[Development of quality standards for patients with rheumatoid arthritis for use in Germany]

Despite a qualitatively and structurally good care of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Germany, there are still potentially amendable deficits in the quality of care. For this reason, the German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) has therefore decided to ask a group of experts including various stakeholders to develop quality standards (QS) for the care of patients with RA in order to improve the quality of care. The QS are used to determine and quantitatively measure the quality of care, subject to relevance and feasibility. The recently published NICE and ASAS standards and a systematic literature search were used as the basis for development. A total of 8 QS, now published for the first time, were approved with the intention to measure and further optimize the quality of care for patients with RA in Germany.

POS0941 LONG-TERM CLINICAL OUTCOMES OF CERTOLIZUMAB PEGOL TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE NON‑RADIOGRAPHIC AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS STRATIFIED BY BASELINE MRI AND C-REACTIVE PROTEIN STATUS

Background

Certolizumab pegol (CZP) has demonstrated clinical efficacy in patients with active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) and objective signs of inflammation during the 52-week (wk) placebo (PBO)-controlled period and 104 wk open-label (OL) safety follow-up extension (SFE) of the C-axSpAnd study.1 There is, however, a paucity of data on the long-term efficacy of biologics in nr-axSpA according to patients’ baseline MRI and C-reactive protein (CRP) status.

Objectives

This post hoc analysis from C-axSpAnd aimed to evaluate whether patients’ baseline MRI and CRP status impacted long-term (3-year) clinical responses to CZP.

Methods

C-axSpAnd (NCT02552212) was a 3-year, phase 3, multicentre study. Adults (N=317) with nr-axSpA fulfilling the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) classification criteria and objective signs of inflammation (CRP ≥ upper limit of normal (10 mg/L) [CRP+] and/or evidence of sacroiliitis on MRI [MRI+])2 were randomised 1:1 to PBO or CZP (400 mg at Wks 0, 2 and 4, then 200 mg every 2 wks [Q2W]) for 52 wks.3 Those enrolled into the SFE received OL CZP (200 mg Q2W) for an additional 104 wks.

Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) alongside the percentage of patients achieving ASDAS major improvement (ASDAS-MI, C-axSpAnd primary outcome) and ASAS 40% response (ASAS40) at Wks 52 and 156 were assessed according to prespecified subgroups based on MRI/CRP status (MRI+/CRP+, MRI−/CRP+, MRI+/CRP−). All data are reported as observed case.

Results

243/317 (76.7%) patients entered the SFE, 120 from the group initially randomised to CZP (36 MRI+/CRP+, 32 MRI−/CRP+ and 52 MRI+/CRP−) and 123 from the initial PBO group (30 MRI+/CRP+, 34 MRI−/CRP+ and 59 MRI+/CRP−; 75/123 had switched to OL treatment in the 52 wk double-blind phase). 206/243 completed the SFE; 102/120 (85.0%) from the group initially randomised to CZP, 104/123 (84.6%) from the initial PBO group.

Among CZP-randomised patients, mean ASDAS was similar between timepoints (MRI+/CRP+: 1.6 at Wk 52 vs 1.6 at Wk 156; MRI−/CRP+: 2.1 vs 2.2; MRI+/CRP−: 1.7 vs 1.6), the percentage achieving ASDAS-MI was lower at Wk 156 compared to Wk 52 across all subgroups (Figure 1 A). Patients initially randomised to PBO showed improvements in mean ASDAS over time (MRI+/CRP+: 2.1 Wk 52 vs 1.8 Wk 156; MRI−/CRP+: 2.2 vs 1.9; MRI+/CRP−: 2.0 vs 1.7) and a sustained proportion of patients achieved ASDAS-MI.

Similar results were shown for BASDAI, with mean scores for CZP-randomised patients sustained from Wk 52 to Wk 156 across all subgroups (Figure 1 B). Mean BASDAI decreased (indicative of clinical improvements) from Wk 52 to Wk 156 in patients initially randomised to PBO, at which point the values aligned with those reported for the CZP-randomised group.

In CZP-randomised patients, ASAS40 responses were sustained at Wk 156 compared to Wk 52. An increased percentage of patients achieved ASAS40 in all MRI/CRP subgroups initially randomised to PBO at Wk 156 compared to Wk 52 (Figure 1 C).

Conclusion

In this analysis of patients with nr-axSpA and objective signs of inflammation, long-term clinical outcomes achieved after 1 year were generally sustained at 3 years across MRI+/CRP+, MRI−/CRP+ and MRI+/CRP− subgroups; ASDAS-MI was numerically highest in the MRI+/CRP+ subgroup.

References

[1]van der Heijde D. Arthritis Rheumatol 2021;73 (suppl 10);

[2]Lambert RG. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75(11):1958–63;

[3]Deodhar A. Arthritis Rheumatol 2019;71(7):1101–11.

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by UCB Pharma. Editorial services were provided by Costello Medical and funded by UCB Pharma.

Disclosure of Interests

Philip Robinson Consultant of: Personal fees from AbbVie, Atom Biosciences, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Grant funding from Janssen, Novartis and UCB Pharma; meeting attendance support from Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Pfizer and Roche, Walter P Maksymowych Consultant of: Honoraria/consulting fees from AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Research grants from AbbVie and Pfizer; educational grants from AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis and Pfizer; Chief Medical Officer for CARE Arthritis Limited., Lianne S. Gensler Speakers bureau: Speaker for AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: Consulting fees from AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis and UCB Pharma, Martin Rudwaleit Speakers bureau: Speaker for AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: Consulting fees from AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis and UCB Pharma, Bengt Hoepken Shareholder of: Stockholder of UCB Pharma, Employee of: Employee of UCB Pharma, Lars Bauer Shareholder of: Stockholder of UCB Pharma, Employee of: Employee of UCB Pharma, Thomas Kumke Shareholder of: Stockholder of UCB Pharma, Employee of: Employee of UCB Pharma, Mindy Kim Shareholder of: Stockholder of UCB Pharma, Employee of: Employee of UCB Pharma, Atul Deodhar Speakers bureau: Speaker for Janssen, Novartis and Pfizer, Consultant of: Consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Aurinia, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, MoonLake, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Research grants from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma

POS0938 MAINTENANCE OF RESPONSE TO BIMEKIZUMAB OVER 3 YEARS OF TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS: POST HOC ANALYSES FROM THE BE AGILE STUDY AND ITS OPEN-LABEL EXTENSION

Background

Bimekizumab (BKZ), a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits interleukin (IL)-17F in addition to IL 17A, has demonstrated significant and rapid efficacy in patients (pts) with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS) treated for up to 48 weeks (wks) in the phase 2b BE AGILE study.1 Maintaining stringent disease control is an internationally recognised treatment target in spondyloarthritis and a relevant goal in clinical research.2

Objectives

To report on the maintenance of clinical response, including the achievement of sustained remission or low disease activity (LDA), to support and extend previous findings on the long-term efficacy of BKZ in pts with active AS treated for up to 3 years (yrs) in BE AGILE and its open-label extension (OLE).3

Methods

Study design of the 48-wk BE AGILE study (NCT02963506) and its ongoing 4-yr OLE (NCT03355573) have been reported previously.1,3 During the OLE, pts received BKZ 160 mg every 4 wks (Q4W) regardless of prior dosing. In this post hoc study, maintenance of response analyses through 156 wks were conducted for Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) <2.1 and Assessment in SpondyloArthritis international Society 40 (ASAS40) response. ASDAS <2.1 includes both ASDAS-LDA (1.3–<2.1) and ASDAS inactive disease (ID; <1.3). Data from pts randomised at baseline to BKZ 160 mg and 320 mg Q4W were used for these analyses. ASDAS and the ASAS components were assessed at every study visit to Wk 24, then every 12 wks. All reported analyses are observed case.

Results

At baseline, 121/303 pts were randomised to BKZ 160 mg (n=60) or 320 mg (n=61). Overall, 36/121 (29.8%) had ASDAS high disease (HD) and 84/121 (69.4%) had very high disease (VHD) activity. At Wk 12, 48/119 (40.3%) had achieved ASDAS <2.1, increasing further to 66/111 (59.5%) at Wk 48 and 63/93 (67.7%) at Wk 156, of which 32 pts (32/63; 50.8%) had ID. Improvement in ASDAS was consistent across both BKZ 160 mg and 320 mg groups, with treatment response levels maintained following dose reduction to 160 mg at Wk 48 in the 320 mg group (Figure 1).

Of those pts who achieved ASDAS <2.1 at Wk 12 across both groups, 33/37 (89.2%) maintained ASDAS <2.1 at Wk 156. In the most stringent maintenance of response analysis, 24/37 (64.9%) pts who achieved ASDAS <2.1 at Wk 12 maintained this state at every ASDAS assessment during Wks 12–156. Efficacy measured by ASAS40 response was also sustained over 3 years, with 56/119 (47.1%) pts having achieved ASAS40 at Wk 12, 72/111 (64.9%) at Wk 48 and 69/96 (71.9%) at Wk 156. In line with ASDAS <2.1, of those pts who achieved ASAS40 at Wk 12, 44/47 (93.6%) maintained ASAS40 at Wk 156, and 36/47 (76.6%) had maintained ASAS40 at every assessment during Wks 12–156.

Conclusion

BKZ 160 mg Q4W provided a robust maintenance of disease control over 3 yrs in pts with active AS who initially responded at Wk 12, irrespective of the initial dosing regimen (BKZ 160 mg or 320 mg Q4W).

References

[1]van der Heijde D. Ann Rheum Dis 2020;79:595–604; 2. Smolen J. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77:3–17; 3. Gensler L. Arthritis Rheumatol 2021;73(suppl 10):0491.

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by UCB Pharma. Editorial services were provided by Costello Medical.

Disclosure of Interests

Victoria Navarro-Compán Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie and Novartis, Martin Rudwaleit Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Paid instructor for: Janssen, Novartis, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Novartis, UCB Pharma, Natasha de Peyrecave Employee of: UCB Pharma, Carmen Fleurinck Employee of: UCB Pharma, Marga Oortgiesen Employee of: UCB Pharma, Vanessa Taieb Employee of: UCB Pharma, Xenofon Baraliakos Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Paid instructor for: AbbVie, BMS, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma

POS0939 BIMEKIZUMAB IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE NON-RADIOGRAPHIC AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: 24-WEEK EFFICACY & SAFETY FROM BE MOBILE 1, A PHASE 3, MULTICENTRE, RANDOMISED, PLACEBO‑CONTROLLED STUDY

Background

Bimekizumab (BKZ) is a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits IL-17F in addition to IL-17A. BKZ has shown rapid and sustained efficacy and was well tolerated up to 156 weeks (wks) in a phase 2b study in patients (pts) with active ankylosing spondylitis.1,2

Objectives

To assess efficacy and safety of BKZ vs placebo (PBO) in pts with active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) up to Wk 24 in the ongoing pivotal phase 3 study, BE MOBILE 1.

Methods

BE MOBILE 1 (NCT03928704) comprises a 16-wk double-blind, PBO-controlled period and 36-wk maintenance period. Pts were aged ≥18 yrs, had BASDAI ≥4 and spinal pain ≥4 at BL, and sacroiliitis on MRI and/or elevated CRP at screening. Pts were randomised 1:1, BKZ 160 mg Q4W:PBO. From Wk 16, all pts received BKZ 160 mg Q4W. Primary and secondary efficacy endpoints were assessed at Wk 16.

Results

Of 254 randomised pts (BKZ: 128; PBO: 126), 244 (96.1%) completed Wk 16, 240 (94.5%) Wk 24. BL characteristics were comparable between groups: mean age 39.4 yrs, symptom duration 9.0 yrs; 54.3% pts male, 77.6% HLA-B27+, 10.6% TNFi-experienced. At Wk 16, the primary (ASAS40: 47.7% BKZ vs 21.4% PBO; p<0.001) and all ranked secondary endpoints were met (Table 1). Responses were rapid with BKZ, including in PBO pts who switched to BKZ at Wk 16, and increased to Wk 24 (Figure 1; Table 1). Substantial reductions of hs-CRP by Wk 2 and MRI SIJ inflammation by Wk 16 were achieved with BKZ vs PBO (Table 1). At Wk 24, >50% of pts initially randomised to BKZ had achieved ASDAS <2.1 (Figure 1).

Table 1.

