Efficacy of a step-down regimen of oral prednisolone in axial spondyloarthritis: result of a double-blind randomized controlled trial (COBRA-AS Study)

Upadacitinib for the treatment of adults with active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA)

INTRODUCTION

Non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) is a chronic inflammatory condition with axial and peripheral musculoskeletal involvement, fulfilling criteria of axSpA in the absence of advanced radiographic sacroiliitis. While appropriate treatment is required for chronic pain and disability resulting from disease progression, the limited availability of treatment options becomes evident. Upadacitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, was approved in Europe, the United States, and other countries for management of nr-axSpA with inadequate response to existing therapies.

AREA COVERED

This review summarizes essential drug profiles, efficacy, and safety of upadacitinib for nr-axSpA in conjunction with data pertaining to radiographic axSpA.

EXPERT OPINION

In a phase 3 trial, upadacitinib exhibited efficacy for patients with nr-axSpA, irrespective of prior exposures to biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). The safety profiles of upadacitinib in nr-axSpA mirrored those in other indications, underscoring its potential as a promising treatment option for nr-axSpA. Concurrently, physicians should be aware of the absence of real-world data, longitudinal efficacy and safety, direct comparative studies between upadacitinib and bDMARDs in nr-axSpA, and evidence for precision medicine to identify patients who may optimally benefit from upadacitinib over bDMARDs. Future research is imperative to facilitate the effective utilization of upadacitinib in daily clinical practice.

Treatment overview of axial spondyloarthritis in 2023

The treatment of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is characterized by non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment options. It may depend on the type and extent of musculoskeletal and extramusculoskeletal manifestations. Recent data on non-pharmacological treatment options, such as physical activity, physiotherapy, and modification of lifestyle factors, are summarized in this review. Moreover, we have provided an overview on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and the ever-expanding number of biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs and tsDMARDs, respectively). In addition to data on efficacy and safety, the review also encompasses data on switching/cycling, tapering, and treatment selection for specific patient subgroups to optimize treatment outcomes.

ASAS-EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis: 2022 update

OBJECTIVES

To update the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS)-EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

METHODS

Following the EULAR Standardised Operating Procedures, two systematic literature reviews were conducted on non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment of axSpA. In a task force meeting, the evidence was presented, discussed, and overarching principles and recommendations were updated, followed by voting.

RESULTS

Five overarching principles and 15 recommendations with a focus on personalised medicine were agreed: eight remained unchanged from the previous recommendations; three with minor edits on nomenclature; two with relevant updates (#9, 12); two newly formulated (#10, 11). The first five recommendations focus on treatment target and monitoring, non-pharmacological management and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as first-choice pharmacological treatment. Recommendations 6-8 deal with analgesics and discourage long-term glucocorticoids and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for pure axial involvement. Recommendation 9 describes the indication of biological DMARDs (bDMARDs, that is, tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), interleukin-17 inhibitors (IL-17i)) and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs, ie, Janus kinase inhibitors) for patients who have Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score ≥2.1 and failed ≥2 NSAIDs and also have either elevated C reactive protein, MRI inflammation of sacroiliac joints or radiographic sacroiliitis. Current practice is to start a TNFi or IL-17i. Recommendation 10 addresses extramusculoskeletal manifestations with TNF monoclonal antibodies preferred for recurrent uveitis or inflammatory bowel disease, and IL-17i for significant psoriasis. Treatment failure should prompt re-evaluation of the diagnosis and consideration of the presence of comorbidities (#11). If active axSpA is confirmed, switching to another b/tsDMARD is recommended (#12). Tapering, rather than immediate discontinuation of a bDMARD, can be considered in patients in sustained remission (#13). The last recommendations (#14, 15) deal with surgery and spinal fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2022 ASAS-EULAR recommendations provide up-to-date guidance on the management of patients with axSpA.

Efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological and non-biological interventions: a systematic literature review informing the 2022 update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To update the evidence of non-biological treatments for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), as a basis for the 2022 Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society-European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (ASAS-EULAR) recommendations for the management of axSpA.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (2016-2021) on efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological and non-biological pharmacological treatments was performed, up to 1 January 2022. The research question was formulated according to the PICO format: Population: adult patients with r-axSpA and nr-axSpA; Intervention: non-pharmacological and non-biological pharmacological treatments; Comparator: active comparator or placebo; Outcomes: all relevant efficacy and safety outcomes. Type of studies included were: randomised controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies (for efficacy of non-pharmacological treatments, and safety), qualitative studies. Cohen's effect size (ES) was calculated for non-pharmacological and risk ratio (RR) for pharmacological treatments.

RESULTS

Of 107 publications included, 63 addressed non-pharmacological interventions, including education (n=8) and exercise (n=20). The ES for education on disease activity, function, mobility was small to moderate (eg. Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), ES: 0.06-0.59). Exercise had moderate to high ES on these outcomes (eg.

