146 ]. Life expectancy in women and men with RA was reduced by 4 and 2 years, respectively, compared to those without RA, and these deficits persisted over the decades despite overall life expectancy improvements in RA patients aligning with the general population [ 147 ]. However, since the introduction of advanced treatments like bDMARDs, the mortality rate for RA patients has significantly decreased [ 148 , 149 ].

Managing LORA is challenging due to multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and frailty. The therapeutic approach needs to be carefully tailored, and current management methods have limitations (Figure 10 ). In this clinical setting, physicians should be cautious with the use of multiple medications due to the risk of drug–drug interactions, nonadherence in older adults, and potential severe consequences such as delirium, gastrointestinal bleeding, fractures, and falls [ 150 , 151 ].

FIGURE 10 Therapeutic approach to elderly‐onset rheumatoid arthritis (LORA). Suggested customized approach based on the prevalence of multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and frailty whe… — FIGURE 10 Therapeutic approach to elderly‐onset rheumatoid arthritis (LORA). Suggested customized approach based on the prevalence of multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and frailty when treating the single patient.

Biological age, which is determined by changes in biological function, plays a significant role in an individual's ability to tolerate illness, as opposed to chronological age. Patients with advanced LORA are at a higher risk of developing frailty due to a greater likelihood of experiencing functional decline, depression, cognitive impairment, falls, malnutrition, and polypharmacy [ 152 ].

Treatment of pre‐frail and frail patients with LORA should aim at returning them to a non‐frail or pre‐frail stage, respectively, to prevent progression to irreversible geriatric syndromes. Patients with LORA who are not at imminent risk of dying and who are aging well should be treated aggressively using the treat‐to‐target (T2T) approach.

In addition to pharmacological treatment, there is a need for more rheumatological rehabilitation programs for individuals with LORA. These programs should include assistive devices, physical therapy, analgesic modalities, exercise regimens, hot spring hydrotherapy, and balance exercises [ 153 ]. These comprehensive approaches can help improve the quality of life and overall outcomes for patients with LORA.

Treat‐to‐Target Strategies in LORA

In the T2T approach, it is generally agreed that older RA patients should be managed similarly to younger ones [ 154 , 155 , 156 ]. However, LORA treatment is complicated by common comorbidities and frailty, requiring tailored therapeutic intensity [ 157 ]. Treatment goals—symptom control, structural preservation, autonomy, and reduced mortality—are consistent with YORA [ 158 , 159 ], though LDA may be a more realistic target than remission in LORA [ 160 ].

Despite guidelines, elderly patients often receive less intensive treatment due to concerns about drug tolerance and interactions from comorbidities [ 161 , 162 ]. Age significantly affects RA drug choices [ 163 ]. US data show patients over 75 are 65%–74% less likely to receive DMARDs than younger seniors, especially if treated by non‐rheumatologists [ 164 ]. LORA patients also receive lower MTX doses, less combination therapy, and fewer biologics [ 165 , 166 , 167 , 168 ]. Glucocorticoids are more commonly prescribed in LORA. Although MTX is used frequently, it is prescribed in lower doses due to renal impairment and comorbidities [ 161 ]. Polypharmacy increases adverse event risk, complicating decisions about aggressive treatment strategies.

Clinical evidence remains limited due to the underrepresentation of elderly patients in trials. A 3‐year study of 197 LORA patients (avg. age 74.4) using T2T found 41.6% received bDMARDs, 84.7% used MTX (avg. dose: 9.9 mg/week), with 61.1% experiencing MTX side effects; 40.2% could not receive full doses due to renal dysfunction [ 169 ].

Data from the DREAM registry and other studies suggest TNFi are slightly less effective in LORA but still significantly reduce disease activity [ 170 , 171 ]. While infliximab is more common in YORA, LORA patients are more likely to receive abatacept or etanercept. Interestingly, some data suggest better disease activity improvement in LORA than in YORA with TNFi [ 32 ]. Although MTX + TNFi is effective in both groups, LORA patients have higher rates of serious adverse events [ 171 , 172 ].

Genevay et al. noted that while DAS28 scores and drug discontinuation were similar, LORA patients showed less improvement in functional ability (HAQ), especially those over 75 [ 173 ]. Although older patients have higher absolute infection risks with TNFi, the relative risk is comparable to that in younger patients [ 174 ]. Glucocorticoids increase serious bacterial infection risk in a dose‐dependent way, while TNFi and MTX have similar safety profiles [ 175 ].

Evidence for biologics and targeted synthetic DMARDs (JAKi) in LORA is limited. Tocilizumab may be less effective in older patients compared to the younger, though retention and adverse event rates are similar across age groups [ 176 ]. Abatacept effectiveness has been shown to be comparable in both age groups, although in younger patients a longer drug survival time [ 177 ].

JAK inhibitors like tofacitinib and baricitinib show similar efficacy in older and younger adults [ 178 , 179 ]. However, the ORAL Surveillance trial raised concerns about increased cardiovascular events and malignancies in older patients, especially smokers or those with CV risk factors [ 180 ]. Higher infection and herpes zoster rates were also noted in elderly patients on JAKi [ 179 , 180 , 181 ]. Lower doses of baricitinib and filgotinib are recommended for patients over 75 [ 182 ].

Although many treatments effective in YORA are also safe and beneficial in LORA, age‐related factors demand careful consideration. Individualized treatment plans are crucial, and more prospective studies are needed to guide therapy for elderly RA patients, who are often excluded from RCTs. It would also be desirable for scientific societies to pay greater attention to the treatment of LORA: to date, there is only a single consensus statement published in Japan [ 12 ].

Conclusions

LORA represents a distinct prognostic category within the spectrum of RA, characterized by high prevalence rates of multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and frailty. Compared with younger patients, those with LORA are overall at higher risk of physical decline, malignancy, and mortality [ 183 ]. Despite advancements of the last years, the understanding and management of LORA are subjects of ongoing debate. Empirical studies have highlighted that the care provided to older RA patients in clinical settings is often suboptimal. Contributing factors to this include a paucity of robust evidence, concerns regarding potential adverse effects, and the presence of comorbid conditions. The concurrent presence of RA and various other chronic illnesses complicates the management of LORA. Addressing the diverse health needs of these patients necessitates an interdisciplinary approach that is both comprehensive and judicious, balancing the risks and benefits of escalating treatment.

According to the T2T strategy, LORA patients should receive treatment akin to their younger counterparts. The T2T approach, despite a generally less favorable prognosis in patients with LORA, appears to ensure outcomes comparable to those of younger patients [ 184 , 185 ]. However, the unique drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in the elderly population necessitate vigilant monitoring of the side‐effect profile. Future research should focus on developing tailored DMARD treatments that consider multimorbidity, polypharmacy, frailty, and safety to enhance treatment efficacy and reduce reliance on glucocorticoids. Such advancements will ultimately lead to improved quality of care for patients with LORA.

Funding

The authors have nothing to report.

Disclosure

The authors have nothing to report.

Ethics Statement

The authors have nothing to report.

Consent

The authors have nothing to report.