Efficacy at Wks 16 and 24

BLWk 16Wk 24PBO N=126BKZ 160 mg Q4W N=128PBO N=126BKZ 160 mg Q4W N=128p valuePBO→BKZ 160 mg Q4W N=126BKZ 160 mg Q4W N=128Ranked endpoints in hierarchical orderASAS40* [NRI] n (%)--27 (21.4)61 (47.7)<0.00159 (46.8)67 (52.3)BASDAI CfB† [MI] mean (SE)6.7 (0.1)6.9 (0.1)–1.5 (0.2)–3.1 (0.2)<0.001–3.2 (0.2)–3.4 (0.2)ASAS20† [NRI] n (%)--48 (38.1)88 (68.8)<0.00187 (69.0)96 (75.0)ASAS PR† [NRI] n (%)--9 (7.1)33 (25.8)<0.00135 (27.8)37 (28.9)ASDAS-MI† [NRI] n (%)--9 (7.1)35 (27.3)<0.00137 (29.4)41 (32.0)ASAS 5/6† [NRI] n (%)--21 (16.7)49 (38.3)<0.00151 (40.5)57 (44.5)BASFI CfB† [MI] mean (SE)5.3 (0.2)5.5 (0.2)–1.0 (0.2)–2.5 (0.2)<0.001–2.3 (0.2)–2.8 (0.2)Nocturnal spinal pain CfB† [MI] mean (SE)6.7 (0.2)6.9 (0.2)–1.7 (0.2)–3.6 (0.3)<0.001–3.5 (0.2)–4.0 (0.3)ASQoL CfB† [MI] mean (SE)9.4 (0.4)9.5 (0.4)–2.5 (0.4)–5.2 (0.4)<0.001–4.8 (0.4)–5.7 (0.4)SF-36 PCS CfB† [MI] mean (SE)33.6 (0.8)33.3 (0.7)5.5 (0.7)9.5 (0.7)<0.00110.1 (0.8)10.6 (0.8)Other endpointsdEnthesitis-free state†a [NRI] n (%)--22 (23.9)b48 (51.1)c-40 (43.5)b45 (47.9)cASAS40 in TNFi-experienced [NRI] n (%)--2 (11.8)e6 (60.0)f---ASDAS-CRP CfB [MI] mean (SE)3.7 (0.1)3.8 (0.1)–0.6 (0.1)–1.5 (0.1)-–1.5 (0.1)–1.6 (0.1)hs-CRP, mg/L [MI] geometric mean (median)5.0 (6.5)4.6 (6.1)3.8 (4.1)2.0 (1.8)-2.3 (2.6)1.9 (1.8)MRI spine Berlin CfBg [OC] mean (SD)1.9 (3.2)h1.6 (2.9)i–0.1 (1.7)j–0.7 (2.2)k---SPARCC MRI SIJ score CfBg [OC] mean (SD)10.5 (13.8)l8.5 (10.3)m–1.5 (9.2)n–6.3 (10.0)o---

Randomised set. *Primary endpoint; †Secondary endpoint; aMASES=0 in pts with BL MASES >0; bn=92; cn=94; dNominal p values not shown; en=17; fn=10; gIn pts in MRI sub-study; hn=65; in=75; jn=58; kn=73; ln=68; mn=79; nn=60; on=77.

Over 16 wks, 80/128 (62.5%) pts had ≥1 TEAE on BKZ vs 71/126 (56.3%) on PBO; most frequent were nasopharyngitis (BKZ: 9.4%; PBO: 4.8%), upper respiratory tract infection (BKZ: 7.0%; PBO: 7.1%) and oral candidiasis (BKZ: 3.1%; PBO: 0%). No systemic candidiasis was observed. Up to 16 wks, incidence of SAEs was low (BKZ: 0.0%; PBO: 0.8%); no MACE or deaths were reported; 0 IBD cases occurred in pts on BKZ vs 1 (0.8%) in a pt on PBO.

Conclusion

Dual inhibition of IL-17A and IL-17F with BKZ in pts with active nr-axSpA resulted in rapid, clinically relevant improvements in efficacy outcomes vs PBO. No new safety signals were observed.1,2

References

[1]van der Heijde D. Ann Rheum Dis 2020;79:595–604;

[2]Gensler L. Arthritis Rheumatol 2021;73(suppl 10):0491.

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by UCB Pharma. Editorial services were provided by Costello Medical.

Disclosure of Interests

Atul Deodhar Speakers bureau: Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Aurinia, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, MoonLake, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Bayer, BMS, Cyxone, Eisai, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Employee of: Imaging Rheumatology BV (Director), Lianne S. Gensler Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Huji Xu: None declared, Karl Gaffney Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and UCB Pharma, Hiroaki Dobashi Speakers bureau: BMS, Chugai, Eli Lilly, GSK, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Walter P Maksymowych Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis and Pfizer, Employee of: Chief Medical Officer for CARE Arthritis, Martin Rudwaleit Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Paid instructor for: Janssen, Novartis, and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Novartis, and UCB Pharma, Marina Magrey Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie and UCB Pharma, Dirk Elewaut Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Novartis and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Novartis and UCB Pharma, Marga Oortgiesen Employee of: Employee of UCB Pharma, Carmen Fleurinck Employee of: Employee of UCB Pharma, Alicia Ellis Employee of: Employee of UCB Pharma, Thomas Vaux Employee of: Employee of UCB Pharma, julie smith Employee of: Employee of UCB Pharma, Xenofon Baraliakos Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Paid instructor for: AbbVie, BMS, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma

POS0153 MRI SPINAL LESIONS IN PATIENTS WITHOUT MRI OR RADIOGRAPHIC LESIONS IN THE SACROILIAC JOINTS TYPICAL OF AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS

Background

There are limited data as to the frequency of spinal lesions on MRI in patients without MRI or radiographic features typical of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) disease and to what degree spine MRI might enhance diagnostic evaluation.

Objectives

To assess the frequency of MRI lesions of the spine in the ASAS-Classification Cohort according to the presence of MRI SIJ lesions typical of axSpA and/or radiographic sacroiliitis (mNY+).

Methods

MRI spine lesions were recorded by 9 central readers in an eCRF that captures global assessment of the spine (“Is the MRI consistent with axSpA: yes/no”) (yes=MRIglobal spine+) and detailed anatomical-based scoring of each discovertebral unit plus lateral and posterior structures. Independently, readers globally assessed SIJ scans for active and/or structural lesions typical of axSpA. We compared the frequency of MRIglobal spine+ and frequencies of different types of spinal lesions according to the presence/absence of axSpA on global evaluation of SIJ scans by ≥5 of 9 readers (MRIglobal SIJ+) and mNY+ sacroiliitis using Fisher’s exact test. Analysis was also stratified by rheumatologist diagnosis.

Results

Among 51 cases with SIJ as well as spine MRI scans and radiographs of the SIJ,19 (37.3%) had MRIglobal SIJ+, and 12 (23.5%) and 7 (13.7%) had MRIglobal spine+ by ≥2 and ≥5 reader agreement, respectively. MRIglobal spine+ occurred significantly more frequently in the presence of mNY+ sacroiliitis and MRIglobal SIJ+ but was also recorded in 4 of 32(12.5%) (≥2 readers) and 1 of 32(3.4%) (≥5 readers) cases that were MRIglobal SIJ- and x-ray negative, all 4 cases being diagnosed with axSpA. Moreover, vertebral corner BME lesions, but not spinal structural lesions, were significantly more frequent in MRIglobal SIJ- cases that had been clinically diagnosed as axSpA versus non-axSpA (Table 1).

Table 1.

Frequency of Spinal MRI lesions According to SIJ Imaging Positive for AxSpA

MRI Spinal Lesions, N (%)MRIglobalSIJ+ (n=19)MRIglobalSIJ- (n=32)P valueMRIglobal SIJ+ and/or mNY+ (n=22)MRIglobal SIJ- and mNY- (n=29)P valueMRIglobal SIJ- and SpA Diagnosis+(n=17)MRIglobal SIJ- and SpA Diagnosis- (n=15)P valueMRIglobal consistent with axSpA (≥2/9 readers agree)8 (42.1%)4 (12.5%)0.048(36.4%)4(13.8%)0.104 (23.5%)0 (0%)0.10MRIglobal consistent with axSpA (≥5/9 readers agree)6 (31.6%)1 (3.1%)0.016 (27.3%)1 (3.4%)0.031 (5.9%)0 (0%)1.0VC BME ≥19 (47.4%)15 (46.9%)46.9% RT 62.5% CT 29.4% GT1.010(45.5%)14(48.3%)1.011 (64.7%)4 (26.7%)0.04VC BME ≥26 (31.6%)10 (31.3%)31.2% RT 55.6% CT 19.6% GT1.06(27.3%)10(34.5%)0.769 (52.9%)1 (6.7%)0.007VC BME ≥36 (31.6%)7 (21.9%)21.9% RT 53.8% CT 13.7% GT0.526(27.3%)7(24.1%)1.07 (41.2%)0 (0%)0.008VC BME ≥45 (26.3%)5 (15.6%)0.475(22.7%)5(17.2%)0.735 (29.4%)0 (0%)0.046Vertebral Endplate BME ≥12 (10.5%)3 (9.4%)1.02(9.1%)3(10.3%)1.02 (11.8%)1 (6.7%)1.0Lateral vertebral BME3 (15.8%)3 (9.4%)0.663(13.6%)3(10.3%)1.03 (17.6%)0 (0%)0.23Facet BME ≥14 (21.1%)1 (3.1%)3.1% RT 20.0% CT 2.0% GT0.064(18.2%)1(3.4%)0.151 (5.9%)0 (0%)1.0Posterior BME ≥15 (26.3%)2 (6.3%)0.095(22.7%)2(6.9%)0.221 (5.9%)1 (6.7%)1.0VC Fat ≥18 (42.1%)42.1% RT 44.4% CT 15.7% GT10 (31.3%)31.2% RT 55.6% CT 19.6% GT0.558(36.4%)10(34.5%)1.05 (29.4%)5 (33.3%)1.0VC Fat ≥27 (36.8%)5 (15.6%)0.107(31.8%)5(17.2%)0.323 (17.6%)2 (13.3%)1.0VC Fat ≥36 (31.6%)31.6% RT 66.7% CT 11.8% GT3 (9.4%)0.066(27.3%)3(10.3%)0.151 (5.9%)2 (13.3%)0.59VC Fat ≥46 (31.6%)1 (3.1%)0.016(27.3%)1(3.4%)0.030 (0%)1 (6.7%)0.47Lateral Fat ≥16 (31.6%)2 (6.3%)0.046(27.3%)2(6.9%)0.060 (0%)2 (13.3%)0.21Erosion ≥13 (15.8%)2 (6.3%)0.353(13.6%)2(6.9%)0.641 (5.9%)1 (6.7%)1.0Bone Spur ≥14 (21.1%)5 (15.6%)0.714(18.2%)5(17.2%)1.04 (23.5%)1 (6.7%)0.34Ankylosis ≥12 (10.5%)0 (0%)0.132(9.1%)0(0%)0.180 (0%)0 (0%)-

Conclusion

Spinal lesions on MRI indicative of axSpA per majority read occurred in about 3% of patients without positive imaging in the SIJ. Frequency of spinal BME lesions was higher in cases with negative SIJ imaging but clinically diagnosed with axSpA.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

OP0150 ASAS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REQUESTING AND REPORTING IMAGING EXAMINATIONS IN PATIENTS WITH SUSPECTED AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS

Background

Clinicians face uncertainties in their daily practice when requesting imaging examinations for patients with suspected axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) or when producing an imaging report because the requirements and desired information of radiologists and rheumatologists / orthopedics alike are sometimes not completely known or understood.

Objectives

This project aimed to develop practical consensus recommendations for the standardized communication around imaging of sacroiliac joints and spine for diagnostic purposes in patients with suspected axSpA or their management in clinical practice.

Methods

An international task force was established combining radiologists (n=7) and rheumatologists (n=13) from the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS), two members of Young ASAS and a patient representative. The task force defined the project’s aims and developed a project statement. Then, considering published literature and the work of other groups, two survey rounds were designed, and all ASAS members invited to respond: first, to identify items for further consideration, second, to consider the detail of information to be communicated. Finally, ASAS members discussed the recommendations proposed by the task force during the ASAS annual workshop in January 2022 and voted regarding endorsement of the recommendations.

Results

The final set of recommendations is presented in Figure 1. Six recommendations deal with imaging requests in patients with axSpA. The first three recommendations entail clinical features, patients’ symptoms and risk factors. Recommendation 4 concerns previous imaging and reports and recommendation 5 refers to contraindications to imaging or contrast media. Recommendation 6 is about the suspected diagnosis and possible clinical differential diagnoses and the reason for the examination. Eleven additional recommendations refer to the radiology report. The first point addresses clinical information included in the report. Recommendations 2 to 4 advise on information about the technical conduct of the exam, the use of contrast media and image quality. Imaging findings that should be mentioned in the report if present are listed in recommendations 5 to 7. Finally, recommendations 8 to 11 combine advice for the conclusion, and for suggesting additional imaging or referral to a rheumatology expert if a different physician requested the imaging. The recommendations were endorsed by ASAS with approval from 73% of voting members (43 agreed, 10 rejected, 6 abstained).

Figure 1.

ASAS recommendations for requesting and reporting imaging in patients with suspected axial Spondyloarthritis.

Conclusion

These ASAS recommendations provide guidance for requesting and reporting imaging examinations in the context of axSpA and for standardizing and enhancing communication between rheumatologists and radiologists to improve diagnosis and patient care.

