Sulfasalazine in the treatment of spondylarthropathy. A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Early diagnosis and treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in Africa and the Middle East

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is the prototype for spondyloarthritis primarily affecting young men. Geographic and ethnic variations exist in the prevalence and severity of AS and relate to the wide disparity in the frequency of human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-B27, a major genetic risk factor. The strength of the disease association with HLA-B27 is lower in most Arab populations (25-75 %) than in Western European populations (>90 %), and there is no association in sub-Saharan Africa, where the prevalence of HLA-B27 is <1 %. Other epidemiologic differences between European and African populations are the apparent later age at presentation in sub-Saharan Africa, and the high rate of spondyloarthropathies associated with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Diagnosis of AS is often delayed 8-10 years; potential reasons for the delay in Africa and the Middle East include low awareness among physicians and patients, the requirement for radiographic evidence of sacroiliitis for diagnosis, and limited access to magnetic resonance imaging in some countries. Treatment should be initiated early to prevent or reduce skeletal deformity and physical disability. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are effective first-line treatment and anti-tumor necrosis factor-α drugs are indicated for patients who have an inadequate response to first-line therapy. In Africa and the Middle East, such treatments may be precluded either by cost or contraindicated because of the high prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection. Research is sorely needed to develop cost-effective tools to diagnose AS early as well as effective, inexpensive, and safe treatments for these developing regions.

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: results of a randomised placebo-controlled trial (ABILITY-1)

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA).

Methods

Patients fulfilled Assessment of Spondyloarthritis international Society (ASAS) criteria for axial spondyloarthritis, had a Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score of ≥ 4, total back pain score of ≥ 4 (10 cm visual analogue scale) and inadequate response, intolerance or contraindication to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); patients fulfilling modified New York criteria for ankylosing spondylitis were excluded. Patients were randomised to adalimumab (N=91) or placebo (N=94). The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving ASAS40 at week 12. Efficacy assessments included BASDAI and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS). MRI was performed at baseline and week 12 and scored using the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) index.

Results

Significantly more patients in the adalimumab group achieved ASAS40 at week 12 compared with patients in the placebo group (36% vs 15%, p<0.001). Significant clinical improvements based on other ASAS responses, ASDAS and BASDAI were also detected at week 12 with adalimumab treatment, as were improvements in quality of life measures. Inflammation in the spine and sacroiliac joints on MRI significantly decreased after 12 weeks of adalimumab treatment. Shorter disease duration, younger age, elevated baseline C-reactive protein or higher SPARCC MRI sacroiliac joint scores were associated with better week 12 responses to adalimumab. The safety profile was consistent with what is known for adalimumab in ankylosing spondylitis and other diseases.

Conclusions

In patients with nr-axSpA, adalimumab treatment resulted in effective control of disease activity, decreased inflammation and improved quality of life compared with placebo. Results from ABILITY-1 suggest that adalimumab has a positive benefit–risk profile in active nr-axSpA patients with inadequate response to NSAIDs.

Juvenile spondyloarthritis treatment recommendations

No specific recommendations for the treatment of juvenile spondyloarthritis have been established. Important differences exist in how spondyloarthritis begins and progresses in children and adults, supporting the need for pediatric-specific recommendations. Recently published recommendations for the treatment of juvenile arthritis consider children with sacroiliitis in a separate group and allow for more accelerated institution of a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor depending on disease activity and prognostic factors that derive primarily from studies of other forms of juvenile arthritis. There is a need to develop measures of disease activity and prognosis specific for juvenile spondyloarthritis that reflect spinal disease, as well as other major clinical features, such as enthesitis, before significant progress can be made in this area.

Developments in therapies for spondyloarthritis

First-line therapy for spondyloarthritis (SpA) has not yet altered in the wake of new classification criteria; NSAIDs and physical therapy are recommended. Anti-TNF agents can be used when NSAIDs fail, but their efficacy has potentially been limited in previous trials by inclusion criteria requiring the presence of established, active disease. Now, not only patients with axial SpA (axSpA) with radiographic signs of sacroiliitis (that is, with ankylosing spondylitis), but also patients in whom structural damage is not-yet-visible radiographically (non-radiographic axSpA) can be included in trials of therapy for axSpA. TNF blockers, it seems already, are at least similarly effective in patients with non-radiographic axSpA as in those with established AS. Short symptom duration and a positive C-reactive protein test at baseline are currently the best predictors for a good response to TNF-blocking agents. Biologic agents besides anti-TNF therapies have so far failed in the treatment of axSpA. New bone formation seems currently to be best prevented by NSAIDs, not by TNF blockers. Whether earlier effective treatment of bony inflammation with anti-TNF therapy will be able to prevent ossification at a later stage has yet to be determined. New classification criteria for peripheral SpA will also allow treatment trials to be conducted more systematically than has previously been possible in this subgroup of patients.

