Switching tumour necrosis factor alpha antagonists in patients with ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis: an observational study over a 5-year period

Switching related to inefficacy in biologics and targeted synthetic therapies for psoriatic arthritis: a comparative real-life study

Background

Switching between therapies is a recommended strategy for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients who experience treatment failure; however, studies including real-life data are scarce.

Objectives

To assess the incidence rate (IR) of switching between biologics and targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) due to inefficacy in PsA, and to compare the risk of switching due to inefficacy across different b/tsDMARDs groups.

Design

A longitudinal retrospective study, spanning from 2007 to 2022, was conducted on patients with PsA treated with b/tsDMARDs at an outpatient rheumatology clinic.

Methods

The primary outcome was switching between b/tsDMARDs due to inefficacy. The independent variable was the exposure to b/tsDMARDs during follow-up. As covariates, clinical, treatment-related, and sociodemographic variables were considered. Survival techniques were run to estimate the IR of switching due to inefficacy per 100 patients*year and confidence interval at 95% (95% CI). Cox multivariate regression analyses were run to assess the risk of b/tsDMARDs switching due to inefficacy, expressed as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI.

Results

In all, 141 patients were included, with 893.09 patients*year follow-ups. 52.48% of them were females in their fifties. In total, 262 courses of treatment were recorded. During the study period, 56 patients presented 121 switches and 103 related to inefficacy (IR: 11.53 (9.51-13.98)). Tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors (TNFi) showed the lowest IR. In the bivariate analysis, all b/tsDMARDs had more risk of switching compared to TNFi (HR: anti-lL-17 vs TNFi: 2.26 (1.17-4.36); others vs TNFi: 3.21 (1.59-6.45)); however, this statistical significance was no longer present in the multivariate analysis once adjustments were made for the covariates. Still, the final model achieved statistical significance in the following variables: gender, clinical symptoms, prescription year, therapy courses, glucocorticoids, and sulfasalazine.

Conclusion

In this study, we did not find differences in the rate of switching due to inefficacy among different groups of b/tsDMARDs. Other concomitant treatments, sociodemographic, and clinical variables were identified as risk factors for switching due to inefficacy.

Retention rate of subcutaneous TNF inhibitors in axial spondyloarthritis in a multicentre study from the RIC-FRANCE network

The objectives of our study were to assess retention rate, safety, and predictive factors for retention of subcutaneous (SC) TNF inhibitors (TNFi) (adalimumab (ADA), etanercept (ETN), golimumab (GOL), and certolizumab pegol (CZP)) in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) depending on the line of treatment in real-life conditions. A multicentre retrospective observational study was conducted including 552 patients fulfilling the ASAS criteria for axSpA followed in the RIC-France register who began SC-TNFi between 01/01/13 and 08/31/2018 for a total of 824 prescriptions. Taking all lines of treatment into account, GOL had a significantly higher retention rate compared with ADA, ETN, and CZP with a mean retention length of 59 months. As first-line bDMARDs, GOL had a significantly higher retention rate compared with ADA and ETN. ETN had the best retention rate when prescribed as at least 3rd bDMARD. Taking all lines of treatment into account, female sex, peripheral disease, BASDAI at initiation, and line of treatment were predictive factors for treatment cessation. Primary inefficiency was the most frequent reason for treatment cessation. In conclusion, GOL showed the highest retention rate in axSpA. Male sex, absence of peripheral disease, and early line of prescription were associated with better SC-TNFi retention in axSpA.

Effect of Upadacitinib on Disease Activity, Pain, Fatigue, Function, Health-Related Quality of Life and Work Productivity for Biologic Refractory Ankylosing Spondylitis

INTRODUCTION

Patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have significant unmet treatment needs, despite advancements in biologic therapies. This study evaluated the impact of upadacitinib on clinically meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessing disease activity, pain, fatigue, function, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and work productivity in patients with AS with inadequate responses or intolerance to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR).

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the phase 3 SELECT-AXIS 2 AS bDMARD-IR study received blinded once-daily oral upadacitinib 15 mg or placebo for 14 weeks. The percentage of patients achieving improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) at week 14 were compared between treatment groups for disease activity (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, BASDAI), patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), total and nocturnal back pain, fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, FACIT-F), physical function (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index, BASFI), HRQoL (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Health Index [ASAS HI], Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life [ASQoL], Short form-36 [SF-36] physical [PCS] and mental [MCS] component summary scores), and work productivity (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI] Questionnaire). Mean changes from baseline through week 14 in fatigue and HRQoL were compared between treatment groups.

RESULTS

A total of 420 patients with active AS who were bDMARD-IR were included. A higher proportion of patients reported MCIDs at week 14 across all PROs with upadacitinib compared with placebo (nominal p ≤ 0.05). Greater improvements in mean change from baseline through week 14 were reported with upadacitinib compared with placebo across FACIT-F, HRQoL, and WPAI, with improvements differentiated as early as week 1 for ASAS HI, ASQoL and SF-36 PCS and week 4 for SF-36 MCS.

CONCLUSIONS

Upadacitinib 15 mg demonstrated rapid and clinically meaningful improvements in disease activity, pain, FACIT-F, function, HRQoL, and WPAI among bDMARD-IR patients with active AS.

TRIAL REGISTRY

Clinical Registration number: NCT04169373, SELECT-AXIS 2.