Disclosure of Interests

Torsten Diekhoff Paid instructor for: Novarits, Eli Lilly, MSD, Canon MS, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, Iris Eshed: None declared, Chiara Giraudo: None declared, Kay-Geert Hermann: None declared, Manouk de Hooge: None declared, Lennart Jans: None declared, Anne Grethe Jurik: None declared, Robert G Lambert: None declared, Pedro M Machado: None declared, Walter P Maksymowych: None declared, Michael Mallinson: None declared, Helena Marzo-Ortega: None declared, Victoria Navarro-Compán: None declared, Susanne Juhl Pedersen: None declared, Mikkel Østergaard: None declared, Monique Reijnierse: None declared, Martin Rudwaleit: None declared, Fernando Sommerfleck: None declared, Ulrich Weber: None declared, Xenofon Baraliakos: None declared, Denis Poddubnyy: None declared

OP0034 IXEKIZUMAB IMPROVES SIGNS, SYMPTOMS, AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SpA IRRESPECTIVE OF DISEASE DURATION: RESULTS FROM THE COAST-V, COAST-W AND COAST-X TRIALS

Background

Ixekizumab (IXE), a high-affinity monoclonal antibody selectively targeting interleukin-17A,1 has demonstrated superior efficacy to placebo (PBO) in the treatment of patients (pts) with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) (COAST-V [NCT02696785]; -W [NCT02696798]), and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) (COAST-X [NCT02757352]).

Objectives

Assess treatment response to IXE categorised by disease duration since symptom onset (<5 years (yrs), ≥5yrs) in pts with r-axSpA and nr-axSpA up to 52 Weeks (Wks).

Methods

Pts fulfilled ASAS classification criteria for r-axSpA or nr-axSpA and were randomised to receive 80mg subcutaneous IXE every 2Wks or 4Wks, or PBO (16Wks COAST-V/W; 52Wks COAST-X). Data were summarized by disease duration and treatment in eligible intent-to-treat (ITT) pts. Wk16 treatment comparisons were conducted using Cochran-Haenszel-Mantel test and ANCOVA. Missing data were handled using non-responder imputation and modified baseline observation carried forward, for categorical and continuous endpoints, respectively.

Results

Table 1 presents pt demographics and baseline characteristics. Data is from pooled IXE pts. In pts with r-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASAS40 response was achieved by 51.5% at Wk16 and 60.6% at Wk52, compared to 36.9% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p<0.001), and 40.5% at Wk52, in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. In pts with nr-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASAS40 response was achieved by 42.5% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p=0.012), and 54.8% at Wk52, compared to 36.0% at Wk16 and 41.4% at Wk52 in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration (Figure 1). In pts with r-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASDAS LDA <2.1 response was achieved by 39.4% at Wk16 and 48.5% at Wk52, compared to 27.5% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p<0.001), and 35.6% at Wk52 in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. In pts with nr-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASDAS LDA <2.1 response was achieved by 32.9% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p=0.003), and 49.3% at Wk52, compared to 23.9% at Wk16 and 36.9% at Wk52 in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. At Wk16, in pts with r-axSpA pts and <5yrs symptom duration, the Change from Baseline (CFB) in SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score (LSM±SE) was 7.91 (±1.52), compared to 6.81 (±0.40) in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. In pts with nr-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, this score was 8.95 (±0.95) compared to 7.07 (±0.73) in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration; both were significantly different to PBO (r-axSpA: p<0.001; nr-axSpA: p=0.037).

Table 1.

Patient demographics and Baseline Characteristics

Pts with r-axSpAPts with nr-axSpA<5yrs (Ns=33)≥5yrs (Ns=306)<5yrs (Ns=73)≥5yrs (Ns=111)Age (years)33.1 (8.15)45.1 (12.12)31.9 (10.07)46.4 (11.86)Male, n (%)26 (78.8)245 (80.1)40 (54.8)53 (47.7)Female, n (%)7 (21.2)61 (19.9)33 (45.2)58 (52.3)Age at axSpA onset (years)30.4 (8.29)27.0 (9.06)29.9 (10.22)29.5 (8.76)ASDAS score, mean (SD)3.87 (0.79)4.03 (0.82)3.79 (0.80)3.85 (0.78)BASDAI score, mean (SD)7.16 (1.64)7.25 (1.35)7.00 (1.33)7.30 (1.26)SF-36 PCS, mean (SD)34.02 (7.73)32.86 (7.63)32.84 (7.86)32.57 (6.97)

Abbreviations: IXE=ixekizumab, n=number of pts in specified category, Ns=number of pts in each subgroup, SD=standard deviation.

Figure 1.

ASAS40 Response Rates for patients with r-axSpA (COAST-V/W) and nr-axSpA (COAST-X) Symptom Duration <5 and ≥5 years up to Week 52, ITT, NRI: Significantly greater response of IXE versus PBO at Week 16 denotated by * (p≤0.05), *** (p≤0.001). Abbreviations: PBO, placebo; IXE, Ixekizumab; NRI, nonresponder imputation; ITT, Intent-to-Treat (population), ASAS, Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society.

Conclusion

Efficacy response to the therapy with IXE was observed in both subgroups based on disease duration (<5 and ≥5yrs) with more robust responses in the <5 years subgroup.

References

[1]Paller AS, Br J Dermatol. 2020;183(2):231-241.

Disclosure of Interests

Victoria Navarro-Compán Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Paid instructor for: AbbVie, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Grant/research support from: ASAS: Research grant 2018 and 2021.

Novartis: Research grant 2021 (Payment to institution), John D Reveille Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly and Company and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Eli Lilly and Company, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, and Company Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Paid instructor for: Advisory Board: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, José Maldonado-Cocco Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Merck Sharp Dohme, Wyeth, Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Shering-Plough, Abbvie, UCB, Gilead., Consultant of: Pfizer, Merck Sharp Dohme, Wyeth, Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Shering-Plough, Abbvie, UCB, Gilead., Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Merck Sharp Dohme, Wyeth, Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Shering-Plough, Abbvie, UCB, Gilead., Marina Magrey Speakers bureau: Novartis, Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Company., Consultant of: Novartis, Eli Lilly and Comapny, Pfizer, Janssen, UCB Pharma, Abbvie, BMS., Rebecca Bolce Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, David Sandoval Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, So Young Park Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Andris Kronbergs Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Martin Rudwaleit Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Paid instructor for: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB., Consultant of: UCB, Grant/research support from: Galapagos, UCB, Novartis.

OP0021 TREATMENT WITH NON-STEROIDAL ANTI-INFLAMMATORY DRUGS IS ASSOCIATED WITH RETARDATION OF RADIOGRAPHIC SPINAL PROGRESSION IN PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: 10-YEAR RESULTS FROM THE GERMAN SPONDYLOARTHRITIS INCEPTION COHORT

Background

There are conflicting data regarding effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) on radiographic spinal progression in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The analysis of the first 2-year of the GErman SPondyloarthritis Inception Cohort (GESPIC) showed that higher NSAID intake may retard new bone formation in r-axSpA. It remained, however, unclear, whether cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitors (COX2i) might have a stronger effect than non-selective (NS) ones and if the effect could be observed also in nr-axSpA.

Objectives

To investigate the effect of NSAIDs (COX2i and NS) intake on radiographic spinal progression in patients with r-axSpA and nr-axSpA.

Methods

Based on availability of at least two sets of spinal radiographs during 10-year follow-up, 243 patients with early axSpA (130 and 113 nr- and r-axSpA, respectively) from GESPIC were included in this analysis. The patients contributed a total of 540 2-year radiographic intervals. Radiographs were scored by 3 trained and calibrated readers according to modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score (mSASSS). Final mSASSS was calculated as a mean of 3 readers, and progression was defined as absolute mSASSS change score over 2 years. NSAID type, daily dose, and frequency of intake were recorded at visits. The ASAS index of NSAID intake (0-100) counting both dose and duration of intake was calculated for intervals. The association between NSAID intake (NSAID type and NSAID score) and radiographic spinal progression over 2 years was analysed using longitudinal generalized estimated equations (GEE).

Results

At baseline, 161 (66.3%) patients were treated with NSAIDs. While 289 (53.5%) and 128 (23.7%) 2-year radiographic intervals were covered by NS and COX-2i respectively, 123 (22.8%) intervals were not covered by NSAID. The significant association between higher NSAID intake and retardation of radiographic spinal progression was found in adjusted multivariable longitudinal GEE analysis. This effect was mostly attributable to patients with r-axSpA (Table 1). mSASSS progression was numerically lower in patients taking COX2i (irrespectively of dose) as compared to patients treated with NS-NSAIDs; in stratified analysis, however, there was no clear dose-dependency (as reflected by NSAID index) in both groups (Figure 1, Table 1).

Table 1.

The association between radiographic spinal progression (mSASSS change score) and NSAID intake in patients with axSpA in multivariable longitudinal GEE

All axSpA β (95% CI)* (n=461)nr-axSpA β (95% CI)*(n=244)r-axSpA β (95% CI)* (n=217)NSAID intake score, per 10 points-0.04 (-0.09, 0.00)-0.02 (-0.06, 0.02)-0.07 (-0.13, 0.00)NSAID type§ NS inhibitors vs No NSAID0.30(-0.07, 0.66)0.25(-0.07, 0.57)0.26(-0.40, 0.92) COX2i vs No NSAID0.17(-0.19, 0.54)0.15(-0.15, 0.46)0.18(-0.49, 0.85) COX2i vs NS inhibitors-0.12(-0.37, 0.12)-0.10(-0.28, 0.09)-0.08(-0.57, 0.40)Analysis stratified according to NSAID typeNon-selective NSAID intake score, per 10 points-0.06(-0.12, 0.00)-0.04(-0.09, 0.01)-0.07(-0.17, 0.03)COX2 selective NSAID intake score, per 10 points-0.06(-0.13, 0.02)-0.03(-0.07, 0.02)-0.09(-0.18, 0.01)

axSpA: axial spondyloarthritis; COX2i, cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitors; n, number of current 2-year radiographic intervals in multivariable analyses; NS, non-selective COXi; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

*All multivariable models were adjusted for sex, symptom duration at the beginning of the interval, time-averaged ASDAS the interval, classification as radiographic axSpA, smoking in the interval, mSASSS at the beginning of theinterval, and TNFi use in the interval.

§NSAID intake score was added in this model.

Conclusion

Higher NSAID intake is associated with lower radiographic spinal progression, particularly in r-axSpA patients. COX2i might possess a stronger inhibitory effect on radiographic progression as compared to NS-NSAIDs.

Disclosure of Interests

Murat Torgutalp: None declared, Valeria Rios Rodriguez Consultant of: AbbVie, Grant/research support from: Falk e.V, Ani Dilbaryan: None declared, Fabian Proft Speakers bureau: Novartis, Lilly, UCB AbbVie, AMGEN, BMS, Hexal, MSD, Pfizer, Roche and Janssen, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Lilly and UCB, Mikhail Protopopov Consultant of: Novartis and UCB, Maryna Verba: None declared, Judith Rademacher Consultant of: Novartis and UCB, Hildrun Haibel Consultant of: Boehringer, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Sobi, Roche, Pfizer, AbbVie, and Sobi, Joachim Sieper Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, UCB, Martin Rudwaleit Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgen, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgen, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Denis Poddubnyy Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB., Consultant of: AbbVie, Biocad, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer.

POS0032 SCORING MRI STRUCTURAL LESIONS IN SACROILIAC JOINTS OF PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: HOW MANY SLICES ARE OPTIMAL?

Background:

There is no international consensus on the optimal number of slices for evaluation of MRI structural lesions in the SIJ. An “all slice” method evaluates lesions from the most anterior slice, defined as the first slice with vertical height of ≥1cm of the SIJ joint cavity, up to the most posterior slice, defined as the most posterior slice where ≥1cm vertical height of the cartilaginous portion is still visible. The SPARCC method scores the transitional slice between cartilaginous and ligamentous compartments as the first slice and then an additional 4 slices anterior to the transitional slice.

Objectives:

We aimed to investigate inter-reader reliability, the extent of detection of lesions, and frequency of cases with a positive MRI for structural lesions when using an “all slice” approach versus the SPARCC scoring of 5 central slices.

Methods:

MRI T1W images with DICOM series were available from 148 cases who had MRI performed in the ASAS-Classification Cohort. Seven central readers recorded MRI lesions in an eCRF that recorded global assessments of presence/absence of changes suggestive of axSpA and structural lesions typical of axSpA. Structural lesions per the ASAS definitions were also recorded in consecutive semicoronal slices using the “all slice” approach, but also recording the transitional slice, according to their presence/absence in SIJ quadrants (erosion, fat lesion, sclerosis) or halves (backfill, ankylosis). Structural lesion frequencies were assessed descriptively according to majority agreement (≥4/7) of central readers and also any 2 central readers. Reliability for detection of MRI lesions was compared between central and local readers using the ICC.

Results:

The mean (SD) (range) number of anterior and posterior slices peripheral to the 5 central slices was 1.0 (1.0) (0-4) and 2.2 (1.8) (0-6) per case, respectively. There were 2 cases (1.4%) where ≥2 readers scored structural lesions in peripheral slices but not in the 5 central slices. The mean percentage of the total structural lesion score that was captured by the 5 central slices was >75% for all types of lesions except ankylosis (59%) (Table 1). Inter-reader reliability was greater for all lesions when assessing the 5 central slices and especially for erosion and backfill (Table 1).