Clinical utility of the new ASAS criteria for spondyloarthritis and the disease activity score

The advent of new therapeutic agents that are efficacious in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis and related spondyloarthropathies has highlighted important unmet needs in our understanding of these conditions. Chief among these is the possibility of making a diagnosis at the early, nonradiographic phase, when the burden of disease is substantial and comparable to that of more advanced stages. The new Assessments in Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS) classification criteria provide a unique tool to allow research standardization in this area and may also be of clinical utility. The development of the disease activity index ASDAS (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score) aims to provide a composite measure that can discriminate and show sensitivity to change while incorporating measurable biomarkers. Both instruments represent a major step forward in the research field of spondyloarthritis, although further validation is now required.

[Psoriatric arthritis - a permanent challenge for rheumatologists and patients: part 2: imaging diagnostics, classification and therapy]

In recent years a considerable number of imaging techniques have been used to demonstrate the onset and progression of arthritis-related changes in psoriatric arthritis (PsA). Moreover the identification of new immunological pathways has resulted in a substantial improvement of available therapies for PsA increasing the chance for the individual to receive effective treatment. Although an all-embracing disease activity score is still lacking, there is a variety of symptom-related tools to adequately reflect the course of disease and to evaluate the corresponding treatment success. This manuscript aims to give an overview of the latest corresponding knowledge with respect to PsA.

Psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review

Psoriatic arthritis is an inflammatory rheumatic disorder of unknown etiology occurring in patients with psoriasis. The Classification Criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis study group has recently developed a validated set of classification criteria for psoriatic arthritis with a sensitivity of 91.4% and a specificity of 98.7%. Three main clinical patterns have been identified: oligoarticular (≤ 4 involved joints) or polyarticular (≥ 5 involved joints) peripheral disease and axial disease with or without associated peripheral arthritis. In this context distal interphalangeal arthritis and arthritis mutilans may occur. According to other reports, also in our centre, asymmetric oligoarthritis is the most frequent pattern at onset. Axial disease has been estimated between 5% and 36% of patients. It is characterized by an irregular involvement of the axial skeleton with a predilection for the cervical spine. Recurrent episodes of enthesitis and dactylitis represent a hallmark of psoriatic arthritis. In around 20% of cases distal extremity swelling with pitting edema of the hands or feet is observed. Unilateral acute iridocyclitis, usually recurrent in alternate fashion, is the most frequent extra-articular manifestation, and accelerated atherosclerosis is the prominent comorbidity. The clinical course of peripheral and axial psoriatic arthritis is usually less severe than rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis, respectively. Local corticosteroid injections and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are recommended in milder forms. Sulphasalazine and methotrexate are effective in peripheral psoriatic arthritis. Recent studies have provided evidence on the efficacy of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α drugs to control symptoms and to slow or arrest radiological disease progression.

Editorial review: how early should ankylosing spondylitis be treated with a tumor necrosis factor-blocker?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Therapy of ankylosing spondylitis with tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-blockers is very effective in about 50% of patients. The focus of this review is to discuss how early in the course of the disease patients with axial spondyloarthritis should be treated with TNF-blockers.

RECENT FINDINGS

During the last 10 years TNF-blockers were investigated in established ankylosing spondylitis. More recently clinical trials focused on early treatment including patients with axial nonradiographic spondyloarthritis. It could be shown that TNF-blockers are at least as effective in patients with axial nonradiographic spondyloarthritis when compared with established ankylosing spondylitis and that TNF-blockers are even more effective when used earlier in the course of the disease and in younger age. Some data even indicate that drug-free remission might be achieved if patients are treated earlier. Active inflammation as seen by MRI can effectively be suppressed during therapy with TNF-blockers. It has been hypothesized that early anti-inflammatory treatment is the best way to prevent ankylosis, which has to be proven in future studies.

SUMMARY

TNF-blockers can achieve a higher clinical response if ankylosing spondylitis patients and patients with nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis are treated earlier. Whether very early treatment affects ankylosis has to be further investigated.

Combination antibiotics as a treatment for chronic Chlamydia-induced reactive arthritis: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, prospective trial

OBJECTIVE

Chlamydia trachomatis and Chlamydophila (Chlamydia) pneumoniae are known triggers of reactive arthritis (ReA) and exist in a persistent metabolically active infection state in the synovium, suggesting that they may be susceptible to antimicrobial agents. The goal of this study was to investigate whether a 6-month course of combination antibiotics is an effective treatment for patients with chronic Chlamydia-induced ReA.

METHODS

This study was a 9-month, prospective, double-blind, triple-placebo trial assessing a 6-month course of combination antibiotics as a treatment for Chlamydia-induced ReA. Eligible patients had to be positive for C trachomatis or C pneumoniae by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Groups received 1) doxycycline and rifampin plus placebo instead of azithromycin; 2) azithromycin and rifampin plus placebo instead of doxycycline; or 3) placebos instead of azithromycin, doxycycline, and rifampin. The primary end point was the number of patients who improved by 20% or more in at least 4 of 6 variables without worsening in any 1 variable in both combination antibiotic groups combined and in the placebo group at month 6 compared with baseline.