Psoriatic arthritis: review of potential biomarkers predicting response to TNF inhibitors

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic and painful inflammatory immune-mediated disease. It affects up to 40% of people with psoriasis and it is associated with several comorbidities such as obesity, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and hypertension. PsA is difficult to diagnose because of its diverse symptoms, namely axial and peripheral arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, skin changes, and nail dystrophy. Different drugs exist to treat the inflammation and pain. When patients do not respond to conventional drugs, they are treated with biologic drugs. Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi's) are commonly given as the first biologic drug; beside being expensive, they also lack efficacy in 50% of patients. A biomarker predicting individual patient's response to TNFi would help treating them earlier with an appropriate biologic drug. This study aimed to review the literature to identify potential biomarkers that should be investigated for their predictive ability. Several such biomarkers were identified, namely transmembrane TNFα (tmTNF), human serum albumin (HSA) and its half-life receptor, the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn) which is also involved in IgG lifespan; calprotectin, high mobility group protein B1 (HMGB1) and advanced glycation end products (AGEs) whose overexpression lead to excessive production of pro-inflammatory cytokines; lymphotoxin α (LTα) which induces inflammation by binding to TNF receptor (TNFR); and T helper 17 (Th17) cells which induce inflammation by IL-17A secretion.

2021 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with peripheral spondyloarthritis. Colombian Association of Rheumatology

BACKGROUND

Peripheral spondyloarthritis is a chronic inflammatory disease in which clinical presentation is related to the presence of arthritis, enthesitis and/or dactylitis. This term is used interchangeably with some of its subtypes such as psoriatic arthritis, reactive arthritis, and undifferentiated spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and formulate a set of specific recommendations based on the best available evidence for the diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of adult patients with peripheral spondyloarthritis.

METHODS

A working group was established, clinical questions were formulated, outcomes were graded, and a systematic search for evidence was conducted. The guideline panel was multidisciplinary (including patient representatives) and balanced. Following the formal expert consensus method, the GRADE methodology "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" was used to assess the quality of the evidence and generate the recommendations. The Clinical Practice Guideline includes ten recommendations; related to monitoring of disease activity (n = 1) and treatment (n = 9).

RESULTS

In patients with peripheral spondyloarthritis, the use of methotrexate or sulfasalazine as the first line of treatment is suggested, and local injections of glucocorticoids is recommended conditionally. In patients with failure to cDMARDs, an anti TNFα or an anti IL17A is recommended. In case of failure to bDMARDs, it is suggested to use another bDMARD or JAK inhibitor. In patients with peripheral spondyloarthritis associated to inflammatory bowel disease, it is recommended to start treatment with cDMARDs; in the absence of response, the use of an anti TNFα over an anti-IL-17 or an anti-IL-12-23 is recommended as a second line of treatment. In patients with psoriatic arthritis, the combined use of methotrexate with bDMARD is conditionally recommended for optimization of dosing. To assess disease activity in Psoriatic Arthritis, the use of DAPSA or MDA is suggested for patient monitoring.

CONCLUSIONS

This set of recommendations provides an updated guide on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral spondyloarthritis.

Health care utilization and cost associated with switching biologics within the first year of biologic treatment initiation among patients with ankylosing spondylitis

BACKGROUND

Costs associated with biologic switching and discontinuation can be high in chronic inflammatory diseases. Inappropriate use of medications may have cost implications for both payers and patients. Understanding of biologic utilization and switching rates is lacking among patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

OBJECTIVE

To compare direct costs of treatment switchers, nonswitchers, and discontinuers among patients with AS who newly initiated a biologic.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥ 18 years with an AS diagnosis and ≥ 1 pharmacy claim for an FDA-approved subcutaneous biologic for AS between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2016 (identification period) were identified from the Truven Health MarketScan Databases. At the time of biologic initiation (index date), eligible patients were continuously enrolled with medical and pharmacy claims for ≥ 1 year before (baseline period) and ≥ 1 year after the index date (follow-up period). Patients with AS were categorized into 3 mutually exclusive groups of nonswitchers (patients who remained on their index biologic), switchers (patients who had a prescription for a biologic therapy other than their index biologic), and discontinuers (patients who had gaps in prescription claims [> 120 days]) based on their biologic utilization pattern during the 1-year follow-up period. Health care costs (inflated to year 2017 costs) during follow-up were described across the 3 groups separately and by disease. Adjusted health care resource utilization and costs during 1-year follow-up were estimated, controlling for age, sex, fulltime work status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (Deyo's modification) during the baseline period.

RESULTS

A total of 791 patients with AS who were newly initiating a biologic were categorized as switchers (15.4%), nonswitchers (53.1%), and discontinuers (31.5%). Switchers and discontinuers had higher all-cause health care utilization than nonswitchers during the 1-year follow-up period. Switchers had higher mean total health care costs than nonswitchers ($71,280 vs. $66,573) due to increased medical ($13,897 vs. $12,043) and pharmacy costs ($57,384 vs. $54,530). Discontinuers had the lowest total health care costs ($41,179) but had the highest medical costs ($19,079). Adjusted analyses for covariates confirmed similar trends as the unadjusted analysis, where discontinuers had significantly lower total health care and pharmacy costs but had higher medical costs (with increased emergency department and outpatient visits) than nonswitchers (all P < 0.001). Switchers had increased outpatient visits and costs versus nonswitchers in the adjusted analysis (P < 0.001); small sample sizes in the switcher group may have limited the ability to detect significant trends in the adjusted analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Biologic switching resulted in higher total health care costs than remaining on the same biologic in patients with AS. These findings highlight the clinical and economic impact of discontinuing or switching biologic therapies in patients with AS, which may inform treatment and/or formulary decision making.

DISCLOSURES

This study was sponsored by Novartis Pharmaceuticals (East Hanover, NJ). Yi, Dai, and Park are employed by Novartis. Piao was an employee of KMK Consulting, supporting Novartis at the time of this study; Zheng is an employee of KMK Consulting and works as a consultant for Novartis. Portions of this work were presented at the 2019 AMCP Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting; March 25-28, 2019; San Diego, CA; and AMCP Nexus 2019; October 29-November 1, 2019; National Harbor, MD.