Conclusion:

The major component of structural lesion data is captured by assessment of 5 slices, which includes the transitional slice and the subsequent 4 anterior slices. Moreover, reliability for detection of structural lesions is substantially worse in peripheral slices.

MRI Lesion“All slice”Central 5 slicesPeripheral slicesP value central vs peripheral slicesP value“all slice” vs central slicesMean (SD) Lesion Score Per CaseErosion2.4 (4.5) (0-22.9)1.8(3.4) (0-17.1)0.6 (1.4) (0-10.1)<0.001< 0.001Fat lesion2.5 (5.9) (0-34.0)1.8 (4.5) (0-25.1)0.7 (1.8) (0-9.9)< 0.001<0.001Sclerosis2.0 (4.9) (0-39.0)1.5 (3.6) (0-26.1)0.5 (1.5) (0-12.9)< 0.001<0.001Backfill0.5 (1.5) (0-12)0.4 (1.2) (0.0-9.3)0.1 (0.4) (0-2.7)< 0.0010.84Ankylosis0.5 (3.4) (0-30.7)0.3 (2.3) (0-20.0)0.2 (1.2) (0-11.3)0.100.18Mean (SD) (Range) % of Total Lesion Score in Central vs Peripheral slicesErosion100%76.4% (28.9%) (0-100%)23.6% (28.9%) (0-100%)<0.001NAFat lesion100%75.4% (26.5%) (0-100%)24.6% (26.5%) (0-100%)<0.001NASclerosis100%79.5% (22.9%) (0-100%)20.5% (22.9%) (0-100%)<0.001NABackfill100%86.0% (20.2%) (0-100%)14.0% (20.2%)(0-100%)<0.001NAAnkylosis100%59.0% (36.4%) (0-100%)41.0% (36.4%) (0-100%)0.56NAICC of 7 readers (Mean (SD) (Range))MRI lesionAll slicesCentral 5 slicesPeripheral slicesErosion0.54 (0.15) (0.28-0.84)0.58 (0.13) (0.34-0.85)0.40 (0.17) (0.10-0.66)Fat lesion0.61 (0.18) (0.30-0.89)0.63 (0.16) (0.35-0.88)0.52 (0.20) (0.19-0.82)Sclerosis0.73 (0.18) (0.36-0.94)0.73 (0.16) (0.36-0.91)0.67 (0.19) (0.27-0.94)Backfill0.37 (0.21) (0.10-0.85)0.39 (0.19) (0.14-0.83)0.18 (0.23) (0.0-0.80)Ankylosis0.97 (0.02) (0.91-0.99)0.99 (0.01) (0.97-1.0)0.85 (0.10) (0.62-0.98)

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared.

OP0139 A TIME-SHIFTED EFFECT OF TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR INHIBITORS ON RADIOGRAPHIC SPINAL PROGRESSION IN PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: LONG-TERM RESULTS FROM THE GERMAN SPONDYLOARTHRITIS INCEPTION COHORT

Background:

There are inconclusive data on the effect of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) on radiographic spinal progression in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Although inflammation and new bone formation are linked in axSpA, TNFi failed to show inhibition of radiographic spinal progression over two years compared to historical cohorts in pivotal studies in radiographic axSpA. Subsequent observational studies suggested that a longer treatment duration, earlier treatment initiation and effective inflammation suppression might be required to achieve inhibition of radiographic progression.

Objectives:

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the effect of TNFi on radiographic spinal progression in patients with early axSpA in a long-term inception cohort.

Methods:

A total of 266 patients with early axSpA (with r-axSpA with symptom duration ≤10 years and nr-axSpA with symptom duration ≤5 years) from the German Spondyloarthritis Inception Cohort (GESPIC) with at least two sets of spinal radiographs obtained at least 2 years apart during a 10-year follow-up were included. These patients contributed with a total of 542 2-year radiographic intervals. Spinal radiographs were evaluated by three trained and calibrated readers according to the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score (mSASSS). The final mSASSS was calculated as a mean of three reader scores. The association between the current TNFi, previous TNFi and radiographic spinal progression defined as the absolute mSASSS change score over 2 years was analyzed using longitudinal generalized estimating equations (GEE) analysis.

Results:

Only 9 patients were treated with a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) at baseline, and a total of 77 patients received TNFi during the entire follow-up period that gave 103 2-year intervals covered by TNFi of any duration, and 78 intervals covered by TNFi with treatment duration of at least 12 months. Radiographic spinal progression in axSpA patients receiving TNFi in the current 2-year interval was not different from progression in patients not treated with TNFi, while TNFi in the previous 2-year interval was associated with lower progression compared to patients without TNFi in this interval (Figure 1). The latter was also evident for patients who received TNFi in both previous and current 2-year intervals, i.e. patients treated with TNFi over 4 years. The longitudinal GEE analysis confirmed no significant association between current TNFi treatment and radiographic spinal progression but a significant association between TNFi in the previous 2-year interval (especially if this was continued also in the current interval giving 4 years in total) and the progression in the current one (Table 1).

Table 1.

The association between the change of the mSASSS over two years and current and/or previous treatment with TNFi in the longitudinal generalized estimation equation analysis.

TNFi treatment definitionReferenceβ*(95% CI)TNFi for ≥12 months in the previous 2-year intervalTNFi for ≥12 months in the current 2-year intervalYesNo TNFi for ≥12 months in the current 2-year interval-0.19(-0.56 to 0.18)YesNo TNFi for ≥12 months in the previous 2-year interval-0.56(-0.95 to -0.17)YesYesNo TNFi for ≥12 months in the current and previous 2-year intervals-0.59(-1.03 to -0.15)

*Parameter estimates from the multivariable models adjusted for sex, symptom duration at the beginning of the current 2-year interval, time-averaged ASDAS in the current 2-year interval, smoking in the current 2-year interval, classification as non-radiographic or radiographic axSpA, and mSASSS at the beginning of the current 2-year interval.

Conclusion:

TNFi treatment exhibits a time-shifted inhibitory effect on radiographic spinal progression in axSpA that becomes evident only in the second 2-year interval after treatment initiation.

Acknowledgements:

GESPIC was initially supported by the BMBF. As consequence of the funding reduction by BMBF according to schedule in 2005 and stopped in 2007, complementary financial support has been obtained also from Abbott, Amgen, Centocor, Schering–Plough, and Wyeth. Starting from 2010, the core GESPIC cohort was supported by AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests:

Denis Poddubnyy Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biocad, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Valeria Rios Rodriguez: None declared, Murat Torgutalp: None declared, Ani Dilbaryan: None declared, Maryna Verba: None declared, Fabian Proft: None declared, Mikhail Protopopov: None declared, Judith Rademacher: None declared, Hildrun Haibel: None declared, Joachim Sieper: None declared, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma

OP0137 TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR INHIBITORS SHOW A DELAYED EFFECT ON RADIOGRAPHIC SACROILIITIS PROGRESSION IN PATIENTS WITH EARLY AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: 10-YEAR RESULTS FROM THE GERMAN SPONDYLOARTHRITIS INCEPTION COHORT

Background:

Observational cohort studies have shown that there is low, but still detectable progression level in radiographic sacroiliitis, which might also have an impact on the function in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Recent data showed that tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) might retard spinal progression when initiated earlier and taken longer in patients with axSpA. However, the question of whether they also have such an effect on radiographic progression in sacroiliac joints (SIJs) is still unclear.

Objectives:

To investigate the longitudinal association between radiographic sacroiliitis progression and treatment with TNFi in patients with early axial SpA in a long-term inception cohort.

Methods:

Based on the availability of at least two sets of SIJ radiographs, 301 patients (166 with nr-axSpA, symptom duration ≤5 years and 135 with r-axSpA, symptom duration ≤10 years) from the German Spondyloarthritis Inception Cohort (GESPIC) were included in this analysis. These patients contributed with a total of 737 2-year radiographic intervals. Two trained and calibrated central readers scored the radiographs according to the modified New York criteria. If both scored an image as definite radiographic sacroiliitis, the patient was classified as having r-axSpA. The sacroiliac sum score was calculated as a mean of both readers. The association between previous as well as current TNFi use and radiographic sacroiliitis progression, which was defined as the change in the sacroiliitis sum score over 2 years, was analysed using longitudinal generalized estimating equations (GEE) analysis.

Results:

At baseline, 9 (3.0%) patients were treated with a TNFi, and 87 (28.9%) patients received at least one TNFi during the entire follow-up period. A total of 141 of the radiographic intervals were covered with TNFi of any duration, while 109 of them were covered with a TNFi of at least 12 months. While receiving ≥12 months TNFi in the previous interval was associated with a lower progression of the sacroiliitis sum score compared to not receiving TNFi in the previous interval, this was not the case in patients who received TNFi ≥12 months in the current 2-year interval (Figure 1). The significant association between TNF ≥12 months in the previous interval and progression in the sacroiliitis sum score were confirmed in the adjusted multivariable longitudinal GEE analysis. In addition, a similar trend for the beneficial effects was observed in different models, which included other treatment definitions with TNFi in the previous 2-year interval (Table).

Table 1.

The longitudinal GEE analysis of the association between progression in the sacroiliitis sum score and TNFi use.

TNFi treatment definitionReferenceβ* (95% CI)TNFi for ≥ 12 months in the previous 2-year intervalNo TNFi for ≥ 12 months in the previous 2-year interval-0.09 (-0.18, -0.003)Any TNFi use in the previous 2-year intervalNo TNFi use in the previous 2-year interval-0.09 (-0.17, 0.002)TNFi for ≥ 12 months in the current 2-year intervalNo TNFi for ≥ 12 months in the current 2-year interval-0.03 (-0.11, 0.06)Any TNFi use in the current 2-year intervalNo TNFi use in the current 2-year interval0.05 (-0.05, 0.14)TNFi for ≥ 12 months in the previous and ≥ 12 months in the current 2-year intervalNo TNFi for ≥ 12 months in the previous and ≥ 12 months in the current 2-year interval-0.08 (-0.17, 0.004)

* Parameter estimates from the multivariable models adjusted for sex, age at the beginning of the current 2-year interval, HLA-B27 positivity, symptom duration at the beginning of the current 2-year interval, time-averaged elevated CRP, time-averaged BASDAI, and time-averaged NSAID intake score in the current 2-year interval.

Conclusion:

Treatment with TNFi was associated with retardation of radiographic sacroiliitis progression in patients with axSpA. This effect becomes evident between 2 and 4 years after treatment initiation.

References:

Acknowledgements:

GESPIC was initially supported by the BMBF. As a consequence of the funding reduction by BMBF according to schedule in 2005 and stopped in 2007, complementary financial support has been obtained also from Abbott, Amgen, Centocor, Schering–Plough, and Wyeth. Starting from 2010, the core GESPIC cohort was supported by AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests:

Murat Torgutalp: None declared, Valeria Rios Rodriguez: None declared, Maryna Verba: None declared, Mikhail Protopopov: None declared, Fabian Proft: None declared, Judith Rademacher: None declared, Hildrun Haibel: None declared, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma, Joachim Sieper: None declared, Denis Poddubnyy Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biocad, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer

OP0253 STRUCTURAL DAMAGE IN AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: IS THERE A PREFERRED WAY TO ASSESS PROGRESSION OVER TIME?

Background:

Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is characterized by development of structural damage in the spine, assessed by conventional radiographs (CR). The modified Stokes Ankylosing Spondylitis Scoring System (mSASSS) includes all the SpA-relevant CR findings and is the most frequently used scoring system for quantification of spinal structural damage in patients (pts) with axSpA. Radiographic progression over 2 years using mean mSASSS progression, scored by a blinded ‘paired’ (sets of CRs of the same patient) approach, is considered as a key treatment outcome reflecting structural progression in clinical trials. However, this approach has been accompanied by questions about the influence of pts showing mSASSS ‘improvement’, indicating possible disappearance of syndesmophytes over time, something ‘naturally unexpected’.

Objectives:

To investigate the performance of mSASSS in assessing spinal radiographic damage and progression in axSpA pts using different approaches of CR evaluations.

Methods:

Complete sets (cervical and lumbar CRs) from the German SpA Inception Cohort (GESPIC) at baseline and after 2 years were blinded to all clinical and demographic characteristics and then scored using the mSASSS by 5 different experienced readers, 2 blinded and 3 unblinded to the timepoint of CR performance. The final mSASSS score was calculated as a mean of 2 (blinded) or 3 (unblinded) readers. Descriptive statistics, cumulative probability plots and shift analyses (agreement of 2/2 readers in the blinded and 2/3 readers in the unblinded group) were performed for each reader group.