Acknowledgements

Open access publishing facilitated by Universita Politecnica delle Marche, as part of the Wiley ‐ CRUI‐CARE agreement.

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References

1. Salaffi F., De Angelis R., Stancati A., Grassi W., and MArche Pain; Prevalence INvestigation Group (MAPPING) Study , “Health‐Related Quality of Life in Multiple Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Cross‐Sectional Population Based Epidemiological Study. II. The MAPPING Study,” Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 23, no. 6 (2005): 829–839.

2. Cimmino M. A. and Salaffi F., “The Fate of the Patient With Musculoskeletal Disorders in Italy: An Epidemiological Insight,” Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 25, no. 6 (2007): 803–805.

3. Fried L. P., Tangen C. M., Walston J., et al., “Frailty in Older Adults: Evidence for a Phenotype,” Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 56, no. 3 (2001): M146–M156, 10.1093/gerona/56.3.m146.

4. Moorhouse P. and Rockwood K., “Frailty and Its Quantitative Clinical Evaluation,” Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh 42, no. 4 (2012): 333–340, 10.4997/JRCPE.2012.412.

5. Mitnitski A. B., Mogilner A. J., and Rockwood K., “Accumulation of Deficits as a Proxy Measure of Aging,” Scientific World Journal 1 (2001): 323–336, 10.1100/tsw.2001.58.

6. Theou O., Haviva C., Wallace L., Searle S. D., and Rockwood K., “How to Construct a Frailty Index From an Existing Dataset in 10 Steps,” Age and Ageing 52, no. 12 (2023): afad221, 10.1093/ageing/afad221.

7. Di Matteo A., Bathon J. M., and Emery P., “Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Lancet 402, no. 10416 (2023): 2019–2033, 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)01525-8.

8. Cross M., Smith E., Hoy D., et al., “The Global Burden of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Estimates From the Global Burden of Disease 2010 Study,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 73, no. 7 (2014): 1316–1322, 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204627.

9. Gomez C. R., Boehmer E. D., and Kovacs E. J., “The Aging Innate Immune System,” Current Opinion in Immunology 17, no. 5 (2005): 457–462, 10.1016/j.coi.2005.07.013.

10. Crowson C. S., Matteson E. L., Myasoedova E., et al., “The Lifetime Risk of Adult‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis and Other Inflammatory Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 63, no. 3 (2011): 633–639, 10.1002/art.30155.

11. Togizbayev G., Baimukhamedov C., Аssanova G., Mirakhmedova K., and Goremykina M., “Late‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis Versus Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis: Understanding the Key Differences: Comment on the Article by Lee et al,” ACR Open Rheumatology 7, no. 6 (2025): e70058, 10.1002/acr2.70058.

12. Kojima M., Sugihara T., Kawahito Y., et al., “Consensus Statement on the Management of Late‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Modern Rheumatology 34, no. 6 (2024): 1095–1102, 10.1093/mr/roae011.

13. Uchiyama S., Takanashi S., Takeno M., et al., “Should We Reconsider the Definition of Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis in an Ageing Society?,” Modern Rheumatology 32, no. 2 (2022): 323–329, 10.1093/mr/roab013.

14. Kato E., Sawada T., Tahara K., et al., “The Age at Onset of Rheumatoid Arthritis Is Increasing in Japan: A Nationwide Database Study,” International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases 20, no. 7 (2017): 839–845, 10.1111/1756-185X.12998.

15. Sokka T., Krishnan E., Häkkinen A., and Hannonen P., “Functional Disability in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Compared With a Community Population in Finland,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 48, no. 1 (2003): 59–63, 10.1002/art.10731.

16. Shin S. Y., Julian L., and Katz P., “The Relationship Between Cognitive Function and Physical Function in Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Journal of Rheumatology 40, no. 3 (2013): 236–243, 10.3899/jrheum.120871.

17. Chen Y. M., Chen L. K., Lan J. L., and Chen D. Y., “Geriatric Syndromes in Elderly Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Rheumatology 48, no. 10 (2009): 1261–1264, 10.1093/rheumatology/kep195.

18. Franceschi C., Garagnani P., Parini P., Giuliani C., and Santoro A., “Inflammaging: A New Immune‐Metabolic Viewpoint for Age‐Related Diseases,” Nature Reviews. Endocrinology 14, no. 10 (2018): 576–590, 10.1038/s41574-018-0059-4.

19. Vlachopoulos C., Xaplanteris P., Aboyans V., et al., “The Role of Vascular Biomarkers for Primary and Secondary Prevention. A Position Paper From the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Peripheral Circulation: Endorsed by the Association for Research Into Arterial Structure and Physiology (ARTERY) Society,” Atherosclerosis 241, no. 2 (2015): 507–532, 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2015.05.007.

20. Fulop T., Witkowski J. M., Olivieri F., and Larbi A., “The Integration of Inflammaging in Age‐Related Diseases,” Seminars in Immunology 40 (2018): 17–35, 10.1016/j.smim.2018.09.003.

21. López‐Otín C., Blasco M. A., Partridge L., Serrano M., and Kroemer G., “The Hallmarks of Aging,” Cell 153, no. 6 (2013): 1194–1217, 10.1016/j.cell.2013.05.039.

22. Makinodan T. and Kay M. M., “Age Influence on the Immune System,” Advances in Immunology 29 (1980): 287–330, 10.1016/s0065-2776(08)60047-4.

23. Chalan P., van den Berg A., Kroesen B. J., Brouwer L., and Boots A., “Rheumatoid Arthritis, Immunosenescence and the Hallmarks of Aging,” Current Aging Science 8, no. 2 (2015): 131–146, 10.2174/1874609808666150727110744.

24. Bauer M. E., “Accelerated Immunosenescence in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Impact on Clinical Progression,” Immunity & Ageing 17 (2020): 6, 10.1186/s12979-020-00178-w.

25. Barbé‐Tuana F., Funchal G., Schmitz C. R. R., Maurmann R. M., and Bauer M. E., “The Interplay Between Immunosenescence and Age‐Related Diseases,” Seminars in Immunopathology 42, no. 5 (2020): 545–557, 10.1007/s00281-020-00806-z.

26. Terkeltaub R., Esdaile J., Décary F., and Tannenbaum H., “A Clinical Study of Older Age Rheumatoid Arthritis With Comparison to a Younger Onset Group,” Journal of Rheumatology 10, no. 3 (1983): 418–424.

27. Straub R. H., Konecna L., Hrach S., et al., “Serum Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and DHEA Sulfate Are Negatively Correlated With Serum Interleukin‐6 (IL‐6), and DHEA Inhibits IL‐6 Secretion From Mononuclear Cells in Man In Vitro: Possible Link Between Endocrinosenescence and Immunosenescence,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 83, no. 6 (1998): 2012–2017, 10.1210/jcem.83.6.4876.

28. Punzi L., Bertazzolo N., Pianon M., Rizzi E., Rossini P., and Todesco S., “Synovial Fluid Levels of Proinflammatory Interleukins and Their Inter‐Relationships in Elderly vs Younger Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Aging (Milano) 8, no. 4 (1996): 277–281, 10.1007/BF03339579.