RESULTS

The primary end point was achieved in 17 of 27 patients (63%) receiving combination antibiotics and in 3 of 15 patients (20%) receiving placebo. Secondary efficacy end points showed similar results. Six of 27 patients (22%) randomized to combination antibiotics believed that their disease went into complete remission during the trial, whereas no patient in the placebo arm achieved remission. Significantly more patients in the active treatment group became negative for C trachomatis or C pneumoniae by PCR at month 6. Adverse events were mild, with no significant differences between the groups.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that a 6-month course of combination antibiotics is an effective treatment for chronic Chlamydia-induced ReA.

Maintained clinical response of infliximab treatment in ankylosing spondylitis: a 6-year long-term study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy, safety and drug discontinuation in patients with ankylosing spondylitis treated with infliximab, as well as the drug survival over a period of 6 years.

METHODS

Forty patients with ankylosing spondylitis treated with infliximab were included in this open label study. All patients fulfilled the New York revised criteria for ankylosing spondylitis. Infliximab was given intravenously (5 mg/kg/body weight) at weeks 0, 2, 6 and every 8 weeks thereafter for a period of 6 years. Data concerning infliximab efficacy, tolerability, adverse events and drug discontinuation, were recorded. Clinical improvement according to the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index 50% and the Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study Group 20% and 40% were also recorded.

RESULTS

A significant improvement in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index and Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study Group scores was noted in the first year which sustained through the sixth year of treatment. More specifically, after the sixth year of treatment, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index 50% was achieved by 65% of patients (26/40), Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study Group 20% by 72.5% (29/40) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study Group 40% was reached by 70% (28/40) of patients. Clinical improvement was associated with the reduction of acute phase reactants, such as C-reactive protein levels. After the first and the second year of treatment, the survival rate of infliximab reached 95%, after the third year it was 80%, while after the fourth year it was 72.5%, which was maintained throughout the fifth and sixth year of therapy. Five patients were increased the dose of infliximab and three of them had shortened the interval infusion. Overall, 11 patients were withdrawn during the observational period, three because of adverse events, two because of lack of efficacy, while six were lost from follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Infliximab was effective, safe and well-tolerated in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. The clinical response was maintained for a period of 6 years, with high infliximab survival rate, reaching the percentage of 72.5%.

Mesalazine in inflammatory bowel disease: a trendy topic once again?

5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) preparations (eg, mesalazine, mesalamine) are well-established preparations used in the management of inflammatory bowel disease. These drugs are most useful for the treatment of mild to moderate flares of ulcerative colitis and, especially, for maintenance of remission. Although most gastroenterologists are very familiar with these drugs, the interest in these drugs has undergone a resurgence, with new preparations offering convenience and high dosage, while preserving their customary safety. New dosage regimens are likely to become standard practice in the near future. There is also considerable interest in chemoprevention of colorectal cancer in the context of inflammatory bowel disease, and the role of long-term maintenance therapy with 5-ASAs in achieving such chemoprevention. A mechanism of action for such chemoprevention has been provided by the agonism of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma by 5-ASA, which unifies its efficacy as an anti-inflammatory and chemopreventive agent. In the future, even more effective agents based on 5-ASA are expected, based on more powerful agonism of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma; 5-ASA preparations have become 'trendy' again.

Anti-IL-1 molecules: new comers and new indications

The interleukin 1 family is composed by the interleukin 1 (IL-1) and its natural occurring inhibitor, the interleukin 1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra). The role of both molecules in rheumatoid arthritis has been widely established, and in this sense new molecules blocking IL-1 actions are under investigation. Anakinra is the recombinant form of IL-1Ra, and has proven to be well tolerated and indicated in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Nevertheless, other molecules such as mAb anti-IL-1 and IL-1 Trap are being developed. Moreover, the recent relation of IL-1 in the inflammasome and pathways of innate immunity has lead to new indications of anti-IL-1 molecules, especially in the autoinflammatory syndromes as well as in other inflammatory diseases. Herein we have performed a review of the literature, limited to English language journals (PUBMED search: combination of descriptors IL-1 and anakinra, systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis, adult's onset Still's disease, autoinflammatory syndromes, gout, pseudogout, ankylosing spondylitis, and systemic lupus erythematosus from January 1985-December 2008) emphasizing the possible new indications. Although sufficient data is not yet available to fully assess the efficacy and safety of anti-IL-1 molecules in patients with inflammatory disorders other than rheumatoid arthritis, new data is promising.