BASDAI, ES

0.14-1.43). Six RCTs on targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) showed efficacy of tofacitinib, upadacitinib and filgotinib (phase 2 only) in r-axSpA (range RR vs placebo for ASAS20: 1.91-3.10), while apremilast and nilotinib were not efficacious. Studies on conventional synthetic DMARDs (n=3), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs, n=8) and other drugs (n=12) did not provide new evidence on efficacy/safety (efficacy of NSAIDs confirmed; limited efficacy of short-term glucocorticoids in one RCT).

CONCLUSIONS

Education, exercise and NSAIDs confirmed to be efficacious in axSpA. JAKi were proved efficacious in r-axSpA.

The safety of glucocorticoids in the treatment of inflammatory rheumatic disease: new evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Glucocorticoids justifiably remain a cornerstone in the treatment of many inflammatory rheumatic diseases but many are opposed to their use because of the side effects, most of them known to be dose-dependent. Most concerns regarding glucocorticoids stem from observational studies which are affected by several forms of bias, mainly confounding by indication, that may result in overestimation of harm. Solid evidence regarding the safety of low-dose glucocorticoids remains remarkably scarce.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several observational studies showed heterogeneous results and two 6-month trials showed no increase of harm. The GLORIA trial of 5 mg/day prednisolone vs. placebo in patients aged 65+ is the first randomized control trial with glucocorticoids safety as coprimary outcome. The benefits of glucocorticoids in terms of symptoms and structural damage were confirmed, but the proportion of patients with at least one adverse event of special interest (serious or glucocorticoids-related) was increased by 24%, mostly due to nonsevere infections.

SUMMARY

Based on current evidence the benefit-risk balance of low-dose glucocorticoids in rheumatoid arthritis, and probably in other rheumatic diseases is generally favourable. Physicians should be aware of the risks and mitigate them, but avoid the negative effects of unfounded fear.

Australian Consensus Statements for the Assessment and Management of Non-radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis

Background

The understanding of non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) has accelerated over the last decade, producing a number of practice-changing developments. Diagnosis is challenging. No diagnostic criteria exist, no single finding is diagnostic, and other causes of back pain may act as confounders.

Aim

To update and expand the 2014 consensus statement on the investigation and management of non‐radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA).

Methods

We created search questions based on our previous statements and four new topics then searched the MEDLINE and Cochrane databases. We assessed relevant publications by full-text review and rated their level of evidence using the GRADE system. We compiled a GRADE evidence summary then produced and voted on consensus statements.

Results

We identified 5145 relevant publications, full-text reviewed 504, and included 176 in the evidence summary. We developed and voted on 22 consensus statements. All had high agreement. Diagnosis of nr-axSpA should be made by experienced clinicians, considering clinical features of spondyloarthritis, blood tests, and imaging. History and examination should also assess alternative causes of back pain and related conditions including non-specific back pain and fibromyalgia. Initial investigations should include CRP, HLA-B27, and AP pelvic radiography. Further imaging by T1 and STIR MRI of the sacroiliac joints is useful if radiography does not show definite changes. MRI provides moderate-to-high sensitivity and high specificity for nr-axSpA. Acute signs of sacroiliitis on MRI are not specific and have been observed in the absence of spondyloarthritis. Initial management should involve NSAIDs and a regular exercise program, while TNF and IL-17 inhibitors can be used for high disease activity unresponsive to these interventions. Goals of treatment include improving the frequent impairment of social and occupational function that occurs in nr-axSpA.

Conclusions

We provide 22 evidence-based consensus statements to provide practical guidance in the assessment and management of nr-axSpA.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-021-00416-7.

Glucocorticoids in spondyloarthritis-systematic review and real-world analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to identify and summarize the efficacy and safety of systemic glucocorticoids (GCs) and local injections of GC in SpA.

METHODS

PubMed (Medline) and EMBASE were searched with pre-defined keywords for relevant articles in English reporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized interventional studies and non-randomized observational studies of the efficacy of GC in SpA, with five or more patients, for inclusion in a systematic literature review. Local injections of GC included IA and entheseal injections, but excluded SI joint injections.

RESULTS

Out of 9657 records identified, there were 14 studies on the use of systemic GCs in SpA (364 patients), including two RCTs of oral prednisolone. On pooling data from two placebo-controlled RCTs (≤24 weeks), BASDAI 50 was 4.2 times more likely (95% CI: 1.5, 11.5) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Group (ASAS) 20 was twice more likely (95% CI: 1.1, 3.64) to occur in patients on high-dose oral prednisolone (± taper). Pulsed GCs led to dramatic improvements that lasted a few weeks to a few months. There were no deaths or major adverse events. There were 10 studies (560 patients) on local GCs in SpA. IA injection was effective in achieving a sustained response in 51.5-90% of joints at 6 months. Entheseal injections led to reduced pain and improved US parameters.

CONCLUSION

There were limited studies on either systemic or local injections of GCs in SpA. However, there was good evidence of efficacy with the use of high-dose systemic GCs in the short term (≤6 months) in SpA. Both IA and entheseal injections seemed safe and effective.