29. Gamerith F., Zlabinger G. J., Scherak O., et al., “Differences in Anti‐Fab Antibodies in Adult and Late Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Rheumatology International 13, no. 3 (1993): 107–112, 10.1007/BF00290297.

30. Romão V. C., Humby F., Kelly S., et al., “Treatment‐Resistant Synovitis and Radiographic Progression Are Increased in Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: Findings From a Prospective Observational Longitudinal Early Arthritis Cohort Study,” Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism 50, no. 4 (2020): 735–743, 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2020.03.018.

31. Murata K., Ito H., Hashimoto M., et al., “Elderly Onset of Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Is a Risk Factor for Bone Erosions, Refractory to Treatment: KURAMA Cohort,” International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases 22, no. 6 (2019): 1084–1093, 10.1111/1756-185X.13428.

32. Takanashi S., Takeuchi T., and Kaneko Y., “Effects of Aging on Rheumatoid Factor and Anticyclic Citrullinated Peptide Antibody Positivity in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Journal of Rheumatology 50, no. 3 (2023): 330–334, 10.3899/jrheum.220526.

33. Sugihara T., Ishizaki T., Hosoya T., et al., “Structural and Functional Outcomes of a Therapeutic Strategy Targeting Low Disease Activity in Patients With Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Prospective Cohort Study (CRANE),” Rheumatology 54, no. 5 (2015): 798–807, 10.1093/rheumatology/keu395.

34. Ruban T. N., Jacob B., Pope J. E., Keystone E. C., Bombardier C., and Kuriya B., “The Influence of Age at Disease Onset on Disease Activity and Disability: Results From the Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative,” Clinical Rheumatology 35, no. 3 (2016): 759–763, 10.1007/s10067-015-3031-x.

35. Arnold M. B., Bykerk V. P., Boire G., et al., “Are There Differences Between Young‐ and Older‐Onset Early Inflammatory Arthritis and Do These Impact Outcomes? An Analysis From the CATCH Cohort,” Rheumatology 53, no. 6 (2014): 1075–1086, 10.1093/rheumatology/ket449.

36. van Onna M. and Boonen A., “The Challenging Interplay Between Rheumatoid Arthritis, Ageing and Comorbidities,” BioMed Central Musculoskeletal Disorders 17 (2016): 184, 10.1186/s12891-016-1038-3.

37. Kobak S. and Bes C., “An Autumn Tale: Geriatric Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Therapeutic Advances in Musculoskeletal Disease 10, no. 1 (2018): 3–11, 10.1177/1759720X17740075.

38. Mackenzie A. H., “Differential Diagnosis of Rheumatoid Arthritis,” American Journal of Medicine 85, no. 4A (1988): 2–11, 10.1016/0002-9343(88)90355-5.

39. Sidari A. and Hill E., “Diagnosis and Treatment of Gout and Pseudogout for Everyday Practice,” Primary Care 45, no. 2 (2018): 213–236, 10.1016/j.pop.2018.02.004.

40. Hoffman G. S., “Polyarthritis: The Differential Diagnosis of Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism 8, no. 2 (1978): 115–141, 10.1016/0049-0172(78)90015-x.

41. Steinbach L. S. and Resnick D., “Calcium Pyrophosphate Dihydrate Crystal Deposition Disease Revisited,” Radiology 200, no. 1 (1996): 1–9, 10.1148/radiology.200.1.8657894.

42. Miksanek J. and Rosenthal A. K., “Imaging of Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition Disease,” Current Rheumatology Reports 17, no. 3 (2015): 20, 10.1007/s11926-015-0496-1.

43. Hunder G. G., Goronzy J., and Weyand C., “Is Seronegative RA in the Elderly the Same as Polymyalgia Rheumatica?,” Bulletin on the Rheumatic Diseases 43, no. 1 (1994): 1–3.

44. Wu J., Yang F., Ma X., Lin J., and Chen W., “Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis vs. Polymyalgia Rheumatica: Differences in Pathogenesis,” Frontiers in Medicine 9 (2023): 1083879, 10.3389/fmed.2022.1083879.

45. Kobayashi K., Nakagomi D., Kobayashi Y., et al., “Ultrasound of Shoulder and Knee Improves the Accuracy of the 2012 EULAR/ACR Provisional Classification Criteria for Polymyalgia Rheumatica,” Rheumatology 61, no. 3 (2022): 1185–1194, 10.1093/rheumatology/keab506.

46. Lange U., Piegsa M., Teichmann J., and Neeck G., “Ultrasonography of the Glenohumeral Joints—A Helpful Instrument in Differentiation in Elderly Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis and Polymyalgia Rheumatica,” Rheumatology International 19, no. 5 (2000): 185–189, 10.1007/s002960000051.

47. Russell E. B., Hunter J. B., Pearson L., and McCarty D. J., “Remitting, Seronegative, Symmetrical Synovitis With Pitting Edema—13 Additional Cases,” Journal of Rheumatology 17, no. 5 (1990): 633–639.

48. Karmacharya P., Donato A. A., Aryal M. R., et al., “RS3PE Revisited: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of 331 Cases,” Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 34, no. 3 (2016): 404–415.

49. Kawashiri S. Y., Suzuki T., Okada A., et al., “Differences in Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Findings Between RS3PE Syndrome and Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Clinical Rheumatology 39, no. 6 (2020): 1981–1988, 10.1007/s10067-020-04931-w.

50. Dillon C. F., Hirsch R., Rasch E. K., and Gu Q., “Symptomatic Hand Osteoarthritis in the United States: Prevalence and Functional Impairment Estimates From the Third U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1991–1994,” American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 86, no. 1 (2007): 12–21, 10.1097/phm.0b013e31802ba28e.

51. Lawrence R. C., Felson D. T., Helmick C. G., et al., “Estimates of the Prevalence of Arthritis and Other Rheumatic Conditions in the United States. Part II,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 58, no. 1 (2008): 26–35, 10.1002/art.23176.

52. Favero M., Belluzzi E., Ortolan A., et al., “Erosive Hand Osteoarthritis: Latest Findings and Outlook,” Nature Reviews Rheumatology 18, no. 3 (2022): 171–183, 10.1038/s41584-021-00747-3.

53. Kortekaas M. C., Kwok W. Y., Reijnierse M., Huizinga T. W., and Kloppenburg M., “In Erosive Hand Osteoarthritis More Inflammatory Signs on Ultrasound Are Found Than in the Rest of Hand Osteoarthritis,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 72, no. 6 (2013): 930–934, 10.1136/annrheumdis-2012-201458.

54. Gabriel S. E., “The Epidemiology of Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Rheumatic Disease Clinics of North America 27, no. 2 (2001): 269–281, 10.1016/s0889-857x(05)70201-5.

55. Kwok W. Y., Kloppenburg M., Rosendaal F. R., van Meurs J. B., Hofman A., and Bierma‐Zeinstra S. M., “Erosive Hand Osteoarthritis: Its Prevalence and Clinical Impact in the General Population and Symptomatic Hand Osteoarthritis,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 70, no. 7 (2011): 1238–1242, 10.1136/ard.2010.143016.

56. Dougados M., Soubrier M., Antunez A., et al., “Prevalence of Comorbidities in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Evaluation of Their Monitoring: Results of an International, Cross‐Sectional Study (COMORA),” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 73, no. 1 (2014): 62–68, 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204223.