Combination Treatment with Etanercept and an Intensive SPA Rehabilitation Program in Active Ankylosing Spondylitis

The aim of this study is to determine the effects of a combination treatment with etanercept and spa rehabilitation versus etanercept alone on function, disability and quality of life in a group of patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Sixty patients with AS underwent etanercept as suggested by ASAS/EULAR recommendations. As the clinical and laboratory conditions improved, 30 patients accepted the proposal of coupling the medical therapy with a 7-day rehabilitation program in a thermal baths centre; the remaining 30 subjects continued to take the biologic agent alone. The comparisons between the 2 groups were made after 3 and 6 months. The primary outcome was an improvement in BASFI. The secondary outcome was an improvement in the visual analogic scale of EuroQol (EQ-5Dvas). After 6 months a statistically significant improvement in BASFI (p < 0.05) and EQ-5DVAS (p < 0.05) scores was observed in both groups. The mean change in EQ-5DVAS value showed a statistically significant difference in favour of the combination therapy group versus the monotherapy group (22 vs 32, p < 0.05). A therapeutic regimen combining etanercept with an intensive rehabilitation program contributes to disability reduction and ameliorates quality of life for AS patients.

A systematic MEDLINE analysis of therapeutic approaches in ankylosing spondylitis

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic inflammatory disorder involving the sacroiliac joints (SIJs), spine and less frequently the peripheral joints. Traditionally, it is well recognised that AS is a challenging disease to manage due to the lack of effective therapeutic options. Current evidence would suggest this has changed and there are now a number of therapies available that provide persistent control of inflammatory symptoms with improvement in daily function. NSAIDs remain the first step in patient treatment. Sulphasalazine may be effective in peripheral arthritis and there are emerging data to support its use in early inflammatory back pain. Studies have shown that pamidronate and steroid injection into SIJ have a symptom-modifying effect in AS. Current data suggest that anti-TNF treatment promises early benefit which is likely to continue in the longer term. Treatment with biologics should be considered sooner rather than later in the management of AS.

Guidelines of care for the management of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: section 4. Guidelines of care for the management and treatment of psoriasis with traditional systemic agents

Psoriasis is a common, chronic, inflammatory, multisystem disease with predominantly skin and joint manifestations affecting approximately 2% of the population. In this fourth of 6 sections of the guidelines of care for psoriasis, we discuss the use of traditional systemic medications for the treatment of patients with psoriasis. Treatment should be tailored to meet individual patients' needs. We will discuss in detail the efficacy and safety, and offer recommendations for the use of the 3 most commonly used, and approved, traditional systemic agents: methotrexate, cyclosporine, and acitretin. We will also briefly discuss the available data for the use of azathioprine, fumaric acid esters, hydroxyurea, leflunomide, mycophenolate mofetil, sulfasalazine, tacrolimus, and 6-thioguanine in psoriasis.

Pharmacological treatment (biotherapy excluded) of peripheral psoriatic arthritis: development of recommendations for clinical practice based on data from the literature and experts opinion

OBJECTIVES

To develop recommendations about treatment (except anti-TNF agents) of psoriatic arthritis with peripheral joint involvement (PsA) seen in everyday practice, using evidence from the literature, supplemented with expert opinion when needed.

METHODS

The recommendations were based on evidence from the literature. First, a scientific committee used a Delphi procedure to select five focal points of interest. Then, a literature task force looked for relevant publications in the following: Cochrane, Pubmed, and Ovid databases and abstracts from the French Society for Rheumatology, European League against Rheumatism and American College of Rheumatology. Based on the data from these publications, recommendations were drafted and then validated by a group of 68 experts. The strength of each recommendation was determined, as well as the extent of agreement among the experts.

RESULTS

The evidence extracted from 73 selected papers was presented to experts during interactive workshops. At the end of the workshops, the experts drafted six recommendations, which were then validated by a final vote including all participants. These six recommendations displayed various strength from B to D.

CONCLUSION

These recommendations should help to improve practice uniformity and, ultimately, to improve the management of PsA in France.

Treatment strategies for early psoriatic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Until a few years ago, the early diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) did not receive much attention, especially in view of the lack of drugs capable of altering the disease course. This changed with the introduction of the TNF-alpha-blocking agents, as a result of which the early diagnosis of PsA is now a topic of great interest.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to review the treatment for PsA in order to determine the optimal approach to managing early disease.

METHODS

The systematic review performed by members of GRAPPA (Group of Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis) was integrated with data from more recent studies.

RESULTS/CONCLUSION

After making the diagnosis of PsA, the next step is to stage of the disease with the aim of establishing the prevalent manifestation (peripheral arthritis, peripheral enthesitis, axial involvement and dactylitis) and degree of severity (mild, moderate or severe) of the disease. Each patient should be treated according to the defined disease status following the suggested treatment algorithms.

Psoriatic arthritis

Although there is still some controversy about the existence of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) as a specific form of inflammatory arthritis associated with psoriasis, epidemiological and clinical studies support the unique features of PsA. Because of lack of diagnostic or classification criteria, the disease has been thought of as uncommon. New classification criteria should facilitate case definition of PsA. Over the past several decades, it has become clear that the disease leads to serious disability and even increased mortality. Traditional medications have not been effective in preventing the progression of joint damage. New medications, including biologics, have emerged with potential to controlling the inflammation and arresting the progression of joint damage.