Treatment Pattern Analysis and Health-care Resource Consumption on Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis or Ankylosing Spondylitis Treated with Biological Drugs in a Northern Italian Region

Purpose

To analyze the treatment patterns of psoriatic arthritis (PSA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients under biological therapies and to evaluate in this population the health-care resource consumption and related costs.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on administrative databases of the Veneto region. Patients ≥18 years with at least one prescription of biological drugs and a diagnosis at any level for PSA or AS from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2016 (inclusion period) were included. Index date (ID) was defined as date of first biological drug prescription during inclusion period. Patients were characterized the year before ID and followed-up for one year after ID. The drug utilization profile in terms of adherence, persistence and therapeutic regimen changes, and the health-care resource consumption was analyzed during follow-up.

Results

A total of 2602 patients were included: 1857 with PSA and 745 with AS. In the PSA cohort, 40.3% of patients were prescribed adalimumab, 35.6% etanercept, 8.0% golimumab, 7.5% infliximab, 5.6% ustekinumab and 3.0% certolizumab. Percentage of PSA patients adherent to treatment was higher among ustekinumab patients (91.3%) and lower among etanercept users (54.3%). Persistence ranged from 53.2% (infliximab) to 70.3% (etanercept). Regarding AS cohort, 45.5% of patients were prescribed adalimumab, 26% etanercept, 17.3% infliximab, 9.7% golimumab and 1.5% certolizumab. Adherence ranged from 46.9% (etanercept) to 90.9% (certolizumab) and persistence from 62.8% (adalimumab) to 81.8% (certolizumab). Mean annual health-care costs (including costs for drug treatment, diagnostic services, specialist visits and hospital admissions) ranged from €9727 (certolizumab) to €14,994 (ustekinumab) among PSA patients and from €9875 (infliximab) to €12,991 (golimumab) among AS patients.

Conclusion

This study in Veneto region gave a picture of biological treatment patterns among PSA and AS patients in a real-world setting. Our findings showed the high degree of variability concerning utilization of each biological drug and provided insight on the economic burden of both diseases.

One-year effectiveness, retention rate, and safety of secukinumab in ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis: a real-life multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Secukinumab (SEC) is effective for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in randomized trials, but real-life data are lacking.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Real-life, prospective observational study on 169 consecutive outpatients at baseline (T0) and at 6 (T6) and 12 months (T12) after starting SEC (39 AS, 23%; 130 PsA, 77%).

RESULTS

Significant improvement was seen at T6 and T12 for all clinical variables, including TJC, SJC, ESR, CRP, DAPSA, ASDAS-CRP, and BASDAI, as well as in patient-reported outcomes like VAS-pain. By multivariable regression analysis, in AS patients high BASDAI at T0 correlated with diagnostic delay (R² = 0.4; p = 0.009) and peripheral joint involvement (R² = 0.4; p = 0.04). During follow-up, reduction of BASDAI positively correlated with high ESR (R² = 0.65; p = 0.04). ASDAS-CRP at T0 positively correlated with high ESR (R² = 0.34; p = 0.004). Reduction of ASDAS-CRP from T0 to T6 correlated with current smoking status (R² = 0.42; p = 0.003). In PsA patients, reduction of DAPSA score from T0 to T12 is negatively correlated with the presence of metabolic syndrome (R² = 0.41; p = 0.0025). SEC was well tolerated; 10 patients discontinued treatment for non-severe adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Secukinumab is effective and safe in patients with AS and PsA in a real-life setting.

Biological treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a nationwide study of treatment trajectories on a patient level in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

There is substantial evidence that patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have high response rates to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), a low likelihood of successful treatment termination, but yet a limited drug retention. Whereas several reports have assessed drug retention rates for TNFi in AS, there are few, if any, studies investigating the actual treatment trajectories on a patient level, including subsequent therapy changes and dose reductions, of individual patients. The aim of this study was to describe 5-year treatment trajectories in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) starting a first TNFi.

METHODS

Bio-naïve patients with AS starting a TNFi in 2006-2015 were identified in the nationwide Swedish Rheumatology Quality register and followed until 31 December 2015. All changes in their anti-rheumatic treatment during follow-up were recorded. To further increase precision, these data were complimented by information on the amount of prescribed subcutaneous TNFi collected from pharmacies during each year, retrieved from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register.

RESULTS

Two thousand five hundred ninety patients started a first TNFi 2006-2015, and after 1 year, 74% remained on their first TNFi. However, after 5 years, this figure was only 46%, although at that time 63% were still on treatment with any biologic, while 30% had no anti-rheumatic treatment at all. After discontinuing the first TNFi, 46% switched directly to a second TNFi, but the drug retention for the second and third TNFi grew successively shorter compared to that for the first TNFi. In contrast, patients remaining on treatment with their first subcutaneous TNFi gradually reduced the dose, so that during the fifth year of treatment only 66% had collected ≥ 75% of the defined daily doses for that year.

CONCLUSION

Less than half of patients with AS will remain on their first TNFi after 5 years, but most are still on a biologic. While patients remaining on treatment with their first TNFi appear to be able to reduce the dose over time, a large proportion cycle through several biologics, and 1/3 have no anti-rheumatic treatment after 5 years. This indicates the importance of thorough follow-up programs as well as a need for alternative therapeutic options.

Non-inferiority of dose reduction versus standard dosing of TNF-inhibitors in axial spondyloarthritis

Objective

The objective was to determine if dose reduction is non-inferior to full-dose TNFi to maintain low disease activity (LDA) in patients already in remission with TNFi, in axial spondyloarthritis.