57. Radner H., Yoshida K., Smolen J. S., and Solomon D. H., “Multimorbidity and Rheumatic Conditions‐Enhancing the Concept of Comorbidity,” Nature Reviews Rheumatology 10, no. 4 (2014): 252–256, 10.1038/nrrheum.2013.212.

58. Serhal L., Lwin M. N., Holroyd C., and Edwards C. J., “Rheumatoid Arthritis in the Elderly: Characteristics and Treatment Considerations,” Autoimmunity Reviews 19, no. 6 (2020): 102528, 10.1016/j.autrev.2020.102528.

59. Targońska‐Stępniak B., Grzechnik K., Kolarz K., Gągoł D., and Majdan M., “Systemic Inflammatory Parameters in Patients With Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis (EORA) and Young‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis (YORA)—An Observational Study,” Journal of Clinical Medicine 10, no. 6 (2021): 1204, 10.3390/jcm10061204.

60. Kara M., Alp G., Palanbek Yavaş S., et al., “The Effect of Polypharmacy on Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis Treatment: Retrospective Study,” PeerJ 11 (2023): e16418, 10.7717/peerj.16418.

61. Gutiérrez‐Valencia M., Izquierdo M., Cesari M., Casas‐Herrero Á., Inzitari M., and Martínez‐Velilla N., “The Relationship Between Frailty and Polypharmacy in Older People: A Systematic Review,” British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 84, no. 7 (2018): 1432–1444, 10.1111/bcp.13590.

62. Ocon A. J., Reed G., Pappas D. A., Curtis J. R., and Kremer J. M., “Short‐Term Dose and Duration‐Dependent Glucocorticoid Risk for Cardiovascular Events in Glucocorticoid‐Naive Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 80, no. 12 (2021): 1522–1529, 10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-220577.

63. Barbulescu A., Sjölander A., Delcoigne B., Askling J., and Frisell T., “Glucocorticoid Exposure and the Risk of Serious Infections in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Marginal Structural Model Application,” Rheumatology (Oxford, England) 62, no. 10 (2023): 3391–3399, 10.1093/rheumatology/kead083.

64. Fialová D., Topinková E., Gambassi G., et al., “Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use Among Elderly Home Care Patients in Europe,” Journal of the American Medical Association 293, no. 11 (2005): 1348–1358, 10.1001/jama.293.11.1348.

65. Masnoon N., Shakib S., Kalisch‐Ellett L., and Caughey G. E., “What Is Polypharmacy? A Systematic Review of Definitions,” BioMed Central Geriatrics 17, no. 1 (2017): 230, 10.1186/s12877-017-0621-2.

66. Bechman K., Clarke B. D., Rutherford A. I., et al., “Polypharmacy Is Associated With Treatment Response and Serious Adverse Events: Results From the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register for Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Rheumatology 58, no. 10 (2019): 1767–1776, 10.1093/rheumatology/kez037.

67. Jack J. D., McCutchan R., Maier S., and Schirmer M., “Polypharmacy in Middle‐European Rheumatoid Arthritis‐Patients: A Retrospective Longitudinal Cohort Analysis With Systematic Literature Review,” Frontiers in Medicine 7 (2020): 573542, 10.3389/fmed.2020.573542.

68. Pedone C., Costanzo L., Cesari M., Bandinelli S., Ferrucci L., and Antonelli Incalzi R., “Are Performance Measures Necessary to Predict Loss of Independence in Elderly People?,” Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 71, no. 1 (2016): 84–89, 10.1093/gerona/glv096.

69. Salaffi F., Di Carlo M., Farah S., Di Donato E., and Carotti M., “Prevalence of Frailty and Its Associated Factors in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Cross‐Sectional Analysis,” Clinical Rheumatology 38, no. 7 (2019): 1823–1830, 10.1007/s10067-019-04486-5.

70. Salaffi F., Farah S., and Di Carlo M., “Frailty Syndrome in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Symptomatic Osteoarthritis: An Emerging Concept in Rheumatology,” Acta Bio‐Medica 91, no. 2 (2020): 274–296, 10.23750/abm.v91i2.9094.

71. Xue Q. L., Tian J., Fried L. P., et al., “Physical Frailty Assessment in Older Women: Can Simplification be Achieved Without Loss of Syndrome Measurement Validity?,” American Journal of Epidemiology 183, no. 11 (2016): 1037–1044, 10.1093/aje/kwv272.

72. Garonzik‐Wang J. M., Govindan P., Grinnan J. W., et al., “Frailty and Delayed Graft Function in Kidney Transplant Recipients,” Archives of Surgery 147, no. 2 (2012): 190–193, 10.1001/archsurg.2011.1229.

73. Makary M. A., Segev D. L., Pronovost P. J., et al., “Frailty as a Predictor of Surgical Outcomes in Older Patients,” Journal of the American College of Surgeons 210, no. 6 (2010): 901–908, 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.01.028.

74. Yao X., Hamilton R. G., Weng N. P., et al., “Frailty Is Associated With Impairment of Vaccine‐Induced Antibody Response and Increase in Post‐Vaccination Influenza Infection in Community‐Dwelling Older Adults,” Vaccine 29, no. 31 (2011): 5015–5021, 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.04.077.

75. Salaffi F., De Angelis R., Farah S., Carotti M., and Di Carlo M., “Frailty as a Novel Predictor of Achieving Comprehensive Disease Control (CDC) in Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Clinical Rheumatology 40, no. 12 (2021): 4869–4877, 10.1007/s10067-021-05744-1.

76. Bandeen‐Roche K., Xue Q. L., Ferrucci L., et al., “Phenotype of Frailty: Characterization in the Women's Health and Aging Studies,” Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 61, no. 3 (2006): 262–266, 10.1093/gerona/61.3.262.

77. Cawthon P. M., Marshall L. M., Michael Y., et al., “Frailty in Older Men: Prevalence, Progression, and Relationship With Mortality,” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 55, no. 8 (2007): 1216–1223, 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01259.x.

78. Salaffi F., Di Matteo A., Farah S., and Di Carlo M., “Inflammaging and Frailty in Immune‐Mediated Rheumatic Diseases: How to Address and Score the Issue,” Clinical Reviews in Allergy and Immunology 64, no. 2 (2023): 206–221, 10.1007/s12016-022-08943-z.

79. Clegg A., Young J., Iliffe S., Rikkert M. O., and Rockwood K., “Frailty in Elderly People,” Lancet 381, no. 9868 (2013): 752–762, 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62167-9.

80. Shokri‐Mashhadi N., Moradi S., Heidari Z., and Saadat S., “Association of Circulating C‐Reactive Protein and High‐Sensitivity C‐Reactive Protein With Components of Sarcopenia: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Observational Studies,” Experimental Gerontology 150 (2021): 111330, 10.1016/j.exger.2021.111330.

81. Abadir P. M., Foster D. B., Crow M., et al., “Identification and Characterization of a Functional Mitochondrial Angiotensin System,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 108, no. 36 (2011): 14849–14854, 10.1073/pnas.1101507108.