Results:

A total of 210 pts (mean age 37.3y, 51% male, 79% HLA-B27+) with non-radiographic (n=115) and radiographic (n=95) axSpA at baseline were included. The mean mSASSS at baseline was 4.3±8.3 vs. 3.4±7.9, while the mean progression was 0.7±2.3 vs.1.0±1.9 mSASSS units for the blinded vs. the unblinded group, respectively (Figure). On the patient level, progression of ≥2 mSASSS units was found in 30 (14.3%) vs. 37 (17.6%) pts in the blinded vs. the unblinded group, while agreement between groups was seen in 179 (85.2%) pts, 18 (8.9%) pts for progression and 161 (76.7%) for no progression.

Figure 1.

Cumulative probability plot for mean mSASSS scores (all scores) in blinded (A) and unblinded (B) and ‘definite’ scores in blinded (C) and unblinded (D) scoring approach

In the analysis of ‘definite’ CR findings (only scores of 2=syndesmophytes or 3=ankylosis), the mean mSASSS score at baseline was 3.3±8.0 vs. 2.6±7.2 and the mean radiographic progression was 0.6±2.4 vs. 0.8±2.1 mSASSS units for the blinded vs. the unblinded group, respectively (Figure). On the patient level, progression was found in 37 (17.6%) vs. 33 (15.7%) pts in the blinded vs. the unblinded group, while agreement between groups was seen in 188 (89.5%) pts, 24 (11.3%) for progression and in 164 (78.1%) pts for no progression.

In the shift analysis, mSASSS worsening was found in 35 (0.8%) and mSASSS ‘improvement’ in only 4 (0.1%) out of a total of 4.373 vertebral edges (VE) analyzed in the blinded and in 109 (2.2%) and 2 (0.04%), respectively, out of a total of 4.914 VE analyzed in the unblinded group (Table). The majority of progression was found for the development of ‘definite’ signs of progression in both the blinded (25/35, 71.4%) and the unblinded (61/109, 56%) group, while more VE showing ‘minor’ (only scores of 1=sclerosis, squaring, erosion) signs of progression were found in the unblinded (48/109, 44%) vs. to the blinded (10/25, 28.6%) group.

Conclusion:

Despite lower mean baseline mSASSS, higher mean mSASSS progression was found using the unblinded approach, while in the shift analysis the unblinded approach was also more specific, confirming the absence of ‘improvement’ of radiographic damage over time. These results were similar in the analysis on the patient’s level. The scoring approach and the influence of ‘minor’ radiographic changes should be taken into account for avoiding the so-called ‘background noise’ in the evaluation of mSASSS.

Acknowledgements:

GESPIC was initially supported by the BMBF. As a consequence of the funding reduction by BMBF according to schedule in 2005 and stopped in 2007, complementary financial support has been obtained also from Abbott, Amgen, Centocor, Schering–Plough, and Wyeth. Starting from 2010, the core GESPIC cohort was supported by AbbVie.

Table 1.

Shift analysis of the blinded and unblinded reading approach on the basis of VE.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

POS0896 PREDICTORS OF RESPONSE IN PATIENTS WITH NON-RADIOGRAPHIC AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS RECEIVING CERTOLIZUMAB PEGOL IN THE C-AXSPAND STUDY

Background:

Identification of predictive clinical factors of long-term treatment response in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) may contribute to improved management of patients with this chronic disease. Certolizumab pegol (CZP) is currently the only FDA-approved tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) for treatment of nr-axSpA.1

Objectives:

To identify whether any demographic or baseline characteristics of nr-axSpA patients from the C-axSpAnd study2 are predictive of achieving a clinical response after 1 year of CZP treatment.

Methods:

C-axSpAnd (NCT02552212) was a phase 3, interventional multicentre study including a 52-week double-blind, placebo-controlled period. Full study design is reported elsewhere.2 Multivariate stepwise logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of response for the primary efficacy variable (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score – major improvement [ASDAS-MI] at Week 52) and the main secondary efficacy variable (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society 40% [ASAS40] at Week 52) in patients randomised to CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W). Predictive factors used in the model included demographic and baseline characteristics, and clinical outcomes at Week 12. A p value ≤0.05 was required for forward selection into the model and p=0.1 for backward elimination from the model. Non-responder imputation was used to account for missing data or values collected after switching to open-label treatment. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to account for patients who had changes in their non-biologic background medication during the 52-week placebo-controlled period.

Results:

A total of 159/317 patients were randomised to CZP 200 mg Q2W and 158/317 to placebo. Predictive factors identified for Week 52 ASDAS-MI in the CZP-treated patients included being positive for both presence of sacroiliitis on MRI (MRI+) and human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-B27 (HLA-B27+), having a higher Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) at baseline, and having a larger Week 12 improvement in ASDAS (Figure 1A). For ASAS40 response, MRI+/HLA-B27+ was also identified as a predictor of Week 52 response, along with a lower baseline Bath AS Metrology Index (BASMI) and larger Week 12 improvements in Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGADA) and AS Quality of Life (ASQoL; Figure 1B). Sensitivity analysis identified the same predictors for ASDAS-MI and ASAS40, with the exception of change from baseline in PtGADA as a predictor of ASAS40. Sensitivity analysis also identified achievement of Week 12 ASAS40 as a predictor of Week 52 ASAS40. In placebo-treated patients, no meaningful predictors of response at Week 52 were identified.

Conclusion:

Presence of sacroiliitis on MRI and HLA-B27 positivity were identified as consistent predictors of Week 52 response (ASDAS-MI and ASAS40) in nr-axSpA patients treated with CZP. To our knowledge, this is the first report from an interventional 52-week placebo-controlled study in nr-axSpA to identify objective clinical features, particularly the presence of sacroiliac joint inflammation, as being predictive of response.

References:

[1]Ashrafi M. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2020;32:321–9.

[2]Deodhar A. Arthritis Rheumatol 2019;71:1101–11.

Acknowledgements:

This study was funded by UCB Pharma. Editorial services were provided by Costello Medical.

Disclosure of Interests:

Walter P Maksymowych Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Thomas Kumke Shareholder of: UCB Pharma, Employee of: UCB Pharma, Simone Auteri Shareholder of: UCB Pharma, Employee of: UCB Pharma, Bengt Hoepken Shareholder of: UCB Pharma, Employee of: UCB Pharma, Lars Bauer Shareholder of: UCB Pharma, Employee of: UCB Pharma, Martin Rudwaleit Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, UCB Pharma

OP0251 DATA-DRIVEN DEFINITIONS BASED ON INFLAMMATORY LESIONS FOR A POSITIVE MRI OF THE SPINE CONSISTENT WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS

Background:

The ASAS definition of a positive MRI for inflammation in the spine (ASAS-MRIspine+) is intended for classification of patients as having axSpA but is often misused for diagnostic purposes. This is problematic because bone marrow edema (BME) in the spine may occur in 20-40% of those with mechanical back disorders. The ASAS MRI group has generated updated consensus lesion definitions which have been validated on MRI spine images from the ASAS Classification Cohort.

Objectives:

We aimed to identify quantitative cut-offs based on numbers of vertebral corners that define ASAS-MRIspine+, there being two gold standards: A. majority central reader decision as to the presence of spine MRI findings consistent with axSpA B. rheumatologist expert opinion diagnosis of axSpA.

Methods:

Eight ASAS-MRI readers recorded MRI lesions in the spine according to recently updated ASAS definitions from 62 cases in an eCRF that comprises global assessment (MRI consistent with axSpA? (yes/no)), and detailed scoring of lesions for all sites in the spine. We calculated sensitivity and specificity for numbers of vertebral corners with BME where a majority of readers (≥5/8) agreed as to the presence of MRI findings consistent with axSpA. We selected cut-offs with ≥95% specificity. These cut-offs were analyzed for their predictive utility for rheumatologist diagnosis of axSpA by calculating positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) and selecting cut-offs with PPV ≥95%. Both criteria were considered requirements for designation of MRI cut-offs defining ASAS-MRIspine+.

Results:

MRI findings consistent with axSpA were observed by majority read in 8 (20%) of 40 cases diagnosed with axSpA, and 0 (0%) of 19 cases without axSpA. Cut-offs achieving specificity of ≥95% for MRI findings consistent with axSpA were 4 vertebral corners (sensitivity 75%) for all cases, 3 vertebral corners (sensitivity 37.5%) for cases with ≥1 additional location with inflammation, 1 vertebral corner (sensitivity 62.5%) in cases with ≥2 vertebral corner fat lesions (Table 1). All of the above cut-offs also had very high PPV (≥95%) for diagnosis of axSpA in cases diagnosed by the rheumatologist (Table 2).

Table 1.

Majority readers agree MRI findings consistent with axSpA are present is the gold-standard external reference

MRI cut-offsSensitivity (95%CI)Specificity (95%CI)BME in ≥2 vertebral corners87.5 (47.3 - 99.7)87.0 (75.1 - 94.6)BME in ≥ 3 vertebral corners87.5 (47.3 - 99.7)94.4 (84.6 - 98.8)BME in ≥4 vertebral corners75.0 (34.9 - 96.8)98.2 (90.1 - 100.0)Cases with ≥1 additional non-corner site inflammatory lesionBME in ≥2 vertebral corners37.5 (8.5 - 75.5)94.4 (84.6 - 98.8)BME in ≥3 vertebral corners37.5 (8.5 - 75.5)98.2 (90.1-100.0)Cases with ≥2 vertebral corner fat lesionsBME in ≥1 vertebral corner62.5 (24.5 - 91.5)100.0 (93.4-100.0)BME in ≥2 vertebral corners62.5 (24.5 - 91.5)100.0 (93.4-100.0)Table 2.

Predictive values of cut-offs for number of vertebral corners with BME according to the diagnostic ascertainment of the rheumatologist

MRI cut-offsSensitivity (95%CI)Specificity (95%CI)PPVNPVMRI findings consistent with axSpA ≥any 2 readers52.5 (36.1 - 68.5)94.7 (74.0 - 99.9)95.5 (75.3 - 99.3)48.6 (40.2 - 57.2)MRI findings consistent with axSpA ≥majority read20.0 (9.1 - 35.6)100.0 (82.4 - 100.0)100.037.3 (33.7 - 40.9)BME in ≥ 4 vertebral corners17.5 (7.3 - 32.8100.0 (82.4 - 100.0)100.036.5 (33.3 - 39.9)Cases with ≥1 additional inflammatory lesionBME in ≥ 3 vertebral corners10.00 (2.8 - 23.7)100.00 (82.4 - 100.0)100.034.5 (32.2 - 36.9)Cases with ≥2 vertebral corner fat lesionsBME in ≥1 vertebral corner12.50 (4.2 - 26.8)100.00 (82.4 - 100.0)100.035.2 (32.6 - 37.9)

Conclusion:

A cut-off of BME in ≥4 vertebral corners, or ≥3 corners in the setting of additional inflammatory lesions at other locations or corner fat, are primary candidates for defining ASAS-MRIspine+. These cut-offs apply to typical patients referred to a rheumatologist with a high index of suspicion of axSpA and may not be appropriate in other populations.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

POS0924 PREDICTORS OF 1-YEAR TREATMENT RESPONSE AMONG UPADACITINIB-TREATED PATIENTS WITH ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS: A POST HOC ANALYSIS OF SELECT-AXIS 1

Background:

Upadacitinib (UPA) is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor that has demonstrated efficacy and safety among patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in the phase 2/3 SELECT-AXIS 1 study.1 If identified, early predictors of treatment response may inform treat-to-target strategies and optimize patient outcomes in AS.

Objectives:

To determine whether baseline (BL) characteristics or early responses predict clinical response at 1 year in UPA-treated patients with AS.

Methods:

In the double-blind, randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled SELECT-AXIS 1 study, patients received UPA 15 mg once daily or PBO until Week 14.1 At Week 14, PBO-treated patients switched to UPA 15 mg; patients originally randomized to UPA continued UPA therapy. Data from patients in the PBO and UPA arms were combined based on overall exposure to UPA; in the switch arm, exposure was defined as current visit minus 14 weeks (time of switch). The following outcomes were assessed at 1 year: Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score with C-reactive protein (ASDAS[CRP]) inactive disease (ID; <1.3) and low disease activity (LDA; <2.1), Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) partial remission (PR), and ≥40% improvement in ASAS criteria (ASAS40) response. The ability of BL characteristics, efficacy at Week 12, and back pain at Week 12 to predict 1-year outcomes was assessed using a univariable logistic regression model generating odds ratios (ORs; 95% confidence intervals). LASSO regression was used to select the best-fitted multivariable model at Week 12 for each outcome measure.

Results:

Among 187 patients who received or switched to UPA 15 mg, 70 (37.4%), 134 (71.7%), 73 (39.0%), and 131 (70.1%) achieved ASDAS(CRP) ID, ASDAS(CRP) LDA, ASAS PR, and ASAS40, respectively, following 1 year of UPA treatment. No meaningful predictors of 1-year efficacy outcomes were identified based on BL demographics (including disease duration, gender, and human leukocyte antigen B27 status) or BL disease characteristics (including ASDAS, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, and CRP levels). In univariable analyses, Week 12 responses based on several disease activity measures and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including reductions (much better improvement [MBI], ≥30/≥50/≥70% reduction, or improvement) in back pain score, along with lower scores for back pain at Week 12, were associated with the achievement of ASDAS(CRP) ID, ASDAS(CRP) LDA, ASAS PR, and ASAS40 at 1 year (Figure 1). In a multivariable analysis, improvement from BL to Week 12 in back pain score consistently predicted several efficacy outcomes at 1 year.