Methods

Randomized, parallel, non-inferiority, open-label multicentre clinical trial. Patients were eligible if they had axial spondyloarthritis and had been in clinical remission for ≥ 6 months with any available TNFi (adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, golimumab) at the dose recommended by product labelling. Patients were randomized by automated central allocation to continue the same TNFi dose schedule, or to reduce the dose by roughly half according to the protocol. The main outcome was the proportion of subjects with LDA after 1 year. Serious adverse reactions or infections were recorded.

Results

The trial stopped due to end of the funding period, after 126 patients were randomized; 113 patients (84.1% male, mean age (SD) 45.6 (13.0) years) were included in the main per-protocol subset. Non-inferiority was concluded for LDA at 1 year (47/55 (83.8%) patients in the full-dose and 48/58 (81.3%) patients in the reduced-dose arm, adjusted difference (95% CI) − 2.5% (− 16.6% to 11.7%)). Serious adverse reactions or infections were reported in 7/62 patients (11.3%) assigned to full dose and 2/61 patients (3.3%) assigned to reduced dose (p value = 0.164).

Conclusion

In patients with ankylosing spondylitis in clinical remission for at least 6 months, dose reduction is non-inferior to full TNF inhibitor doses to maintain LDA after 1 year. Serious adverse events may be less frequent with reduced doses.

Trial registration

EU Clinical Trials Registry, EudraCT 2011–005871-18 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01604629.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13075-018-1772-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Factors associated with ASDAS remission in a long-term study of ankylosing spondylitis patients under tumor necrosis factor inhibitors

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical and demographic factors associated with disease remission and drug survival in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) on TNF inhibitors.

METHODS

Data from a longitudinal electronic database of AS patients under anti-TNF therapy between June/2004 and August/2013. Demographic, clinical parameters, disease activity by ASDAS remission (< 1.3) and inactive/low (< 2.1) were analyzed to characterize reasons for drug survival and switching of anti-TNF.

RESULTS

Among 117 AS patients, 69 (59%) were prescribed only one anti-TNF, 48 (41%) switched to a second anti-TNF and 13 (11%) to a third anti-TNF. Considering ASDAS-CRP < 1.3, 31 (39%) patients were inactive at the end of the study. Non-switchers (P = 0.04), younger age (P = 0.004), non-smoking (P = 0.016), shorter disease duration (P = 0.047), more frequent use of SSZ (P = 0.037) and lower BASDAI (P = 0.027), BASMI (P = 0.034) and BASFI (P = 0.003) at baseline were associated with remission. In the multivariate analysis younger age (P = 0.016) and lower BASDAI (P = 0.032) remained as remission predictors.

CONCLUSION

This study supports that ASDAS-CRP remission is an achievable goal not only for non-switchers but also for second anti-TNF, particularly in patients with younger age and lower BASDAI at baseline. Co-medication and non-smoker status seems to have a beneficial effect in anti-TNF response in this population.

Switching Between Biological Treatments in Psoriatic Arthritis: A Review of the Evidence

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory arthropathy. Therapy with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α agents represents the first therapeutic choice for moderate and severe forms; however, PsA patients can experience anti-TNFα failure, lack of efficacy, or adverse events. Several evidences exist on the effectiveness of switching among different TNFα inhibitors, and we reviewed the published data on the effectiveness of anti-TNFα first-, second- and third-line. Most of the studies report that the main reason for switching to a second anti-TNFα agent is represented by lack of efficacy (primary or secondary) and, more rarely, adverse events. Switchers receiving their second anti-TNFα agent have considerably poorer responses compared with non-switchers. Survival of anti-TNFα treatment appears to be superior in PsA patients when compared with rheumatoid arthritis patients. Switching from anti-TNF agents to ustekinumab or secukinumab or apremilast can represent a valid alternative therapeutic strategy.

Treatment patterns of biologics in US patients with ankylosing spondylitis: descriptive analyses from a claims database

AIM

Examine treatment patterns among patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS) treated with a TNF inhibitor (TNFi).

PATIENTS & METHODS

Patients with AS who initiated a TNFi between 1 January 2013, and 31 January 2015, were identified in the Optum Research Database. Outcomes included adherence, persistence, discontinuation and therapy modifications of the index TNFi during 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the 426 patients included, 40.6% persisted on the index TNFi for ≥12 months, 31.0% discontinued, 21.4% switched to a different TNFi, and 7.0% discontinued and then restarted. Of the 333 patients who persisted on their TNFi for >90 days, 44.7% received ≥1 add-on medication.

CONCLUSION

A high proportion of patients with AS switched, discontinued or modified their TNFi therapy.

Etanercept for treating axial spondyloarthritis

INTRODUCTION

Axial spondyloarthritis is an inflammatory rheumatic disease causing back pain, functional impairment and potential ankylosis in the advanced stage. In this context, TNF blockers have been a major therapeutic advance. Etanercept is a soluble recombinant TNF receptor fusion protein in this vain. Areas covered: The aim of this review is to summarize the current published data concerning the efficacy and tolerance of etanercept in axial spondyloarthrits. The authors performed a systematic review on PubMed, using 'etanercept' and 'spondyloarthritis', 'axial spondyloarthritis' or 'ankylosing spondylitis' keywords. Expert opinion: Etanercept showed clinical efficacy on the axial (non-radiographic and radiographic) and peripheral manifestations (peripheral arthritis and enthesitis) of axial spondyloarthritis (Ax-SpA). Among the extra-articular manifestations, it works on psoriasis but not on inflammatory bowel disease, with a lack of efficacy data in anterior uveitis. Etanercept also demonstrated an interesting tolerance profile and good drug survival rates after 5 years. Etanercept was also shown to reduce MRI inflammation on the spine and the sacroiliac joints. However, like other TNF blockers, its impact on radiographic progression could not be fully demonstrated. In the context of upcoming new biologic targeted treatments, head-to-head and longer-term randomized controlled trials are now required to further define the role of etanercept in spondyloarthritis treatment strategies.