82. Leng S. X., Yang H., and Walston J. D., “Decreased Cell Proliferation and Altered Cytokine Production in Frail Older Adults,” Aging Clinical and Experimental Research 16, no. 3 (2004): 249–252, 10.1007/BF03327392.

83. Banks W. A., “Blood‐Brain Barrier Transport of Cytokines: A Mechanism for Neuropathology,” Current Pharmaceutical Design 11, no. 8 (2005): 973–984, 10.2174/1381612053381684.

84. Fernandes L. V., Paiva A. E. G., Silva A. C. B., et al., “Prevalence of Sarcopenia According to EWGSOP1 and EWGSOP2 in Older Adults and Their Associations With Unfavorable Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review,” Aging Clinical and Experimental Research 34, no. 3 (2022): 505–514, 10.1007/s40520-021-01951-7.

85. Li T. H., Chang Y. S., Liu C. W., et al., “The Prevalence and Risk Factors of Sarcopenia in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Regression Analysis,” Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism 51, no. 1 (2021): 236–245, 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2020.10.002.

86. Malmstrom T. K., Miller D. K., Simonsick E. M., Ferrucci L., and Morley J. E., “SARC‐F: A Symptom Score to Predict Persons With Sarcopenia at Risk for Poor Functional Outcomes,” Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle 7, no. 1 (2016): 28–36, 10.1002/jcsm.12048.

87. Schaap L. A., Pluijm S. M., Deeg D. J., and Visser M., “Inflammatory Markers and Loss of Muscle Mass (Sarcopenia) and Strength,” American Journal of Medicine 119, no. 6 (2006): 526.e9–526.e17, 10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.10.049.

88. Visser M., Pahor M., Taaffe D. R., et al., “Relationship of Interleukin‐6 and Tumor Necrosis Factor‐Alpha With Muscle Mass and Muscle Strength in Elderly Men and Women: The Health ABC Study,” Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 57, no. 5 (2002): M326–M332, 10.1093/gerona/57.5.m326.

89. Salaffi F., Carotti M., Di Matteo A., et al., “Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging as Diagnostic Tools for Sarcopenia in Immune‐Mediated Rheumatic Diseases (IMRDs),” La Radiologia Medica 127, no. 11 (2022): 1277–1291, 10.1007/s11547-022-01560-y.

90. Salaffi F., Carotti M., Farah S., Ceccarelli L., and Di Carlo M., “Handgrip Strength Features in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Assessed Using an Innovative Cylindrical‐Shaped Device: Relationships With Demographic, Anthropometric and Clinical Variables,” Journal of Medical Systems 45, no. 11 (2021): 100, 10.1007/s10916-021-01778-9.

91. Di Matteo A., Moscioni E., Lommano M. G., et al., “Reliability Assessment of Ultrasound Muscle Echogenicity in Patients With Rheumatic Diseases: Results of a Multicenter International Web‐Based Study,” Frontiers in Medicine 9 (2023): 1090468, 10.3389/fmed.2022.1090468.

92. Salaffi F., Carotti M., Poliseno A. C., et al., “Quantification of Sarcopenia in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis by Measuring the Cross‐Sectional Area of the Thigh Muscles With Magnetic Resonance Imaging,” La Radiologia Medica 128, no. 5 (2023): 578–587, 10.1007/s11547-023-01630-9.

93. Smerilli G., Moscioni E., Sclocco R., et al., “Multimodal Ultrasound Muscle Assessment in Patients With Rheumatic Diseases: A Patient‐Based Reliability Study,” Rheumatology Advances in Practice 7, no. 3 (2023): rkad072, 10.1093/rap/rkad072.

94. Shelly M. J., Bolster F., Foran P., Crosbie I., Kavanagh E. C., and Eustace S. J., “Whole‐Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Skeletal Muscle Disease,” Seminars in Musculoskeletal Radiology 14, no. 1 (2010): 47–56, 10.1055/s-0030-1248704.

95. Ogier A. C., Hostin M. A., Bellemare M. E., and Bendahan D., “Overview of MR Image Segmentation Strategies in Neuromuscular Disorders,” Frontiers in Neurology 12 (2021): 625308, 10.3389/fneur.2021.625308.

96. Salaffi F., Di Carlo M., Farah S., and Carotti M., “The Comprehensive Rheumatologic Assessment of Frailty (CRAF): Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Frailty Screening Tool in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 38, no. 3 (2020): 488–499.

97. Rockwood K. and Mitnitski A., “Frailty in Relation to the Accumulation of Deficits,” Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 62, no. 7 (2007): 722–727, 10.1093/gerona/62.7.722.

98. Searle S. D., Mitnitski A., Gahbauer E. A., Gill T. M., and Rockwood K., “A Standard Procedure for Creating a Frailty Index,” BioMed Central Geriatrics 8 (2008): 24, 10.1186/1471-2318-8-24.

99. Stewart J., O'Halloran C., Harrigan P., Spencer J. A., Barton J. R., and Singleton S. J., “Identifying Appropriate Tasks for the Preregistration Year: Modified Delphi Technique,” British Medical Journal 319, no. 7204 (1999): 224–229, 10.1136/bmj.319.7204.224.

100. Maradit‐Kremers H., Crowson C. S., Nicola P. J., et al., “Increased Unrecognized Coronary Heart Disease and Sudden Deaths in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population‐Based Cohort Study,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 52, no. 2 (2005): 402–411, 10.1002/art.20853.

101. Nicola P. J., Maradit‐Kremers H., Roger V. L., et al., “The Risk of Congestive Heart Failure in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population‐Based Study Over 46 Years,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 52, no. 2 (2005): 412–420, 10.1002/art.20855.

102. Maradit‐Kremers H., Nicola P. J., Crowson C. S., Ballman K. V., and Gabriel S. E., “Cardiovascular Death in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population‐Based Study,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 52, no. 3 (2005): 722–732, 10.1002/art.20878.

103. Madjid M. and Willerson J. T., “Inflammatory Markers in Coronary Heart Disease,” British Medical Bulletin 100 (2011): 23–38, 10.1093/bmb/ldr043.

104. Liao K. P. and Solomon D. H., “Traditional Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Inflammation and Cardiovascular Risk in Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Rheumatology 52, no. 1 (2013): 45–52, 10.1093/rheumatology/kes243.

105. Doran M. F., Crowson C. S., Pond G. R., O'Fallon W. M., and Gabriel S. E., “Frequency of Infection in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Compared With Controls: A Population‐Based Study,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 46, no. 9 (2002): 2287–2293, 10.1002/art.10524.

106. Keyser F. D., “Choice of Biologic Therapy for Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: The Infection Perspective,” Current Rheumatology Reviews 7, no. 1 (2011): 77–87, 10.2174/157339711794474620.

107. Crowson C. S., Hoganson D. D., Fitz‐Gibbon P. D., and Matteson E. L., “Development and Validation of a Risk Score for Serious Infection in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 64, no. 9 (2012): 2847–2855, 10.1002/art.34530.

108. Turesson C., O'Fallon W. M., Crowson C. S., Gabriel S. E., and Matteson E. L., “Extra‐Articular Disease Manifestations in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Incidence Trends and Risk Factors Over 46 Years,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 62, no. 8 (2003): 722–727, 10.1136/ard.62.8.722.