Conclusion:

In upadacitinib-treated patients with AS, improvement in PROs and reduction in back pain score at 12 weeks predicted clinical outcomes at 1 year.

References:

[1]van der Heijde D, et al. Lancet 2019;394:2108–17.

Figure 1.

Association between Week 12 response or back pain at Week 12 and achievement of efficacy outcomes at 1 year (univariable analysis)

All ASDAS scores are calculated using C-reactive protein

ASDAS CII: change from BL ≥1.1; ASDAS MI: change from BL ≥2.0; MBI back pain: ≥2-point reduction in absolute score and ≥33% reduction from BL on a 0–10 NRS

ASAS, Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society; ASAS40, ≥40% improvement in ASAS criteria; ASDAS, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score; BASDAI50, ≥50% improvement in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index; BL, baseline; CI, confidence interval; CII, clinically important improvement; ID, inactive disease; LDA, low disease activity; MBI, much better improvement; MI, major improvement; NRS, numeric rating scale; OR, odds ratio; PR, partial remission

Acknowledgements:

AbbVie funded this study; contributed to its design; participated in data collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and participated in the writing, review, and approval of the abstract. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Laura Chalmers, PhD, of 2 the Nth (Cheshire, UK), and was funded by AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests:

Marina Magrey Consultant of: Consultant for Janssen and Novartis; member of advisory boards for Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Sofia Ramiro Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: MSD, Marcelo Pinheiro Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, and Novartis, Tianming Gao Employee of: AbbVie employee and may own stock or options, Fabiana Ganz Employee of: AbbVie employee and may own stock or options, In-Ho Song Employee of: AbbVie employee and may own stock or options, Ana Biljan Employee of: AbbVie employee and may own stock or options, Nigil Haroon Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB

POS0909 IXEKIZUMAB IMPROVES SIGNS, SYMPTOMS AND QUALITY OF LIFE OF ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS IN PATIENTS IRRESPECTIVE OF HLA-B27 STATUS: POOLED RESULTS FROM THE COAST-V AND COAST-W TRIALS

Background:

Human leukocyte antigen-B27 (HLA-B27) is found in most patients (pts) with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Although a subset of pts with AS are HLA-B27 negative (NEG), ensuring treatment efficacy in this subpopulation is important.

Objectives:

This analysis evaluated the efficacy of ixekizumab (IXE), a high-affinity monoclonal antibody selectively targeting interleukin-17A, in AS pts who are either HLA-B27 positive (POS) or NEG.

Methods:

COAST-V (NCT02696785) and COAST-W (NCT02696798) were 2 phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled trials investigating the efficacy of 80-mg IXE administered every 4 weeks (Q4W) and every 2 weeks (Q2W) in pts naïve to biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs; COAST-V) and in those who were inadequate responders or intolerant to 1 or 2 tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi; COAST-W). Only data from pts randomized at baseline to PBO, IXE Q4W or Q2W in both trials who met per protocol eligibility criteria were integrated and stratified based on HLA-B27 status (POS, NEG) for an ad hoc subgroup analysis. Efficacy was assessed using the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society 40 (ASAS40), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index 50 (BASDAI50) and Short Form 36 Physical Component Scores (SF-36 PCS). Missing data were imputed by non-responder imputation (NRI) for binary measure and by modified baseline observation carried forward (mBOCF). Data from PBO was reported up to Week 16 and for pooled IXE Q4W and Q2W up to Week 52.

Results:

This analysis includes pts with AS who are HLA-B27 POS (N=453; PBO=155, IXE=298) or NEG (N=62, PBO=21, IXE=41). Overall, more pts were male (82.6%, POS; 77.4%, NEG), and for IXE treated pts, the duration of disease since r-axSpA diagnosis was 10.3 (SD=9.1) and 6.9 (SD=5.6) years, among POS and NEG pts respectively (Table 1). Among IXE treated patients, the mean age of HLA-B27 NEG pts was approximately 7-8 years older than HLA-B27 POS pts. At Week 16, 39.6% (n=118/298) of HLA-B27 POS and 29.3% (n=12/41) of HLA-B27 NEG pts achieved ASAS40, and 34.6% (n=103) of HLA-B27 POS and 17.1% (n=7) of HLA-B27 NEG pts achieved BASDAI50; improvements were seen as early as Week 1 and sustained or improved up to Week 52. The mean baseline SF-36 PCS was 33.2 (SD=7.63) for HLA-B27 POS and 31.4 (SD=7.67) for HLA-B27 NEG pts. At Week 16, the mean change from baseline in SF-36 PCS was 7.3 (SD 7.6) for HLA-B27 POS and 3.7 (SD=6.83) for HLA-B27 NEG pts. Improvements were sustained to Week 52 (Figure 1).

Conclusion:

IXE improves signs, symptoms, patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life in HLA-B27 POS and NEG pts with AS, however the HLA-B27 POS pts have a faster and more robust response than HLA-B27 NEG pts.

Table 1.

Baseline Characteristics by HLA-B27 Positive and Negative Status

Positive HLA-B27Negative HLA-B27PBO (N=155)IXE (N=298)PBO (N=21)IXE (N=41)Male, n (%)133 (85.8)241 (80.9)18 (85.7)30 (73.2)Age of r-axSpA onset (yr), mean (SD)25.2 (9.28)26.3 (8.38)35.4 (8.43)‡34.6 (10.32)‡Duration of symptoms since r-axSpA onset (yr)18.7 (11.82)17.1 (10.38)16.0 (9.69)15.9 (12.40)C-Reactive protein (mg/L), mean (SD)16.7 (22.43)16.9 (25.50)18.1 (21.69)13.7 (14.38)ASDAS score, mean (SD)4.0 (0.78)4.0 (0.83)4.3 (0.76)4.1 (0.73)BASDAI score, mean (SD)7.1 (1.25)7.2 (1.37)7.6 (1.31)*7.4 (1.41)SF-36 PCS, mean (SD)33.7 (7.50)33.2 (7.63)34.1 (8.28)31.4 (7.67)

Abbreviations: ASDAS, Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society 40; BASDAI, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index; HLA-B27, Human leukocyte antigen-B27; IXE, pooled ixekizumab every 2 weeks and every 4 weeks; N, total number of patients in group; n, number of patients in category/subgroup; PBO, placebo; r-axSpA, axial spondyloarthritis; SD, standard deviation; SF-36 PCS, Short Form 36 Physical Component Scores; yr, years.

p-value: vs. HLA-B27 positive: *≤0.05,‡<0.0001

Figure 1.

Comparisons done using t-test and chi-square test for continuous and categorical variables.

Disclosure of Interests:

John D Reveille Consultant of: UCB (Union Chimique Belge), Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Pfizer, Grant/research support from: Janssen 2018; Eli Lilly 2020, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbot, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, David Sandoval Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Talia Muram Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Rebecca Bolce Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, So Young Park Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Martin Rudwaleit Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Chugai, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD (Merck Sharp and Dohme), Novartis, Pfizer, UCD (Union Chimique Belge), Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB (Union Chimique Belge)

[Quality in acute inpatient rheumatology 2021 : Current aspects of the KOBRA quality label of the Association of Rheumatological Acute Care Clinics]

Mit einer umfassenden gesundheitspolitischen Qualitätsoffensive ab 2021 sollen die Qualität und Transparenz in der Versorgung von Menschen mit Krankheiten in Krankenhäusern in Deutschland verbessert werden. Gesetzliche Vorgaben zu Mindestmengen und die Ausweitung von Qualitätsverträgen zwischen Kostenträgern und Krankenhäusern sowie die Verwendung von planungsrelevanten Qualitätsindikatoren für eine bedarfs- und qualitätsorientierte Weiterentwicklung der stationären Versorgung werden den Wettbewerb in der Versorgungsqualität zwischen den Krankenhäusern verstärken. Dem Thema „Entwicklung und Definition von Qualität in der Medizin“ hat sich auch der Verband der Rheumatologischen Akutkliniken e. V. (VRA) schon früh nach der Gründung im Jahr 1998 umfassend angenommen. Im Zentrum der akutstationären Qualitätssicherung stehen verbindlich festgelegte Strukturkriterien in Verknüpfung mit dem 2003 in der Rheumatologie gestarteten und bis heute kontinuierlich durchgeführten KOBRA-Projekt (Kontinuierliches Outcome Benchmarking in der Rheumatologischen Akutversorgung) mit der Messung von Prozess- und Ergebnisqualität. Auf der Basis dieses Rahmenkonzeptes (Erfüllung der Strukturkriterien und Durchführung des KOBRA-Projektes) können erfolgreich teilnehmende rheumatologische Einrichtungen für jeweils 2 Jahre das KOBRA-Label erwerben, welches von der Projektleitung – dem aQua-Institut – vergeben wird. Die herausragende Stellung des KOBRA-Projektes wird beispielhaft anhand von Datenauswertungen des Projektzyklus 2018 gezeigt mit Auswertungen zum Therapiestrategiewechsel bei aktiver rheumatoider Arthritis, Diagnosesicherung von Kollagenosen und Vaskulitiden während des stationären Aufenthaltes sowie zur partizipativen Entscheidungsfindung bei rheumatoider Arthritis. Auf den gesundheitspolitisch geforderten „Paradigmenwechsel – weg vom Bett, hin zu einer leistungs-, bedarfs- und qualitätsorientierten Planung“ – ist die akutstationäre Rheumatologie mit der Verankerung von Projekten zur Struktur‑, Prozess- und Ergebnisqualität sehr gut vorbereitet. Für die in der vom Gemeinsamen Bundesausschuss (G-BA) erstellten Richtlinie zu „Rheumatologischen Zentren“ geforderten Qualitätssicherung ist das KOBRA-Projekt ebenfalls eine sehr gute Voraussetzung.

[Mission statement from rheumatologists in the German Society of Rheumatology (DGRh e. V.) : We live rheumatology. German version]

Systemic disease demands systemic thinkers. In this mission statement we define rheumatology, describe the role of the German Society of Rheumatology and the rheumatologist's spirit to their discipline. Rheumatologists are dedicated to improving the quality of life of their acute, chronic, and rehabilitative patients on the basis of up to date evidence and strong physician-patient relations. We think, act and interact systemically, scientifically, consistently, transparently, reliably, inclusively, innovatively and enthusiastically.

FRI0303 PERIPHERAL SYMPTOMS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH LESS SPINAL RADIOGRAPHIC PROGRESSION IN PATIENTS WITH EARLY AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: RESULTS FROM THE GERMAN SPONDYLOARTHRITIS INCEPTION COHORT

Background:

Peripheral symptoms (PS), such as arthritis, enthesitis, and dactylitis, are common in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA); data showing the association of PS and spinal radiographic progression in axSpA are controversial.

Objectives:

To analyze the association of PS and spinal radiographic progression in patients with axSpA.

Methods:

A total of 210 patients with axSpA (115 with radiographic and 95 with non-radiographic axSpA) were selected for analysis. Spinal radiographs were scored by two readers in a random order according to the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (mSASSS). Pelvic radiographs were scored according to the grading system of the modified New York criteria; a sacroiliitis sum score was calculated as a sum of the grades for both sacroiliac joints. Mann-Whitney and Fisher exact tests were performed for group comparisons. A multivariable regression analysis was performed to analyze the influence of PS on radiographic progression.

Results:

Of the 101 (48.1%) patients with PS, 78 had peripheral arthritis, 48 - enthesitis, 12 - dactylitis. 32 patients had ≤1 PS. Patients with PS were older, less frequently HLA-B27 positive, compared with patients with no PS (73 (73.0%) vs. 93 (85.3%), p=0.028), had higher disease activity (time-averaged ASDAS over 2 years 2.6 ± 0.9 vs. 2.3 ± 0.9; p=0.032), worse physical function (BASFI 3.5 ± 2.3 vs. 2.3 ± 2.2, p<0.001), higher exposure to disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (39 (38.6%) vs. 22 (20.2%), p=0.003) and lower baseline radiographic sacroiliitis sum score (3.8 ± 1.9 vs. 4.4 ± 2.1, p=0.026); other baseline characteristics were similar. Patients with PS had lower absolute progression in mSASSS after 2 years of follow-up than those without (0.28 ± 1.39 vs 1.15 ± 2.9, p=0.045); 7.9% of patients with PS had a progression of mSASSS by ≥2 points compared to 20.2% in patients without PS (p=0.011). Radiographic progression of sacroiliitis was similar in both groups. In a multivariable regression analysis, presence of PS was associated with a lower mSASSS progression and lower odds for the mSASSS progression by ≥2 points after 2 years of follow-up: β=-0.98 (95% -1.68 to -0.28) OR=0.33 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.91), respectively – Table 1.

Table 1.

Association of peripheral symptoms with radiographic progression in axial spondyloarthritis after 2 years of follow-up.