Switching tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in the treatment of axial spondyloarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of switching tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha inhibitors on patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

METHODS

PubMed literature searches were conducted using combinations of search terms including ankylosing spondylitis, spondyloarthropathy, spondyloarthritis, switch/switching, drug survival, and TNF/tumor necrosis factor to identify published articles with data on outcomes related to switching biologic therapies in patients with axSpA.

RESULTS

Of the 134 studies screened, 21 were identified as reporting data on switching TNF inhibitors in patients carrying a diagnosis of axSpA or ankylosing spondylitis. The most common reasons for switching from the first TNF inhibitor were lack of efficacy (14-68%), loss of efficacy (13-61%), and adverse events/poor tolerability (13-57%). Switching TNF inhibitors was beneficial for a substantial proportion of patients with axSpA who failed to respond to initial or even second TNF inhibitor therapy and adverse effects were not enhanced. Drug survival rates were generally lower for the second (47-72% at 2 years) or third TNF inhibitor (49% at 2 years) than for the first TNF inhibitor (58-75% at 2 years). Predictors of responses in TNF-naïve patients included HLA-B27 positivity, absence of enthesitis, age ≤40 years, elevated C-reactive protein level, good functional status, and shorter disease duration. Predictors of drug survival included male sex and peripheral arthritis. Common characteristics of patients who switched TNF inhibitors included female sex, older age, more severe disease, greater symptom burden, higher erythrocyte sedimentation rate, complete ankyloses, and enthesitis.

CONCLUSION

When the first or even the second TNF inhibitor fails, switching to an alternate one is not an unreasonable clinical therapeutic decision.

Second-line biologic therapy optimization in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis

OBJECTIVE

The Italian board for the TAilored BIOlogic therapy (ITABIO) reviewed the most consistent literature to indicate the best strategy for the second-line biologic choice in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondyloarthritis (SpA), and psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature to identify English-language articles on efficacy of second-line biologic choice in RA, PsA, and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Data were extracted from available randomized, controlled trials, national biologic registries, national healthcare databases, post-marketing surveys, and open-label observational studies.

RESULTS

Some previously stated variables, including the patients׳ preference, the indication for anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) monotherapy in potential childbearing women, and the intravenous route with dose titration in obese subjects resulted valid for all the three rheumatic conditions. In RA, golimumab as second-line biologic has the highest level of evidence in anti-TNF failure. The switching strategy is preferable for responder patients who experience an adverse event, whereas serious or class-specific side effects should be managed by the choice of a differently targeted drug. Secondary inadequate response to etanercept (ETN) should be treated with a biologic agent other than anti-TNF. After two or more anti-TNF failures, the swapping to a different mode of action is recommended. Among non-anti-TNF targeted biologics, to date rituximab (RTX) and tocilizumab (TCZ) have the strongest evidence of efficacy in the treatment of anti-TNF failures. In PsA and AS patients failing the first anti-TNF, the switch strategy to a second is advisable, taking in account the evidence of adalimumab efficacy in patients with uveitis. The severity of psoriasis, of articular involvement, and the predominance of enthesitis and/or dactylitis may drive the choice toward ustekinumab or secukinumab in PsA, and the latter in AS.

CONCLUSION

Taking in account the paucity of controlled trials, second-line biologic therapy may be reasonably optimized in patients with RA, SpA, and PsA.

An update on the use of tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis

INTRODUCTION

Ankylosing spondylitis is a chronic immune-mediated disease affecting the sacroiliac joints and the spine manifesting with new bone formation and osteopenia. Over the past decade, tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors (TNFi) have become the cornerstone for therapy in improving functional outcomes, and decreasing disease activity in patients with a marginal benefit from non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) therapy. At this time, it remains to be determined whether these agents decrease new bone formation, although some studies have recently suggested that. Areas covered: In this review we discuss the factors that favour a good response to these agents both initially and during maintenance, and some of the more recent studies outlining strategies for dose reduction. Expert commentary: Finally, we discuss the importance of using more objective tools for disease activity, such as magnetic resonance imaging, as a complementary tool for clinical assessments in both predicting responses to treatment but also in selecting patients most suited for targeted therapy.

Does the reason for discontinuation of a first TNF inhibitor influence the effectiveness of a second TNF inhibitor in axial spondyloarthritis? Results from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management Cohort

Background

With regard to switching tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), conflicting results have been reported as to whether the effectiveness of a second TNFi depends on the reason for discontinuation of the first TNFi.

Methods

Patients with a clinical diagnosis of axSpA starting a second TNFi in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort were included. Effectiveness of treatment at 1 year, as well as drug survival, was compared between subgroups having discontinued the first TNFi because of lack of response, adverse events (AEs), or other reasons. Lack of response was further divided into primary or secondary lack of response (PLR or SLR, respectively), depending on whether the first TNFi was stopped before or after 6 months of treatment.

Results

Among 632 patients with axSpA, median survival of a second TNFi was 1.1 years after PLR and 3.8 years after SLR (p = 0.003). At least moderate disease activity as defined by an Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ASDAS-ESR) <2.1 was achieved after 12 months by 11 %, 39 %, 26 %, and 39 % of patients who discontinued their first TNFi because of PLR, SLR, AEs, and other reasons, respectively (p = 0.01). Only 4 % of patients achieved an ASDAS-ESR inactive disease state after PLR, in comparison to 22 % of those after SLR. Similar results were demonstrated in patients fulfilling the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society classification criteria for axSpA (n = 488): ASDAS-ESR <2.1 was achieved after 12 months by 9 %, 41 %, 29 %, and 39 % of patients who discontinued their first TNFi because of PLR, SLR, AEs, and other reasons, respectively (p = 0.01).