109. Carotti M., Salaffi F., Manganelli P., Salvolini L., Bichi Secchi E., and De Berardinis S., “L'interessamento Polmonare Subclinico Nell'artrite Reumatoide: Studio Mediante Tomografia Ad Alta Risoluzione [The Subclinical Involvement of the Lung in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Evaluation by High‐Resolution Computed Tomography],” Reumatismo 53, no. 4 (2001): 280–288 Italian., 10.4081/reumatismo.2001.280.

110. Brown K. K., “Rheumatoid Lung Disease,” Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society 4, no. 5 (2007): 443–448, 10.1513/pats.200703-045MS.

111. Salaffi F., Carotti M., Di Carlo M., Tardella M., and Giovagnoni A., “High‐Resolution Computed Tomography of the Lung in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Prevalence of Interstitial Lung Disease Involvement and Determinants of Abnormalities,” Medicine 98, no. 38 (2019): e17088, 10.1097/MD.0000000000017088.

112. Carmona L., González‐Alvaro I., Balsa A., Angel Belmonte M., Tena X., and Sanmartí R., “Rheumatoid Arthritis in Spain: Occurrence of Extra‐Articular Manifestations and Estimates of Disease Severity,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 62, no. 9 (2003): 897–900, 10.1136/ard.62.9.897.

113. Gochuico B. R., Avila N. A., Chow C. K., et al., “Progressive Preclinical Interstitial Lung Disease in Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Archives of Internal Medicine 168, no. 2 (2008): 159–166, 10.1001/archinternmed.2007.59.

114. Wang J. X. and Du C. G., “A Retrospective Study of Clinical Characteristics of Interstitial Lung Disease Associated With Rheumatoid Arthritis in Chinese Patients,” Medical Science Monitor 21 (2015): 708–715, 10.12659/MSM.890880.

115. Bongartz T., Nannini C., Medina‐Velasquez Y. F., et al., “Incidence and Mortality of Interstitial Lung Disease in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population‐Based Study,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 62, no. 6 (2010): 1583–1591, 10.1002/art.27405.

116. Smitten A. L., Simon T. A., Hochberg M. C., and Suissa S., “A Meta‐Analysis of the Incidence of Malignancy in Adult Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Arthritis Research & Therapy 10, no. 2 (2008): R45, 10.1186/ar2404.

117. Bhandari B., Basyal B., Sarao M. S., Nookala V., and Thein Y., “Prevalence of Cancer in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Epidemiological Study Based on the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES),” Cureus 12, no. 4 (2020): e7870, 10.7759/cureus.7870.

118. Hashimoto A., Chiba N., Tsuno H., et al., “Incidence of Malignancy and the Risk of Lymphoma in Japanese Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Compared to the General Population,” Journal of Rheumatology 42, no. 4 (2015): 564–571, 10.3899/jrheum.140533.

119. Mizushima M., Sugihara T., Matsui T., Urata Y., Tohma S., and Kawahata K., “Comparison Between Rheumatoid Arthritis With Malignant Lymphoma and Other Malignancies: Analysis of a National Database of Rheumatic Disease in Japan,” Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism 63 (2023): 152301, 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2023.152301.

120. Harigai M., Nanki T., Koike R., et al., “Risk for Malignancy in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Treated With Biological Disease‐Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs Compared to the General Population: A Nationwide Cohort Study in Japan,” Modern Rheumatology 26, no. 5 (2016): 642–650, 10.3109/14397595.2016.1141740.

121. Wu C. Y., Chen D. Y., Shen J. L., et al., “The Risk of cancer in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Taking Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonists: A Nationwide Cohort Study,” Arthritis Research & Therapy 16, no. 5 (2014): 449, 10.1186/s13075-014-0449-5.

122. Mariette X., Matucci‐Cerinic M., Pavelka K., et al., “Malignancies Associated With Tumour Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in Registries and Prospective Observational Studies: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 70, no. 11 (2011): 1895–1904, 10.1136/ard.2010.149419.

123. Carmona L., Descalzo M. A., Perez‐Pampin E., et al., “All‐Cause and Cause‐Specific Mortality in Rheumatoid Arthritis Are Not Greater Than Expected When Treated With Tumour Necrosis Factor Antagonists,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 66, no. 7 (2007): 880–885, 10.1136/ard.2006.067660.

124. Lunt M., Watson K. D., Dixon W. G., et al., “No Evidence of Association Between Anti‐Tumor Necrosis Factor Treatment and Mortality in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results From the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 62, no. 11 (2010): 3145–3153, 10.1002/art.27660.

125. Lopez‐Olivo M. A., Tayar J. H., Martinez‐Lopez J. A., et al., “Risk of Malignancies in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated With Biologic Therapy: A Meta‐Analysis,” Journal of the American Medical Association 308, no. 9 (2012): 898–908, 10.1001/2012.jama.10857.

126. Simon T. A., Boers M., Hochberg M., et al., “Comparative Risk of Malignancies and Infections in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Initiating Abatacept Versus Other Biologics: A Multi‐Database Real‐World Study,” Arthritis Research & Therapy 21, no. 1 (2019): 228, 10.1186/s13075-019-1992-x.

127. Ng K. J., Huang K. Y., Tung C. H., et al., “Risk Factors, Including Different Biologics, Associated With Depression and Anxiety in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Cross‐Sectional Observational Study,” Clinical Rheumatology 39, no. 3 (2020): 737–746, 10.1007/s10067-019-04820-x.

128. Katchamart W., Narongroeknawin P., Chanapai W., Thaweeratthakul P., and Srisomnuek A., “Prevalence of and Factors Associated With Depression and Anxiety in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Multicenter Prospective Cross‐Sectional Study,” International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases 23, no. 3 (2020): 302–308, 10.1111/1756-185X.13781.

129. Ho R. C., Fu E. H., Chua A. N., Cheak A. A., and Mak A., “Clinical and Psychosocial Factors Associated With Depression and Anxiety in Singaporean Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases 14, no. 1 (2011): 37–47, 10.1111/j.1756-185X.2010.01591.x.

130. El‐Miedany Y. M. and El‐Rasheed A. H., “Is Anxiety a More Common Disorder Than Depression in Rheumatoid Arthritis?,” Joint, Bone, Spine 69, no. 3 (2002): 300–306, 10.1016/s1297-319x(02)00368-8.

131. Matcham F., Rayner L., Steer S., and Hotopf M., “The Prevalence of Depression in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis,” Rheumatology 52, no. 12 (2013): 2136–2148, 10.1093/rheumatology/ket169.

132. Li N., Chan E., and Peterson S., “The Economic Burden of Depression Among Adults With Rheumatoid Arthritis in the United States,” Journal of Medical Economics 22, no. 4 (2019): 372–378, 10.1080/13696998.2019.1572015.

133. Aprahamian I., Suemoto C. K., Lin S. M., et al., “Depression Is Associated With Self‐Rated Frailty in Older Adults From an Outpatient Clinic: A Prospective Study,” International Psychogeriatrics 31, no. 3 (2019): 425–434, 10.1017/S104161021800100X.