Extraintestinal manifestations of inflammatory bowel disease

The idiopathic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, may be complicated by extraintestinal manifestations (EIMs) in up to 40% of patients. Reports suggest that almost every organ system may be affected. The EIMs are a significant cause of morbidity and may be particularly distressing for the patient. Recent attempts have been made to define the phenotype of IBD in patients of different ethnicities. These studies have highlighted potential racial variations in the prevalence of specific EIMs, findings that are perhaps not surprising given the influence of genetic factors in their pathogenesis. Certain EIMs are related to the activity of the bowel disease, and their management often involves careful monitoring while the IBD is brought under control. Other EIMs, however, typically run a course independent of the IBD activity, and specific, targeted treatments may be required, even including biologic agents such as infliximab.

Therapy of spondyloarthritides

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is the major subtype and a major outcome of an interrelated group of rheumatic diseases now named as spondyloarthritides (SpA). The most important clinical features of this group are inflammatory back pain (IBP), asymmetric peripheral oligoarthritis, predominantly of the lower limbs, enthesitis and specific organ involvement such as anterior uveitis, psoriasis and chronic inflammatory bowel disease. Aortic root involvement and conduction abnormalities are rare complications ofAS. For clinical purposes, five subgroups are differentiated: AS, psoriatic SpA (PsSpA), reactive SpA (ReSpA), SpA associated with inflammatory bowel disease (SpAIBD) and undifferentiated SpA (uSpA). The SpA are genetically linked, the strongest known contributing factor is the MHC class I molecule HLA B27, ARTS-7, and IL-23R, others still remain to be identified. Most frequently and characteristically, AS starts in the sacroiliac joints at a mean age of26 years affecting men only slightly more frequent than women. In about 80% of the patients the disease spreads to the spine where all three segments are affected, most frequently the thoracic spine. Osteodestructive structural changes such as erosions occur less frequently than osteoproliferative changes which are pathognomonic for AS being clinically impressive by their appearance as syndesmophytes and ankylosis. Established classification criteria for AS and SpA perform less well in early disease stages. This partly contributes to the delay of diagnosis which is in the range of 5-10 years-mainly due the high frequency of back pain in the population. Major factors to improve the rate of AS patients diagnosed early are HLA B27 and imaging of the sacroiliac joints. International recommendations for the management ofAS have been published. The conventional treatment is mainly based on NSAIDs, patients with peripheral arthritis may be treated with sulfasalazine and patients with persistently active disease benefit from therapy with anti-TNF agents. Physiotherapy is of major importance in the general approach to patients with AS.

Clinical observations programme in SpA: disease parameters, treatment options and practical management issues

Spondyloarthritides (SpAs) are a cluster of chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases that typically involve inflammation of axial and peripheral joint or tendon and ligament insertions, distinct radiographic changes and diverse extra-articular features. Conventional treatments relieve the signs and symptoms but do not prevent disease progression. TNFalpha inhibitors provide clinicians with the potential to treat the underlying pathology and to alter disease progression. By targeting the underlying inflammatory mechanisms, TNFalpha blockade can treat any extra-articular manifestations of SpA.

Psoriatic Arthritis: A Review

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a seronegative inflammatory spondyloarthropathy occurring in individuals with psoriasis. Psoriasis precedes joint disease in approximately 80% of PsA cases. The clinical course of PsA varies from mild arthritis to a severe, debilitating erosive arthropathy that affects functional capacity and quality of life of patients. The incidence of PsA is gender neutral, but a significant genetic component exists. Hallmark clinical features include dystrophic nail changes in the fingers or toes, dactylitis, and enthesitis. Many drugs indicated for use in rheumatoid arthritis have been found useful in the treatment of PsA, suggesting a similar immune-mediated etiology. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and intraarticular corticosteroids are often sufficient to manage mild PsA. Moderate to severe forms of the disease require the initiation of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Failure of two disease modifying antirheumatic drugs justifies the initiation of biologic therapy with tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors.

Appropriate management of axial spondyloarthritis

The management of axial spondyloarthritis includes a structured baseline assessment of the disease and follow-up of treatment efficacy using validated instruments. The treatment will depend on the severity and predominant manifestations of the disease. The cornerstone of management remains physical therapy and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs such as sulfasalazine have shown efficacy only in treating peripheral arthritis, whereas thalidomide and pamidronate have shown some efficacy in treating axial inflammation. Anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha agents are an efficacious option for treating signs and symptoms of axial disease, peripheral arthritis, and enthesitis, and for improving functional outcomes. They have not shown efficacy in reducing radiographic progression in axial disease. Recent evidence suggests that the new bone formation in ankylosing spondylitis may be due to upregulation of Wnt signaling in the osteoblastic pathway secondary to low serum DKK-1 levels, which are further suppressed by tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy.

Ankylosing spondylitis

Ankylosing spondylitis is a common inflammatory rheumatic disease that affects the axial skeleton, causing characteristic inflammatory back pain, which can lead to structural and functional impairments and a decrease in quality of life. New imaging techniques and therapies have substantially changed the management of this disease in the past decade. Whether inhibition of radiographic progression and structural damage can be reached with available drugs is as yet unclear. Furthermore, treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents and physiotherapy remains an important approach to long-term management of patients with ankylosing spondylitis. The new treatment options with tumour necrosis factor blockers seems a breakthrough for patients refractory to conventional treatment.