Conclusions

The effectiveness of a second TNFi is significantly impaired in patients with axSpA after PLR to a first TNFi compared with SLR.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-016-0969-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effectiveness and Feasibility Associated with Switching to a Second or Third TNF Inhibitor in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: A Cohort Study from Southern Sweden

Objective.

Because new modes of action for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) are emerging, it is important to understand the use of switching to a second or third antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent. This study investigated drug survival and treatment response rates of patients with PsA undergoing second- and third-line anti-TNF therapy.

Methods.

Patients with PsA were monitored in a prospective, observational study. Patients who switched anti-TNF therapy once (first-time switchers, n = 217) or twice (second-time switchers, n = 57) between January 2003 and March 2012 were studied. American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) good response at 3 and 6 months, as well as drug survival, were reported and further analyzed using the Cox and logistic regression models.

Results.

Median age for first-time switchers was 47 years and 42% were men. The corresponding values for second-time switchers were 48 years and 40% men. Three-month ACR20 Lund Efficacy Index (LUNDEX) response was achieved by 47% of first-time and 22% of second-time switchers; ACR50 LUNDEX rates were 21% and 14%, ACR70 LUNDEX rates were 12% and 2%, and EULAR good LUNDEX rates were 26% and 10%, respectively. Median drug survival time for patients switching anti-TNF for the first time was 64 months (95% CI 31–97) compared with 14 months (95% CI 5–23) for second-time switchers. Identified baseline predictor of ACR20 response to second-line treatment was the 28-joint Disease Activity Score values at baseline (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.01–2.10), while higher Health Assessment Questionnaire scores predicted premature drug withdrawal (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.03–2.48).

Conclusion.

Response rates of first-time anti-TNF switchers are moderate, while the inferior response rates of second-time switchers suggest other therapeutic options should be considered in this situation.

Evaluation of dose reduction versus standard dosing for maintenance of remission in patients with spondyloarthritis and clinical remission with anti-TNF (REDES-TNF): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Dose reduction schedules of tumor necrosis factor antagonists (anti-TNF) as maintenance therapy in patients with spondyloarthritis are used empirically in clinical practice, despite the lack of clinical trials providing evidence for this practice.

METHODS/DESIGN

To address this issue the Spanish Society of Rheumatology (SER) and Spanish Society of Clinical Pharmacology (SEFC) designed a 3-year multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled clinical trial (2 years for inclusion and 1 year of follow-up). The study is expected to include 190 patients with axial spondyloarthritis on stable maintenance treatment (≥4 months) with any anti-TNF agent at doses recommended in the summary of product characteristics. Patients will be randomized to either a dose reduction arm or maintenance of the dosing regimen as per the official labelling recommendations. Randomization will be stratified according to the anti-TNF agent received before study inclusion. Patient follow-up, visit schedule, and examinations will be maintained as per normal clinical practice recommendations according to SER guidelines. The study aims to test the hypothesis of noninferiority of the dose reduction strategy compared with standard treatment. The first patients were recruited in July 2012, and study completion is scheduled for the end of April 2015.

DISCUSSION

The REDES-TNF study is a pragmatic clinical trial that aims to provide evidence to support a medical decision now made empirically. The study results may help inform clinical decisions relevant to both patients and healthcare decision makers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT 2011-005871-18 (21 December 2011).

Drug survival of anti-tumour necrosis factor α therapy in spondyloarthropathies: results from the Spanish emAR II Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess drug survival and the reasons for switching anti-TNF-α therapy in SpA patients in a Spanish nationwide study.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed. Sample size was calculated to represent all regions and hospitals throughout the country. Demographic data, patient characteristics and disease activity parameters were obtained. Drug survival and reasons for switching anti-TNF therapy were also recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 467 SpA patients receiving at least one anti-TNF agent were identified. Among patients who received a first, second and third anti-TNF course, 39.4%, 37.4% and 23.1% discontinued treatment, respectively. The main reasons for switching anti-TNF agents in the first course were lack or loss of efficacy (LOE) and adverse events (AEs) in 40% and 30% of switchers, respectively. Similarly, reasons for switching during the second anti-TNF course were LOE in 48% and AEs in 28% of switchers. Of the 467 SpA patients starting anti-TNF therapy, 28% switched to a second and 8% switched to a third therapy. Mean drug survival for the first, second and third anti-TNF courses were 84.4 (95% CI 78.4, 90.5), 70.2 (95% CI 61.6, 78.9) and 64.8 (95% CI 51.1, 78.5) months, respectively (P = 0.315).

CONCLUSION

Twenty-eight per cent of SpA patients starting anti-TNF therapy switched to a second anti-TNF agent. Drug survival did not differ among anti-TNF courses. The main reason for switching anti-TNF therapy was LOE. Switchers were more frequently women and had higher disease activity parameters at the time of the study than non-switchers.

Efficacy, tolerability and safety of switching from etanercept to infliximab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis: A multicenter, open-label trial (TANGO)

Biologic anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) therapies have revolutionized the management of psoriasis. However, despite similar mechanisms of action, inter-patient variability in the clinical responses to therapy remain unexplained. Possible differences between agents include stability or bioavailability and anti-drug antibody development, and patient factors such as compliance may play a role. As a result, it is not uncommon for physicians to switch a patient from one anti-TNF-α agent to another when initial response is inadequate. This multicenter, single-arm, observational, Phase IV study assessed the efficacy and safety of infliximab therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis who had not responded to 24 weeks' etanercept treatment. Drug efficacy was assessed using specific psoriasis indexes; health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was measured using the Dermatology Life Quality Index and the Skindex-29. A total of 48 patients were screened, 38 were treated with infliximab and 31 completed the study. Of these, 71% achieved Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 after 10 weeks, and improvement in HRQoL was documented. The results of this study showed that patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis could be successfully switched from etanercept to infliximab, with improvements in both clinical parameter and HRQoL.