Multivariable linear regression analysisOutcomeβ (95 %CI)mSASSS change score−0.98 (-1.68 to -0.28)*Change of the sacroiliitis sum score−0.06 (-0.32 to 0.20)**Multivariable logistic regression analysisOutcomeOdds ratio (95 %CI)Progression of mSASSS by ≥2 points0.33 (0.12 to 0.91)*Progression of sacroiliitis by at least 1 grade in opinion of both readers0.84 (0.33 to 2.09)**

mSASSS - modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score.

*Adjusted for the smoking status, HLA-B27 status, NSAIDs intake, baseline syndesmophytes, and time-averaged ASDAS.

**Adjusted for the smoking status, HLA-B27 status, NSAIDs intake, sacroiliitis sum score at baseline, and time-averaged ASDAS.

Conclusion:

Presence of PS is associated with distinct characteristics of SpA including slower radiographic spinal progression which might be explained partly by the numerically lower mSASSS score at baseline.

Acknowledgments:

GESPIC has been financially supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). As funding by BMBF was reduced in 2005 and stopped in 2007, financial support has been obtained from Abbott / Abbvie, Amgen, Centocor, Schering-Plough, and Wyeth. Since 2010 GESPIC is supported by Abbvie.

Dr. Murat Torgutalp was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK).

Disclosure of Interests:

Murat Torgutalp: None declared, Mikhail Protopopov Consultant of: Novartis, Fabian Proft Grant/research support from: Novartis Pharma GmbH, Consultant of: Consultancy / speaker fees from: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: Consultancy / speaker fees from: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Joachim Sieper Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Valeria Rios Rodriguez Consultant of: Abbvie, Novartis, Hildrun Haibel Consultant of: Abbvie, Jansen, MSD, and Novartis, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Jansen, MSD, and Novartis, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma, Denis Poddubnyy Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB

FRI0302 WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF DISCREPANCY BETWEEN CENTRAL AND LOCAL READERS IN EVALUATION OF MRI SCANS ON THE CLASSIFICATION OF AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS? DATA FROM THE ASAS CLASSIFICATION COHORT STUDY

Background:

Active MRI lesions typical of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) were reported in 61.6% and 2.2% of axSpA and not-axSpA patients, respectively, from the ASAS classification cohort (ASAS-CC)1. Discrepancy between local and central reader evaluation of MRI scans could result in differences in numbers of patients fulfilling the imaging arm of the ASAS classification criteria. But final classification may not be impacted if discrepant patients still fulfill the clinical arm.

Objectives:

We aimed to assess the impact of reader discrepancy in detection of active MRI lesions on the number of patients classified as having axSpA in patients recruited to the ASAS-CC.

Methods:

MRI images of the sacroiliac joints (SIJs) were available from 252 cases in the ASAS-CC, and these also had clinical and radiographic data. Seven central readers from the ASAS-MRI group recorded MRI lesions in an eCRF that included active lesions typical of axSpA in the SIJ (MRI-active) that was worded exactly the same as in the original ASAS-CC eCRF permitting comparisons between central and local site readers. Active lesions were deemed to be present according to majority agreement (≥4/7) of central readers and also any 2 central readers. We calculated the number of patients that were classified differently after central evaluation for overall fulfilment of the ASAS criteria and for the imaging arm.

Results:

Discordance between central and local readers for detection of MRI-active was recorded in 45(17.8%) and 47(18.2%) of cases according to 2-reader and majority (≥4/7) central reader data, respectively (kappa (95%CI) of 0.64 (0.54-0.73) and 0.62 (0.53-0.72). With central reading as external standard the false-positive rate for active lesions was 26.9%% and 32.2% (‘local overcall’) for 2-reader and majority reader data, respectively. There were 159(63.1%) patients who fulfilled the ASAS axSpA criteria based on local-reading, and 148(58.7%) and 143(56.7%) patients based on 2-reader and majority central-reading, respectively (Table). When fulfillment of the imaging arm was the primary consideration (irrespective of the clinical arm), 126 (50%) patients fulfilled the criteria based on local-reading, and 111 (44%) and 102 (40.5%) patients based on 2-reader and majority central-reading, respectively.

Conclusion:

Despite substantial overcall for positive MRI SIJ inflammation by local readers, the number of patients classified as having axSpA did not change substantially. This is due to the alternate mechanism for classification through the clinical arm.

References:

[1]Rudwaleit et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68: 777-83

Impact of Central Vs. Local Reader SIJ MRI Inflammation Assessment on SpA Classification in cases with all clinical, radiographic, and central and local MRI inflammation data available (n=252)MRI assessment usedSpA Classification = Yes N(%)SpA Classification = No N(%)Imaging Arm SpA Classification = Yes N(%)Imaging Arm SpA Classification = No N(%)Local Reader MRI positive159 (63.1%)93 (36.9%)126 (50%)126 (50%)>2 Central Reader MRI positive148 (58.7%)104 (41.3%)111 (44.0%)141 (56.0%)Majority Central Reader (≥4/7) MRI positive143 (56.7%)109 (43.2%)102 (40.5%)150 (59.5%)

Disclosure of Interests:

Walter P. Maksymowych Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Employee of: Chief Medical Officer of CARE Arthritis Limited, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Susanne Juhl Pedersen Grant/research support from: Novartis, Ulrich Weber: None declared, Pedro M Machado Consultant of: PMM: Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Speakers bureau: PMM: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Xenofon Baraliakos Grant/research support from: Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Joachim Sieper Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Stephanie Wichuk: None declared, Denis Poddubnyy Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma; Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV, Robert B.M. Landewé Consultant of: AbbVie; AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly & Co.; Galapagos NV; Novartis; Pfizer; UCB Pharma, Joel Paschke: None declared, Mikkel Ǿstergaard Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Merck, and Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Robert G Lambert: None declared

OP0079 PRELIMINARY DEFINITION OF A POSITIVE MRI FOR STRUCTURAL LESIONS IN THE SACROILIAC JOINTS IN AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS

Background:

There is lack of international consensus as to what defines a structural lesion on MRI of the sacroiliac joints (SIJ) typical of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The ASAS MRI group has generated updated consensus lesion definitions that describe each of the MRI lesions in the SIJ1. These definitions have been evaluated by 7 readers from the ASAS-MRI group on MRI images from the ASAS Classification Cohort.

Objectives:

We aimed to identify quantitative cut-offs based on numbers of slices and SIJ quadrants that define a positive MRI for structural lesions typical of axSpA, the gold standard being majority central reader decision as to the presence of a structural lesion typical of axSpA with high confidence.

Methods:

MRI structural lesions meeting ASAS definitions were recorded in an eCRF that comprises global assessment (structural lesion typical of axSpA present/absent and degree of confidence (-4 (absent) to +4 (present)), and detailed scoring of lesions per SIJ quadrant. Detailed scoring was based only on assessment of DICOM images (n =148). We calculated sensitivity and specificity for numbers of SIJ quadrants and consecutive slices with erosion, sclerosis, and fat lesions where a majority of readers (≥4/7) agreed as to the presence of a structural lesion typical of axSpA with high confidence (≥ +3). We tested candidate lesion definitions for predictive diagnostic utility in cases assessed after 4.4 years of follow up by the local rheumatologist.

Results:

Structural lesions typical of axSpA were observed by majority read in 33 (32.4%) of 102 cases diagnosed with axSpA, and 3 (6.8%) of 44 cases without axSpA and 29 cases were assigned a high degree of confidence (≥ +3) by a majority of readers. Cut-offs achieving specificity of 95% were erosion in ≥2 consecutive slices (sensitivity 83%), erosion ≥3 SIJ quadrants (sensitivity 90%), and fat lesion (≥1cm horizontal depth) in ≥1 SIJ quadrant (sensitivity 59%) (Table). These had very high positive predictive values (>95%) for diagnosis of axSpA in cases diagnosed by the rheumatologist after 4.4 years follow up.

Conclusion:

ASAS-defined erosion in ≥2 consecutive slices or in ≥3 SIJ quadrants and ASAS-defined fat lesion with depth >1cm in ≥1 SIJ quadrant are high priority candidates for defining an MRI structural lesion typical of axSpA. This will require similar assessment in additional axSpA cohorts.

References:

[1]Maksymowych et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2019; 78:1550-8.

Table 1.

Majority readers agree structural lesion indicative of axSpA is present with confidence ≥3/4 is the gold-standard external reference

SensitivitySpecificityErosion Score ≥1 SIJ qdr93.1 (77.2-99.2)80.6 (72.4-87.3)Erosion Score ≥2 SIJ qdr93.1 (77.2-99.2)90.8 (84.1-95.3)Erosion Score ≥3 SIJ qdr89.7 (72.6-97.8)95.8 (90.5-98.6)Erosion in 2 consecutive slices82.8 (64.2-94.2)95.0 (89.3-98.1)Fat lesion ≥1 SIJ qdr82.8 (64.2-94.2)81.5 (73.4-88.0)Fat lesion ≥2 SIJ qdr69.0 (49.2-84.7)86.6 (79.1-92.1)Fat lesion ≥3 SIJ qdr62.1 (42.3-79.3)91.6 (85.1-95.9)Fat lesion in 2 consecutive slices55.2 (35.7-73.6)93.3 (87.2-97.1)Fat lesion (>1cm depth) ≥158.6 (38.9-76.5)95.0 (89.3-98.1)Fat lesion (>1cm depth) ≥255.2 (35.7-73.6)95.8 (90.5-98.6)Fat lesion (>1cm depth) ≥351.7 (32.5-70.6)97.5 (92.8-99.5)Fat lesion (>1cm depth) in 2 consecutive slices48.3 (29.4-67.5)97.5 (92.8-99.5)

Table. SIJ qdr: sacroiliac joint quadrant

Disclosure of Interests:

Walter P. Maksymowych Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Employee of: Chief Medical Officer of CARE Arthritis Limited, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Xenofon Baraliakos: None declared, Ulrich Weber: None declared, Pedro M Machado Consultant of: PMM: Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Speakers bureau: PMM: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Susanne Juhl Pedersen Grant/research support from: Novartis, Joachim Sieper Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Stephanie Wichuk: None declared, Denis Poddubnyy Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma; Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV, Robert B.M. Landewé Consultant of: AbbVie; AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly & Co.; Galapagos NV; Novartis; Pfizer; UCB Pharma, Joel Paschke: None declared, Robert G Lambert: None declared, Mikkel Ǿstergaard Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Merck, and Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB

THU0400 CLINICAL COURSE OF EARLY AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS OVER TEN YEARS: LONG-TERM RESULTS FROM THE GERMAN SPONDYLOARTHRITIS INCEPTION COHORT

Background:

Previous studies showed that patients with non-radiographic and radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr- and r-axSpA) have similar disease burden and similar response to anti-inflammatory therapy given similar level of inflammatory activity. Only little is known, however, about long-term disease course in patients with early axSpA.

Objectives:

To investigate the long-term (up to 10 years) clinical course of patients with early axSpA.

Methods:

In total, 525 patients with early axSpA (r-axSpA with symptom duration ≤10 years and nr-axSpA with symptom duration ≤5 years) from the German Spondyloarthritis Inception Cohort (GESPIC) were included. The final patient classification was based on central reading results in 458 patients with available pelvic X-rays, and on local rheumatologist judgement in 67 patients. A total of 251 patients were finally classified as r-axSpA and 274 as nr-axSpA. Clinical evaluation, which included disease activity (BASDAI, C-reactive protein – CRP, ASDAS) as well as therapy recording, was performed at baseline and every 6 months thereafter until year 2 and annually thereafter till year 10. Treatment was conducted at the discretion of the local rheumatologist.

Results:

Since the cohort has started prior to introduction of TNF inhibitors (TNFi), only 2% patients received TNFi at baseline that increased to 23% at year 10 (15% in nr-axSpA and 31% in r-axSpA) – Figure 1. The use of NSAIDs and csDMARDs decreased in both groups (Figure 1), while use of systemic steroids did not change substantially (9% at baseline, 8% at year 10). The proportion of patients with low disease activity according to BASDAI (<4) was higher in r-axSpA as compared to nr-axSpA at almost all time points, while the proportion of patients with low disease activity according to ASDAS (<2.1), as well as with ASDAS inactive disease (<1.3) was similar between nr-axSpA and r-axSpA (Figure 2). In the group of patients who completed year 10 (n=134 in total, 68 with nr-axSpA, 67 with r-axSpA) the same trends in therapy and disease activity were observed.

Conclusion:

Patients with nr-axSpA and r-axSpA showed a similar disease course in terms of disease activity on the group level. The drop-out rate in this observational cohort was overall high, but comparable between groups. The lower proportion of patients with nr-axSpA being treated with TNFi might reflect a later introduction of TNFi for this indication.

Acknowledgments:

GESPIC has been financially supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research as well as by Abbott, Amgen, Centocor, Schering–Plough, and Wyeth. From 2010 till 2019 GESPIC has been supported by Abbvie.