[Effectiveness and safety of radium chloride in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. Results of an observational study]

After radium chloride was approved for the therapy of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in Germany on October 23, 2000, an open, non-comparative prospective observational study was planed. The assessment involved 308 patients with the diagnosis of AS and radiological evidence of spinal involvement who were treated with at least one injection of radium chloride. 278 of these patients received the full cycle of 10 injections (a total of 10 MBq radium-224) one injection one per week for a period of 10 successive weeks. Validated outcomes were measured before therapy and six months after therapy according to the recommendations of the "assessment in ankylosing spondylitis working group"(ASAS). The primary endpoint was disease activity assessed using the BASDAI ("Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index"). Secondary endpoints included the BASFI ("Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index"), as well as self-reported pain and global patient ratings. Patients showed significant improvement in all of the parameters assessed (BASDAI, BASFI, pain, global patient rating) at 6-months post-treatment. At this time, the mean BASDAI and BASFI scores improved from 5.5 to 3.5 and from 5.6 to 3.7, respectively. Pain decreased from a mean of 7.3 to 4.1, and disease activity (as rated by patients) also decreased from 7.2 to 4.1 (p < 0.001 for all of them). Drug tolerance was good. Six adverse events were documented, none of which was serious and none led to discontinuation of treatment. According to the data provided here medical treatment with radium chloride seems to be effective and safe during an observation period of 6 months. Nevertheless, a randomized placebo-controlled study should be performed in the near future in order to safeguard the level of evidence.

Pharmacological management of undifferentiated spondyloarthropathies

Among undifferentiated spondyloarthropathies (uSpA) are included incomplete forms or early phases of definite seronegative spondyloarthritides and cases of spondyloarthritides that remain undifferentiated. The treatment of all spondyloarthritides is more conditioned by the disease localisation, number of involved districts and severity of inflammation rather than by the subtype of the spondyloarthritides itself. Specific studies focused on the pharmacological approach to uSpA are scarce. As a consequence, many drugs are used on the basis of the experiences that have been gained in the treatment of other spondyloarthritides. At present, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs/COX-2 inhibitors and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs are the main therapeutic agents for the involvement of peripheral joints in uSpA. In those cases in which severe symptoms persist despite these treatments or when there is a severe axial involvement, antitumour necrosis factor agents represent an effective choice. In these patients, antitumour necrosis factor treatment raises the important possibility of blocking a shift from uSpA to differentiated severe forms of spondyloarthritides such as ankylosing spondylitis. Local administration of corticosteroids is useful when a small number of joints are involved, as is also the case for the extra-articular localisations of soft tissues.

Ankylosing spondylitis and symptom-modifying vs disease-modifying therapy

The main objectives of medical therapy in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are to relieve pain, stiffness and fatigue and to prevent structural damage. The Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis Working Group has proposed different domains with specific instruments to assess the efficacy of therapeutic agents classified as symptom-modifying and disease-controlling antirheumatic drugs. Non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are still the first-line treatment in the management of AS, and they are effective in controlling symptoms such as pain and stiffness and maintaining mobility in many patients. A recent randomized trial suggested that the progression of radiological damage occurs less on continuous use of celecoxib compared with on-demand use. If such findings were confirmed by other studies, the therapeutic value of NSAIDs in AS may extend beyond symptom control. However, for each individual patient, the expected advantages of treatment with NSAIDs should be weighted against any possible gastrointestinal and cardiovascular disadvantages. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are widely used for second-line therapy in AS, but the evidence for their efficacy is poor. The term 'DMARD' has been borrowed from rheumatoid arthritis, and none of the DMARDs have been shown to prevent or significantly decrease the rate of progression of structural damage which is required to be qualified as a disease-controlling antirheumatic drug for AS. Sulphasalazine is the most extensively studied DMARD and studies suggest some degree of clinical benefit confined to peripheral joint involvement, but no evidence of benefit in axial disease. Methotrexate, which is the gold standard DMARD in rheumatoid arthritis, does not seem to have a substantial therapeutic effect in AS on axial or peripheral joint involvement. Leflunomide appears to exert little beneficial effect, if any, even on peripheral joint involvement. There is also good evidence that local therapy with corticosteroids is effective and may be used in selected patients. Oral corticosteroids may be somewhat effective in relieving the symptoms of AS, but this has not been formally studied. Small studies have reported favourable results with intravenous methylprednisolone pulse therapy, but the effect is temporary. Pamidronate and thalidomide have been used in some preliminary trials but need further studies to assess their potential role in treating AS patients resistant or intolerant to other forms of treatment. Treatment with tumour necrosis factor blockers is not discussed in this review.

Efficacy of sulfasalazine in patients with inflammatory back pain due to undifferentiated spondyloarthritis and early ankylosing spondylitis: a multicentre randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of sulfasalazine (SSZ) on inflammatory back pain (IBP) due to active undifferentiated spondyloarthritis (uSpA) or ankylosing spondylitis in patients with symptom duration <5 years.