Therapeutic options after treatment failure in rheumatoid arthritis or spondyloarthritides

The prognosis for patients with rheumatoid arthritis or spondyloarthritides has improved dramatically due to earlier diagnosis, recognition of the need to treat early with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), alone or in combinations, the establishment of treatment targets, and the development of biological DMARDs (bDMARDs). Many patients are now able to achieve clinical remission or low disease activity with therapy, and reduce or eliminate systemic corticosteroid use. Guidelines recommend methotrexate as a first-line agent for the initial treatment of rheumatoid arthritis; however, a majority of patients will require a change of csDMARD or step up to combination therapy with the addition of another csDMARD or a bDMARD. However, treatment failure is common and switching to a different therapy may be required. The large number of available treatment options, combined with a lack of comparative data, makes the choice of a new therapy complex and often not evidence based. We summarize and discuss evidence to inform treatment decisions in patients who require a change in therapy, including baseline factors that may predict response to therapy.

Drug retention rates and treatment discontinuation among anti-TNF-α agents in psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis in clinical practice

Objective. The study aim was to determine treatment persistence rates and to identify causes of discontinuation in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients in clinical practice. Methods. Patients treated with adalimumab (ADA), etanercept (ETA), or infliximab (INF) were retrospectively included. Treatment persistence rates were analyzed by means of a stepwise logistic regression. Differences between therapy duration were assessed by means of an analysis of variance model (ANOVA), while a chi-square test was used to evaluate relationships between therapies and causes of treatment discontinuation and the administration of concomitant disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) among therapies and types of disease considering completed courses of therapy versus courses that were discontinued. Results. 268 patients received a total of 353 anti-TNF treatment courses (97 ADA, 180 ETA, and 76 INF). Comparison among therapies showed significant difference regarding the treatment persistence rates due to the contrast between ETA and INF (P = 0.0062). We observed that 84.7% of patients were still responding after 6 months of follow-up. Comparison among diseases showed that there were significant differences between PsA and AS (P = 0.0073) and PsA and PsA with predominant axial involvement (P = 0.0467) in terms of duration of the therapy, while there were no significant differences with regard to the persistence rate. Conclusions. In this cohort, anti-TNF-α therapy was associated with high drug persistence rates. As in rheumatoid arthritis, switching to another anti-TNF-α agent can be an effective option when, during the treatment of AS or PsA, therapy is suspended because of inefficacy or an adverse event. Combination therapy with DMARDs was associated with a better persistence rate.

Real-life experience with switching TNF-α inhibitors in ankylosing spondylitis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, reasons for switching and drug survival of TNF-α inhibitors (TNFis) used as first- and second-line drugs in ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

METHODS

Data on patients suffering from AS and treated with at least one TNFi between November 2005 and 2013 were extracted retrospectively from the database of a single clinical centre. Beside demographic data, the disease activity measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), the response rates (BASDAI50), reasons for switching and survival curves of TNFis were analysed in general and in subgroups of patients treated with each of the available TNFis. The reasons for switching were defined as inefficacy, side effects of the given drug, patient's request and occurrence of extra-articular manifestations.

RESULTS

Altogether, 175 patients were on TNFis and 77 of them received at least two TNFis. The patients' age at the initiation of the first TNFi was higher among switchers compared to non-switchers (42.5 ± 12.6 vs. 38.8 ± 11.2 years, p = 0.049); otherwise, gender, disease duration and initial disease activity had no influence on the risk of switching. The decrease of the BASDAI was similar among non-switchers and switchers using either the first or second TNFi, but the response rates to the first and second TNFi were worse in switchers than in non-switchers. Following the failure of the first TNFi, the retention on therapy was unfavourable, especially in patients on infliximab after 1 year of treatment. The main reason for switching from the first drug was inefficacy. The frequency of side effects that led to switching was higher in the infliximab group than in patients treated with other agents.

CONCLUSION

Although the retention rate to a second-line TNFi was somewhat worse than that to the first-line TNFi, the switching of TNFis is a good therapeutic option in AS patients who failed to respond to the first TNFi.

Therapeutic strategies in psoriasis patients with psoriatic arthritis: focus on new agents

Psoriatic arthritis affects approximately 6-42 % of patients with psoriasis. It is useful for physicians or dermatologists managing psoriasis patients to be aware of how to concurrently manage the joint manifestations, as it is preferable and convenient to use a single agent in such patients. However, only certain therapies are effective for both. Systemic agents, which can be used for both skin and joint manifestations, include methotrexate and ciclosporin. For the group of biologic agents, the tumor necrosis factor inhibitors such as adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, golimumab and certolizumab are effective. Ustekinumab is a more recently developed agent belonging to the group of anti-IL-12p40 antibodies and has been shown to be efficacious. Newer drugs in the treatment armamentarium that have shown efficacy for both psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis consist of the anti-IL-17 agent, secukinumab, and a phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor, apremilast. The other anti-IL-17 agents, ixekizumab and brodalumab, as well as the oral Jak inhibitor, tofacitinib, have very limited but promising data. This review paper provides a good overview of the agents that can be used for the concurrent management of skin and joint psoriasis.

Adalimumab for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis and nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis - a five-year update

INTRODUCTION

Following its marketing authorization for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in 2006 in the United States und in the European Union, adalimumab became one of the most frequently prescribed tumor necrosis factor (TNF) α blockers available for this indication. Recently, the label for adalimumab was extended to nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA), which might be considered as an early stage of AS. The increasing number of patients with AS being treated with adalimumab raises issues concerning long-term safety, efficacy in the prevention of structural damage in the spine and high treatment costs.