134. Sanders J. B., Comijs H. C., Bremmer M. A., Deeg D. J., and Beekman A. T., “A 13‐Year Prospective Cohort Study on the Effects of Aging and Frailty on the Depression‐Pain Relationship in Older Adults,” International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 30, no. 7 (2015): 751–757, 10.1002/gps.4224.

135. Bair M. J., Robinson R. L., Katon W., and Kroenke K., “Depression and Pain Comorbidity: A Literature Review,” Archives of Internal Medicine 163, no. 20 (2003): 2433–2445, 10.1001/archinte.163.20.2433.

136. Arvanitakis Z., Shah R. C., and Bennett D. A., “Diagnosis and Management of Dementia: Review,” Journal of the American Medical Association 322, no. 16 (2019): 1589–1599, 10.1001/jama.2019.4782.

137. Duan L., Li S., Li H., Shi Y., Xie X., and Feng Y., “Causality Between Rheumatoid Arthritis and the Risk of Cognitive Impairment: A Mendelian Randomization Study,” Arthritis Research & Therapy 26, no. 1 (2024): 5, 10.1186/s13075-023-03245-x.

138. Vitturi B. K., Nascimento B. A. C., Alves B. R., de Campos F. S. C., and Torigoe D. Y., “Cognitive Impairment in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 69 (2019): 81–87, 10.1016/j.jocn.2019.08.027.

139. Petersen L. E., Baptista T. S. A., Molina J. K., et al., “Cognitive Impairment in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Role of Lymphocyte Subsets, Cytokines and Neurotrophic Factors,” Clinical Rheumatology 37, no. 5 (2018): 1171–1181, 10.1007/s10067-018-3990-9.

140. Vezzani A. and Viviani B., “Neuromodulatory Properties of Inflammatory Cytokines and Their Impact on Neuronal Excitability,” Neuropharmacology 96, no. Pt A (2015): 70–82, 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2014.10.027.

141. Petersen L. E., Grassi‐Oliveira R., Siara T., et al., “Premature Immunosenescence Is Associated With Memory Dysfunction in Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Neuroimmunomodulation 22, no. 3 (2015): 130–137, 10.1159/000358437.

142. Gao Y., Cai W., Zhou Y., Li Y., Cheng J., and Wei F., “Immunosenescence of T Cells: A Key Player in Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Inflammation Research 71, no. 12 (2022): 1449–1462, 10.1007/s00011-022-01649-0.

143. Shin S. Y., Katz P., Wallhagen M., and Julian L., “Cognitive Impairment in Persons With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Arthritis Care & Research 64, no. 8 (2012): 1144–1150, 10.1002/acr.21683.

144. Oláh C., Schwartz N., Denton C., Kardos Z., Putterman C., and Szekanecz Z., “Cognitive Dysfunction in Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases,” Arthritis Research & Therapy 22, no. 1 (2020): 78, 10.1186/s13075-020-02180-5.

145. Coluccia D., Wolf O. T., Kollias S., Roozendaal B., Forster A., and de Quervain D. J., “Glucocorticoid Therapy‐Induced Memory Deficits: Acute Versus Chronic Effects,” Journal of Neuroscience 28, no. 13 (2008): 3474–3478, 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4893-07.2008.

146. Wolfe F., Mitchell D. M., Sibley J. T., et al., “The Mortality of Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 37, no. 4 (1994): 481–494, 10.1002/art.1780370408.

147. Ziadé N., Jougla E., and Coste J., “Population‐Level Influence of Rheumatoid Arthritis on Mortality and Recent Trends: A Multiple Cause‐of‐Death Analysis in France, 1970–2002,” Journal of Rheumatology 35, no. 10 (2008): 1950–1957.

148. Widdifield J., Bernatsky S., Paterson J. M., et al., “Trends in Excess Mortality Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis in Ontario, Canada,” Arthritis Care & Research 67, no. 8 (2015): 1047–1053, 10.1002/acr.22553.

149. Zhang Y., Lu N., Peloquin C., et al., “Improved Survival in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A General Population‐Based Cohort Study,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 76, no. 2 (2017): 408–413, 10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-209058.

150. Kojima T., Akishita M., Nakamura T., et al., “Association of Polypharmacy With Fall Risk Among Geriatric Outpatients,” Geriatrics & Gerontology International 11, no. 4 (2011): 438–444, 10.1111/j.1447-0594.2011.00703.x.

151. Benetos A., Rossignol P., Cherubini A., et al., “Polypharmacy in the Aging Patient: Management of Hypertension in Octogenarians,” Journal of the American Medical Association 314, no. 2 (2015): 170–180, 10.1001/jama.2015.7517.

152. Treharne G. J., Douglas K. M., Iwaszko J., et al., “Polypharmacy Among People With Rheumatoid Arthritis: The Role of Age, Disease Duration and Comorbidity,” Musculoskeletal Care 5, no. 4 (2007): 175–190, 10.1002/msc.112.

153. Mao S., Xiao K., Zhou W., Xu H., and Zhang S., “The Impact of Hot Spring Hydrotherapy on Pain Perception and Dysfunction Severity in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis,” Journal of Pain Research 16 (2023): 3925–3944, 10.2147/JPR.S438744.

154. Smolen J. S., Aletaha D., Bijlsma J. W., et al., “T2T Expert Committee. Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis to Target: Recommendations of an International Task Force,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 69, no. 4 (2010): 631–637, 10.1136/ard.2009.123919.

155. Schoels M., Knevel R., Aletaha D., et al., “Evidence for Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis to Target: Results of a Systematic Literature Search,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 69, no. 4 (2010): 638–643, 10.1136/ard.2009.123976.

156. Stoffer M. A., Schoels M. M., Smolen J. S., et al., “Evidence for Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis to Target: Results of a Systematic Literature Search Update,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 75, no. 1 (2016): 16–22, 10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-207526.

157. Batko B., Urbański K., Świerkot J., et al., “Comorbidity Burden and Clinical Characteristics of Patients With Difficult‐to‐Control Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Clinical Rheumatology 38, no. 9 (2019): 2473–2481, 10.1007/s10067-019-04579-1.

158. Coelho T., Paúl C., Gobbens R. J. J., and Fernandes L., “Multidimensional Frailty and Pain in Community Dwelling Elderly,” Pain Medicine 18, no. 4 (2017): 693–701, 10.1111/pme.12746.

159. Azizli A., Sargın G., and Senturk T., “The Effect of Disease‐Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs on Sleep and Quality of Life in Older Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Journal of Rheumatic Diseases 30, no. 2 (2023): 99–105, 10.4078/jrd.22.0053.

160. Smolen J. S., Breedveld F. C., Burmester G. R., et al., “Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis to Target: 2014 Update of the Recommendations of an International Task Force,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 75, no. 1 (2016): 3–15, 10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-207524.

161. Tutuncu Z., Reed G., Kremer J., and Kavanaugh A., “Do Patients With Older‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis Receive Less Aggressive Treatment?,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 65, no. 9 (2006): 1226–1229, 10.1136/ard.2005.051144.