METHODS

Patients with IBP and a Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) >3 from 12 centres were randomly assigned to 24 weeks' treatment with SSZ 2 g/day or placebo. The primary outcome variable was the change in BASDAI over 6 months. Secondary outcomes included measures of spinal pain, physical function and inflammation.

RESULTS

230 patients (50% men, age range 18-64 years, 67% human leucocyte antigen B27 positive) were treated with either SSZ 2x1 g/day or placebo for 6 months. Enthesitis was found in 50%, and peripheral arthritis in 47% of the patients. The mean (SD) BASDAI dropped markedly in both groups: by 3.7 (2.7) and 3.8 (2.4), respectively, as did most secondary outcome measures. No noticeable difference in treatment was observed between groups. Patients with IBP and no peripheral arthritis had significantly (p = 0.03) more benefit with SSZ (BASDAI 5.1 (1.3) to 2.8 (2.3)) than with placebo (5.2 (1.6) to 3.8 (2.4)). Spinal pain (p = 0.03) and morning stiffness (p = 0.05) improved with SSZ in these patients, but other secondary outcomes were not markedly different.

CONCLUSION

SSZ was no better than placebo for the treatment of the signs and symptoms of uSpA; however, SSZ was more effective than placebo in the subgroup of patients with IBP and no peripheral arthritis.

Conventional therapy for Crohn’s disease

Crohn’s disease (CD) is a multifactorial disorder of unknown cause. Outstanding progress regarding the pathophysiology of CD has led to the development of innovative therapeutic concepts. Numerous controlled trials have been performed in CD over the last years. However, many drugs have not been approved by regulatory authorities due to lack of efficacy or severe side effects. Therefore, well-known drugs, including 5-ASA, systemic or topical corticosteroids, and immunosuppressants such as azathioprine, are still the mainstay of CD therapy. Importantly, biologicals such as infliximab have shown to be efficacious in problematic settings such as fistulizing or steroid-dependent CD. This review is intended to give practical guidelines to clinicians for the conventional treatment of CD. We concentrated on the results of randomized, placebo-controlled trials and meta-analyses, when available, that provide the highest degree of evidence. We provide evidence-based treatment algorithms whenever possible. However, many clinical situations have not been answered by controlled clinical trials and it is important to fill these gaps through expert opinions. We hope that this review offers a useful tool for clinicians in the challenging treatment of CD.

No efficacy of subcutaneous methotrexate in active ankylosing spondylitis: a 16-week open-label trial

OBJECTIVE

To examine the potential therapeutic effect of methotrexate 20 mg given weekly as subcutaneous injections to 20 patients with ankylosing spondylitis refractory to non-steroidal antirheumatic drugs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

20 patients with ankylosing spondylitis, a mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score of 5.6 (range 4-9.3) and predominantly axial manifestations were treated with weekly 15 mg methotrexate subcutaneously for 4 weeks, which was then increased to 20 mg subcutaneously for the next 12 weeks. Clinical outcome assessments included, among others, BASDAI score physical function, spinal mobility, patients' and physicians' global assessment (visual analogue scale), peripheral joint assessment, quality of life (Short Form 36) and C reactive protein. The primary end point of the study was a 20% improvement on the ASsessments in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS 20) scale.

RESULTS

Using an intention-to-treat analysis, ASAS 20 was achieved in only 25% of patients. An ASAS 40 response was achieved in 10% of patients, and no patient reached an ASAS 70 response or the ASAS criteria for partial remission. For the mean BASDAI score, no change was observed between baseline and week 16 (baseline 5.6 v week 16, 5.6). No improvement was observed in any of the clinical parameters or C reactive protein, except a small but non-significant decrease in the number of swollen joints.

CONCLUSIONS

In this open study, methotrexate did not show any benefit for axial manifestations in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis beyond the expected placebo response.

Developments and current pharmacotherapeutic recommendations for ankylosing spondylitis

The introduction of anti-TNFalpha therapy into the field of rheumatology has led to dramatic improvements in patient care, perhaps the most remarkable being in the management of ankylosing spondylitis. As experience with these compounds grows, their place in therapeutic strategy is becoming clearer, and it has been possible to develop evidence- and expertise-based recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis to aid the clinician in patient care. This review outlines treatment advances in ankylosing spondylitis, including the use of anti-TNFalpha agents, and how these have been incorporated into clinical recommendations for daily use.

Identification of synovial biomarkers of response to experimental treatment in early-phase clinical trials in spondylarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To identify biomarkers for effective treatment in early-phase clinical trials of spondylarthritis (SpA), by analyzing which synovial features can be reliably identified in patients with SpA.

METHODS

Synovial biopsies were performed at weeks 0 and 12 in 20 SpA patients treated with infliximab, 20 treated with etanercept, and 12 who were not treated. Primary clinical outcome measures were patient and physician global assessment of disease activity. Extensive histologic evaluation included assessment of lining layer hyperplasia, vascularity, markers of cellular infiltration, and metalloproteinases (MMPs) in the lining and sublining layers.