AREAS COVERED

Herein, we summarize data on efficacy and safety of adalimumab treatment in AS and nr-axSpA obtained over the past 5 years.

EXPERT OPINION

Adalimumab is clinically effective and reasonably safe in the short-term and long-term treatment of patients with AS who do not respond to standard therapy. Recent data indicate good efficacy of adalimumab also in patients with nr-axSpA but only in the presence of objective signs of active inflammation. Yet unresolved questions relate to the ability of adalimumab to stop or retard structural damage development in the spine in patients with AS and nr-axSpA. The introduction of biosimilar drugs in the near future may potentially reduce the currently very high treatment costs associated with adalimumab treatment.

Long-term safety and efficacy of etanercept in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis

To date, anti-tumor necrosis factor alfa (anti-TNF-α) therapy is the only alternative to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. Etanercept is a soluble TNF receptor, with a mode of action and pharmacokinetics different to those of antibodies and distinctive efficacy and safety. Etanercept has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis, with or without radiographic sacroiliitis, and other manifestations of the disease, including peripheral arthritis, enthesitis, and psoriasis. Etanercept is not efficacious in inflammatory bowel disease, and its efficacy in the treatment of uveitis appears to be lower than that of other anti-TNF drugs. Studies of etanercept confirmed regression of bone edema on magnetic resonance imaging of the spine and sacroiliac joint, but failed to reduce radiographic progression, as do the other anti-TNF drugs. It seems that a proportion of patients remain in disease remission when the etanercept dose is reduced or administration intervals are extended. Etanercept is generally well tolerated with an acceptable safety profile in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. The most common adverse effect of etanercept treatment is injection site reactions, which are generally self-limiting. Reactivation of tuberculosis, reactivation of hepatitis B virus infection, congestive heart failure, demyelinating neurologic disorders, hematologic disorders like aplastic anemia and pancytopenia, vasculitis, immunogenicity, and exacerbation or induction of psoriasis are class effects of all the anti-TNF drugs, and have been seen in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. However, etanercept is less likely to induce reactivation of tuberculosis than the other anti-TNF drugs and it has been suggested that etanercept might be less immunogenic, especially in ankylosing spondylitis. Acute uveitis, Crohn's disease, and sarcoidosis are other adverse events that have been rarely associated with etanercept therapy in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.

Clinical response, drug survival and predictors thereof in 432 ankylosing spondylitis patients after switching tumour necrosis factor α inhibitor therapy: results from the Danish nationwide DANBIO registry

OBJECTIVE

To investigate frequencies and reasons for switching, treatment responses and drug survival in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) switching tumour-necrosis-factor-α inhibitor (TNFi) treatment in routine clinical care.

METHODS

AS patients were identified in the Danish nationwide DANBIO registry. Disease activity, treatment responses (50% or 20 mm reduction in Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)), duration and rates of drug survival and predictors thereof were studied in patients receiving ≥2 different biological drugs.

RESULTS

Of 1436 AS patients starting TNFi treatment, 432 patients (30%) switched to a second and 137 (10%) to a third biological drug. Compared with non-switchers, switchers were more frequently women (33%/22%), had shorter disease duration (3 years/5 years) and higher BASDAI (62(52-76) mm/56(43-69) mm (median(interquartile-range))), Bath AS Functional Index (BASFI) (54(39-71) mm/47(31-65) mm) and visual-analogue-scale (VAS) global, pain and fatigue scores when they started the first TNFi (all p<0.01). Main reason for switching was lack of response (56%). During the first, second and third treatment BAS- and VAS scores had decreased after 6 months' treatment (all p<0.05). Median drug survivals were 3.1, 1.6 and 1.8 years respectively (p<0.001). After 2 years of treatment 52% of switchers and 63% of non-switchers had achieved response (number needed to treat 1.9 and 1.6, respectively, p=0.01). Drug survivals were similar regardless of the reason for switching. Male gender and low BASFI predicted drug survival of the second TNFi.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one-third of AS patients in clinical practice switched biological treatment. Response rates and drug survivals were lower among switchers, however, half of switchers achieved treatment response.

Anti-TNF Therapy in Ankylosing Spondylitis: Insights for the Clinician

The introduction of tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-blocking therapy has revolutionized the management of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) over the last decade. This review highlights the current evidence relating to the use of TNF-blocking therapy in AS. International guidelines for the use of TNF blockers in AS are summarized. An outline of the evidence for efficacy and safety of these drugs is included, highlighting recent data from registries and real-life observational studies. Such cohort data is also reviewed highlighting the evidence for 'switching' TNF blockers in AS in the case of non-response or adverse events. The potential new application of TNF blockers in preradiographic axial spondyloarthropathy (SpA) or 'early AS' is discussed with reviews of two recent studies in this area. Finally research into the possible additional impacts of TNF therapies is reviewed. The question of whether TNF blockers are truly disease modifying in AS remains unanswered with conflicting reports. The additional burden of AS in terms of cardiovascular disease is now becoming understood. Recent data from basic science studies highlights the potential impact of TNF blockers on this excess cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Future studies and registry data will be able to assess whether TNF blockers have an additional role in controlling systemic inflammation and its associated cardiovascular risk.

[How to optimize the antiTNF alpha therapy in spondylitis?]

TNFalpha inhibitors have been a major advance in the treatment of spondyloarthropathies, having demonstrated their safety and efficacy, with higher response and survival rates than those observed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The fact that disease modifying anti-arthritic drugs (DMARD) have shown utility in the treatment of this disease, especially in the axial forms, gives them greater importance, since it is known that up to 30%of patients do not respond to treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. However, we must take into account that these drugs are expensive and not without side effects, so it is necessary to optimize their use. We intend to review the use of antiTNF alpha in spondyloarthropathies and review the available evidence on strategies that can help with their rational use.