162. Richter M. D., Matteson E. L., J. M. Davis, 3rd , Achenbach S. J., and Crowson C. S., “Comparison of Biologic Discontinuation in Patients With Elderly‐Onset Versus Younger‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis,” ACR Open Rheumatology 1, no. 10 (2019): 627–631, 10.1002/acr2.11083.

163. Fraenkel L., Rabidou N., and Dhar R., “Are Rheumatologists' Treatment Decisions Influenced by Patients' Age?,” Rheumatology 45, no. 12 (2006): 1555–1557, 10.1093/rheumatology/kel144.

164. Schmajuk G., Schneeweiss S., Katz J. N., et al., “Treatment of Older Adult Patients Diagnosed With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Improved but Not Optimal,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 57, no. 6 (2007): 928–934, 10.1002/art.22890.

165. Radovits B. J., Fransen J., Eijsbouts A., van Riel P. L., and Laan R. F., “Missed Opportunities in the Treatment of Elderly Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Rheumatology 48, no. 8 (2009): 906–910, 10.1093/rheumatology/kep129.

166. Pavlov‐Dolijanovic S., Bogojevic M., Nozica‐Radulovic T., Radunovic G., and Mujovic N., “Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis: Characteristics and Treatment Options,” Medicina 59, no. 10 (2023): 1878, 10.3390/medicina59101878.

167. Innala L., Berglin E., Möller B., et al., “Age at Onset Determines Severity and Choice of Treatment in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Prospective Study,” Arthritis Research & Therapy 16, no. 2 (2014): R94, 10.1186/ar4540.

168. Ochi S., Mizoguchi F., Nakano K., and Tanaka Y., “Similarity of Response to Biologics Between Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis (EORA) and Non‐EORA Elderly Patients: From the FIRST Registry,” Journal of Rheumatology 48, no. 11 (2021): 1655–1662, 10.3899/jrheum.201135.

169. Sugihara T., Ishizaki T., Onoguchi W., et al., “Effectiveness and Safety of Treat‐To‐Target Strategy in Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis: A 3‐Year Prospective Observational Study,” Rheumatology 60, no. 9 (2021): 4252–4261, 10.1093/rheumatology/keaa922.

170. Radovits B. J., Kievit W., Fransen J., et al., “Influence of Age on the Outcome of Antitumour Necrosis Factor Alpha Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 68, no. 9 (2009): 1470–1473, 10.1136/ard.2008.094730.

171. Bathon J. M., Fleischmann R. M., Van der Heijde D., et al., “Safety and Efficacy of Etanercept Treatment in Elderly Subjects With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Journal of Rheumatology 33, no. 2 (2006): 234–243.

172. Köller M. D., Aletaha D., Funovits J., Pangan A., Baker D., and Smolen J. S., “Response of Elderly Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis to Methotrexate or TNF Inhibitors Compared With Younger Patients,” Rheumatology 48, no. 12 (2009): 1575–1580, 10.1093/rheumatology/kep291.

173. Genevay S., Finckh A., Ciurea A., et al., “Tolerance and Effectiveness of Anti‐Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Therapies in Elderly Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population‐Based Cohort Study,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 57, no. 4 (2007): 679–685, 10.1002/art.22688.

174. Galloway J. B., Hyrich K. L., Mercer L. K., et al., “Anti‐TNF Therapy Is Associated With an Increased Risk of Serious Infections in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Especially in the First 6 Months of Treatment: Updated Results From the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register With Special Emphasis on Risks in the Elderly,” Rheumatology 50, no. 1 (2011): 124–131, 10.1093/rheumatology/keq242.

175. Schneeweiss S., Setoguchi S., Weinblatt M. E., et al., “Anti‐Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Therapy and the Risk of Serious Bacterial Infections in Elderly Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Arthritis and Rheumatism 56, no. 6 (2007): 1754–1764, 10.1002/art.22600.

176. Pers Y. M., Fortunet C., Constant E., et al., “Predictors of Response and Remission in a Large Cohort of Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Treated With Tocilizumab in Clinical Practice,” Rheumatology 53, no. 1 (2014): 76–84, 10.1093/rheumatology/ket301.

177. Jeries H., Daood R., Hijazi B., et al., “Drug Survival on First Biologic Therapy Among Late‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Compared to Early‐Onset Patients: A Population‐Based Cohort Study,” Musculoskeletal Care 22, no. 3 (2024): e1928, 10.1002/msc.1928.

178. Curtis J. R., Schulze‐Koops H., Takiya L., et al., “Efficacy and Safety of Tofacitinib in Older and Younger Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 35, no. 3 (2017): 390–400.

179. Ytterberg S. R., Bhatt D. L., Mikuls T. R., et al., “Cardiovascular and Cancer Risk With Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis,” New England Journal of Medicine 386, no. 4 (2022): 316–326, 10.1056/NEJMoa2109927.

180. Cohen S. B., Koenig A., Wang L., et al., “Efficacy and Safety of Tofacitinib in US and Non‐US Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: Pooled Analyses of Phase II and III,” Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 34, no. 1 (2016): 32–36.

181. Fleischmann R., Alam J., Arora V., et al., “Safety and Efficacy of Baricitinib in Elderly Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases Open 3, no. 2 (2017): e000546, 10.1136/rmdopen-2017-000546.

182. Genovese M. C., Kalunian K., Gottenberg J. E., et al., “Effect of Filgotinib vs Placebo on Clinical Response in Patients With Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis Refractory to Disease‐Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Therapy: The FINCH 2 Randomized Clinical Trial,” Journal of the American Medical Association 322, no. 4 (2019): 315–325, 10.1001/jama.2019.9055.

183. Sugitani N., Tanaka E., Inoue E., et al., “Higher Risk of Poor Functional Outcome and Unfavourable Clinical Events for Late‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results From the IORRA Cohort,” Rheumatology 64, no. 5 (2025): 2541–2549, 10.1093/rheumatology/keae673.

184. Dag H. H., Snoeck Henkemans S. V. J., Looijen A. E. M., Heutz J. W., Dolhain R. J. E. M., and de Jong P. H. P., “Eye‐Openers for Advanced Management of Elderly‐Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Rheumatology 64, no. 12 (2025): 6241–6249, 10.1093/rheumatology/keaf432.

185. Cacciatore F., Della‐Morte D., Basile C., et al., “Long‐Term Mortality in Frail Elderly Subjects With Osteoarthritis,” Rheumatology 53, no. 2 (2014): 293–299, 10.1093/rheumatology/ket348.

Associated Data

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

Insights Into Late-Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis (LORA): Characteristics (Clinical and Imaging), Comorbidities, and Therapeutic Targets.

Ошибки и ограничения

Аннотация

Introduction

Inflammaging and Rheumatoid Arthritis

Clinical Features of LORA

Differential Diagnosis for LORA

Multimorbidity, Polypharmacy and Frailty

Cardiovascular Risk

Risk of Infections

Lung Disease

Risk for Developing Malignancies

Cognitive Dysfunction and Depression

Challenges in the LORA Treatment

Treat‐to‐Target Strategies in LORA

Conclusions

Funding

Disclosure

Ethics Statement

Consent

Acknowledgements

Data Availability Statement

References

Associated Data

Data Availability Statement