RESULTS

Changes in levels of CD163 (resident tissue macrophages) in the lining, and CD163, MMP-3, and myeloid-related protein 14 (MRP-14; infiltrating myeloid cells) in the sublining correlated significantly with changes in the primary clinical outcomes. Comparison between responders (n = 35) and nonresponders (n = 17) showed differences in the degree of change in the levels of CD163 in the lining and CD163, MMP-3, and CD3 in the sublining, whereas trends in change in the levels of MRP-8 and MRP-14 in the lining and sublining were similar in the 2 groups. Accordingly, the highest differences in standardized response means (SRMs) between the 2 groups were found for CD163 in the lining, MMP-3, CD163, CD3, and MRP-8 in the sublining, and the level of polymorphonuclear cells (PMNs). When comparing treated and untreated patients, high differences in SRMs were again found for CD163 in the lining, MMP-3, CD163, and MRP-8 in the sublining, and PMNs. These parameters performed prognostically as well as the erythrocyte sedimentation rate and better than the C-reactive protein level. Class prediction analysis yielded a 90% correct prediction using 8 synovial parameters, as follows: lining and sublining CD163, MRP-8, and MRP-14, sublining MMP-3, and PMNs. In validation analyses with independent samples, effective treatment was correctly predicted in 24 of 30 SpA patients and in 2 of 2 placebo-treated patients.

CONCLUSION

Changes in synovial macrophage subsets, PMN levels, and MMP-3 expression reflect response to treatment in SpA. The ability of these parameters to correctly identify effective therapy makes them interesting biomarkers for use in early-phase clinical trials in SpA.

The treatment of the rheumatological manifestations of the inflammatory bowel diseases

The strong link between the bowel and the osteo-articular system is suggested by many clinical and experimental observations. However, the therapeutic approach is still empirical. For symptomatic therapy it is better to favour the use of steroids and avoid non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs because they may induce intestinal ulcerations and can activate inflammatory bowel disease. Second line drugs (sulfasalazine, methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine and leflunomide) should be used for selected indications. In some cases (severe spondylitis, severe and persistent enthesopathy) anti-TNF-alpha agents (infliximab) should be considered as first line therapy. In all cases it is mandatory to select the best therapeutic option for each individual patient, considering that the optimal treatment of bowel inflammation may induce "per se" a remission of the musculo-skeletal manifestations.

The treatment of psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic, autoimmune, seronegative inflammatory arthritis characterized by varying degrees of axial and peripheral arthritis. Here, we review the literature on the pharmacological management of PsA and present a simple treatment algorithm based on the available information. Although PsA management must be individualized to the degree and type of joint pain and inflammation, in general, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) still represent first-line treatment of mild PsA. Second-line therapy includes older agents such as gold salts, methotrexate, sulfasalazine, and cyclosporine. The tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) antagonists represent the most recent major advance in the clinical management of PsA.

Rheumatic manifestations of psoriasis

Psoriatic arthritis was described as a distinct rheumatic disease in the 1960s, and subsequently grouped among the spondyloarthropathies. Recently, other rheumatic manifestations of psoriasis, such as enthesopathy and osteoperiostitis, were recognized. This study attempts to examine the rheumatological and radiological manifestations of Psoriasis and their association with skin and nail disease. Eighty-one psoriatic outpatients were interviewed consecutively during 6 months. Questionnaires and indices were carried out to assess the extent and severity of skin and nail involvement, as well as the activity and severity of peripheral and axial rheumatic manifestations. Radiological examination of the hands, feet, spine and pelvis was also done for all patients. Fifty-nine psoriatic outpatients (73%) had rheumatic manifestations clinically and/or radiologically (Psoriatic arthropathy "PsA"). Clinical peripheral arthritis was found in 14 (23.7%) of the patients with PsA, being oligoarticular in 11, polyarticular in two, and exclusively of the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints in one patient. Sacroiliitis and/or spondylitis were found in 38 (64.4%), enthesopathy in 36 (61%), dactylitis in two (3.3%), radiological DIP involvement in 24 (40.6%), and radiological osteoperiostitis in 49 (83%) of patients with PsA. Most PsA patients had more than one rheumatic manifestation, while four patients (6.7%) had isolated enthesopathy without any other rheumatic manifestations. Subungual hyperkeratosis of the nails was significantly correlated with PsA (p<0.05), as well as with clinical arthritis, enthesopathy, and DIP involvement (p<0.01), while other types of skin and nail lesions were correlated with selected rheumatic manifestations. The performance of existing criteria for PsA was poor, as individual sets favored either sensitivity or specificity. Psoriatic arthropathy (PsA), occurring in about three-quarters of hospital outpatients with psoriasis, is more common than previously thought. More sensitive and specific criteria for the diagnosis and classification of PsA need to be developed, taking into account the recently described clinical and radiological manifestations.