Disclosure of Interests:

Denis Poddubnyy Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Valeria Rios Rodriguez Consultant of: Abbvie, Novartis, Murat Torgutalp: None declared, Maryna Verba: None declared, Johanna Callhoff: None declared, Mikhail Protopopov Consultant of: Novartis, Fabian Proft Grant/research support from: Novartis Pharma GmbH, Consultant of: Consultancy / speaker fees from: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: Consultancy / speaker fees from: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Judith Rademacher: None declared, Hildrun Haibel Consultant of: Abbvie, Jansen, MSD, and Novartis, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Jansen, MSD, and Novartis, Joachim Sieper Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma

SAT0384 REPLACEMENT OF RADIOGRAPHIC SACROILITIS BY MRI STRUCTURAL LESIONS: WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON CLASSIFICATION OF AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS IN THE ASAS CLASSIFICATION COHORT?

Background:

Classification of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is based on either an imaging or clinical arm. Radiographic or MRI evidence of sacroiliitis can be applied for the imaging arm. However, it is well-established that reliability and sensitivity of radiographic sacroiliitis is inadequate.

Objectives:

To assess the impact of replacing radiographic sacroiliitis with MRI structural lesions (MRI-S) typical of axSpA on the number of patients classified as having axSpA in patients with undiagnosed back pain recruited to the ASAS Classification Cohort (ASAS-CC).

Methods:

MRI images of the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) were available from 217 cases in the ASAS-CC, which also had clinical, laboratory, and radiographic data. Seven central readers from the ASAS-MRI group recorded MRI lesions in an eCRF that included active (MRI-A) and structural (MRI-S) lesions typical of axSpA. MRI-A was deemed to be present according to majority agreement (≥4/7) of central readers. MRI-S was deemed to be present according to the majority (majority reader MRI-S) and also according to at least 2 central readers (≥2-reader MRI-S). We calculated the number of patients that were classified differently after replacement of radiographs by MRI-S for overall fulfillment of the ASAS criteria and for the imaging arm.

Results:

In total, 119 (54.8%) cases fulfilled the axSpA criteria based on local reading of radiographic sacroiliitis and central reading of active inflammation on MRI. This changed to 125 (57.6%) and 118 (54.4%) of cases after replacement of radiographic sacroiliitis by ≥2-reader and majority reader MRI-S, respectively (Table). A total of 13 (6.0%) and 7 (3.2%) cases who were classified as not having axSpA were re-classified as having axSpA after replacing radiographic sacroiliitis with ≥2-reader and majority reader MRI-S, respectively. Conversely, 7 (3.2%) and 8 (3.7%) cases were re-classified as not having axSpA after substitution by ≥2-reader and majority reader MRI-S, respectively. When fulfillment of the imaging arm was the primary consideration (irrespective of the clinical arm), the number of patients reclassified from not axSpA to axSpA was 25 (11.5%) by ≥2-reader and 13 (6.0%) by majority reader MRI-S, while 8 (3.7%) and 11 (5.1%) were reclassified from axSpA to not axSpA.

Conclusion:

The number of patients classified as having axSpA does not change substantially when MRI-S replaces radiographic sacroiliitis. However, it remains possible that MRI structural lesions can influence the final diagnosis, the gold standard for assessment of the performance of the ASAS criteria.

Impact of Replacement of Radiographic Sacroilitis by MRI Structural Lesions on SpA Classification in cases with all clinical, radiographic, and central and local MRI inflammation data available (n=217)

MRI assessment usedSpA Classification=Yes N(%)SpA Classification=No N(%)Imaging Arm SpA Classification=Yes N(%)Imaging Arm SpA Classification=No N(%)Radiographic Sacroiliitis + Majority Central Reader MRI Inflammation Positive119 (54.8%)97 (44.7%)83(38.2%)134 (61.8%)Replace Radiographic Sacroiliitis with ≥2 Central Reader MRI Structural Positive125 (57.6%)92 (42.4%)100 (46.1%)117 (53.9%)Replace Radiographic Sacroiliitis with Majority Central Reader MRI Structural Positive118 (54.4%)99 (45.6%)85 (39.2%)132 (60.8%)

Disclosure of Interests:

Walter P. Maksymowych Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Employee of: Chief Medical Officer of CARE Arthritis Limited, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Pedro M Machado Consultant of: PMM: Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Speakers bureau: PMM: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Robert G Lambert: None declared, Xenofon Baraliakos Grant/research support from: Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Mikkel Ǿstergaard Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Merck, and Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Joachim Sieper Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Stephanie Wichuk: None declared, Denis Poddubnyy Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma; Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV, Robert B.M. Landewé Consultant of: AbbVie; AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly & Co.; Galapagos NV; Novartis; Pfizer; UCB Pharma, Joel Paschke: None declared, Susanne Juhl Pedersen Grant/research support from: Novartis, Ulrich Weber: None declared

AB0716 SEX DIFFERENCES IN CLINICAL PHENOTYPE AND RADIOGRAPHIC DISEASE PROGRESSION IN AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: RESULTS FROM THE GERMAN SPONDYLOARTHRITIS INCEPTION COHORT

Background:

It is presumed that the phenotype of the axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) may differ in females and males; the published data are controversial.

Objectives:

To explore the sex differences in disease features and radiographic progression in axSpA.

Methods:

A total of 210 patients with axSpA (115 with radiographic and 95 with non-radiographic axSpA) were selected for analysis. Spinal radiographs were scored by two readers in a random order according to the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (mSASSS). Pelvic radiographs were scored according to the grading system of the modified New York criteria; a sacroiliitis sum score was calculated as a sum of the grades for both sacroiliac joints. Mann-Whitney and Fisher exact tests were performed for group comparisons. A multivariable regression analysis was performed to analyze the influence of gender on radiographic progression.

Results:

Males (n=107; 51%) were significantly younger at disease onset (34.8 ± 10.3 vs. 31.5 ± 11.2 years, p=0.008) and at diagnosis (37.5 ± 10.2 vs. 34.1 ± 11.2 years, p=0.006); symptom duration at baseline was similar (4.1 ± 2.6 vs. 4.3 ± 2.8 years, p=0.66). Females were less often HLA-B27 positive (74 (72.5%) vs. 92 (86.0%), p=0.02), had higher baseline disease activity (BASDAI 4.3±2.2 vs 3.7±2.0; p=0.05), but lower baseline C-reactive protein level (7.1 ± 10.9 vs. 12.3 ±18.2 mg/l, p=0.08), and similar time-averaged ASDAS (2.5±0.8 vs 2.4±1.0; p=0.385). Males more frequently had definite radiographic sacroiliitis (70.1% vs. 38.8%; p<0.001), higher sacroiliitis sum score (4.9 ±1.9 vs 3.2±1.8, p<0.001), and higher mean mSASSS (6.1 ± 10.7 vs 2.4 ± 4.0; p=0.100) at baseline. Other variables were comparable between the groups. There was a trend for a higher radiographic progression in males in all explored outcomes, statistically significant only for the formation/progression of syndesmophytes (23 (21.5%) vs. 10 (9.7%), p=0.023), with no differences in the radiographic progression of sacroiliitis. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, similar odds for spinal radiographic progression, new syndesmophyte formation and radiographic progression of sacroiliitis by ≥1 grade were seen –Table 1.

Conclusion:

There was a trend for male patients to have more radiographic damage at the baseline and more progression after two years, as reflected by the percentage of patients with new syndesmophytes.

:

Table 1.

Association of sex with radiographic progression in spine and sacroiliac joints after 2 years of follow-up.

Parameter, n (%) or mean±SDFemale(n=103)Male(n=107)PSpinal radiographic progressionmSASSS change0.46 ± 1.631.00 ± 2.850.25Progression of mSASSS by ≥2 points10 (9.7)20 (18.7)0.08New syndesmophytes or progression of syndesmophytes10 (9.7)23 (21.5)0.02Progression of radiografic sacroiliitisChange of the sacroiliitis sum score0.14 ± 0.940.13 ± 0.730.58Progression of sacroiliitis by at least 1 grade in opinion of both readers17 (16.5)9 (8.4)0.09

mSASSS – modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score;

Acknowledgments:

GESPIC has been financially supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). As funding by BMBF was reduced in 2005 and stopped in 2007, financial support has been obtained from Abbott / Abbvie, Amgen, Centocor, Schering-Plough, and Wyeth. Since 2010 GESPIC is supported by Abbvie.

Dr. Murat Torgutalp was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK).

Disclosure of Interests:

Mikhail Protopopov Consultant of: Novartis, Murat Torgutalp: None declared, Joachim Sieper Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Hildrun Haibel Consultant of: Abbvie, Jansen, MSD, and Novartis, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Jansen, MSD, and Novartis, Fabian Proft Grant/research support from: Novartis Pharma GmbH, Consultant of: Consultancy / speaker fees from: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: Consultancy / speaker fees from: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Valeria Rios Rodriguez Consultant of: Abbvie, Novartis, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma, Denis Poddubnyy Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB

FRI0317 CONSENSUS DEFINITIONS FOR MRI LESIONS IN THE SPINE OF PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: FIRST ANALYSIS FROM THE ASSESSMENTS IN SPONDYLOARTHRITIS INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY CLASSIFICATION COHORT

Background:

A recent consensus from the ASAS MRI group has culminated in updated spine lesion definitions for axial spondyloarthritis (ASAS_MRI_defn)1. There has been no central reader evaluation of MRI scans from the ASAS Classification Cohort (ASAS-CC)2to determine the spectrum of MRI lesions in the spine in this cohort.

Objectives:

To determine the spectrum of active and structural lesions on MRI images of the spine from the ASAS-CC according to the consensus ASAS_MRI_defnupdate.

Methods:

ASAS_MRI_defnwere recorded by 9 central readers in an eCRF for global assessment and detailed scoring of each discovertebral unit and postero-lateral structures. Vertebral corner bone marrow edema (VCBME) and corner fat (VCFAT) lesions were recorded if present on 2 slices; facet joint, lateral, and posterior inflammatory lesions were recorded if present on a single slice. Vertebral corner erosion, bone spurs, and ankylosis were each scored on a single slice. Comparison of active and structural lesion frequencies by local rheumatologist diagnosis of axSpA was assessed descriptively according to ≥2 and majority reader (≥5/9) concordant data.

Results:

MRI scans of the spine were available from 69 cases with axSpA diagnosed in 44/64 (68.8%). VCBME was most frequent with ≥1 lesion in 32(46.4%) and 19 (27.5%) by ≥2 and ≥5/9 readers, respectively. VCFAT was the most frequent structural lesion with ≥1 lesion in 24 (34.8%) and 14 (20.3%) by ≥2 and ≥5/9 readers, respectively. There were significantly more VCBME lesions in axSpA patients than non-axSpA (mean(SD):1.8(2.7) vs 0.3 (0.5)) (p<0.001) while differences in VCFAT were not significant (Table). The presence of ≥2 VCBME had 90-95% specificity for axSpA. Significantly more VCBME and VCFAT were observed in the setting of radiographic sacroiliitis (modified New York criteria (mNY)).

Conclusion:

Spine lesions on MRI are relatively frequent in patients with undiagnosed back pain presenting to the rheumatologist. The presence of ≥2 VCBME, but not VCFAT, may have some diagnostic utility.

References:

[1]Maksymowych WP, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 70 (suppl 10): 654, 2018

[2]Rudwaleit et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68: 777-83

Vertebral Corner MRI lesionsmajority of readers (>=5)≥2 readersaxSpA=Yes (n=44)axSpA=No (n=20)p-valueaxSpA=Yes (n=44)axSpA=No (n=20)p-valueCorner Fat ≥112 (27.3%)2 (10%)0.1917 (38.6%)7 (35%)0.78Corner Fat ≥210 (22.7%)2 (10%)0.3113 (29.5%)4 (20%)0.64Corner Fat ≥38 (18.2%)1 (5%)0.2510 (22.7%)3 (15%)0.74Corner Fat ≥47 (15.9%)1 (5%)0.429 (20.5%)2 (10%)0.48Corner BME ≥117 (38.6%)1 (5%)0.00625 (54.5%)6 (30%)0.047Corner BME ≥215 (34.1%)1 (5%)0.01319 (43.2%)2 (10%)0.009Corner BME ≥311 (25%)0 (0%)0.01316 (36.4%)1 (5%)0.008Corner BME ≥48 (18.2%)0 (0%)0.09412 (27.3%)1 (5%)0.048mNY=Yes (n=10)mNY=No (n=49)p-valuemNY=Yes (n=10)mNY=No (n=49)p-valueCorner Fat ≥15 (50%)9 (18.4%)0.0475 (50%)17 (34.7%)0.48Corner Fat ≥25 (50%)7 (14.3%)0.0225 (50%)11 (22.4%)0.12Corner Fat ≥34 (40%)5 (10.2%)0.0364 (40%)9 (18.4%)0.20Corner Fat ≥44 (40%)4 (8.2%)0.0224 (40%)7 (14.3%)0.079Corner BME ≥15 (50%)11 (22.4%)0.1167 (70%)22 (44.9%)0.18Corner BME ≥25 (50%)9 (18.4%)0.0475 (50%)14 (28.6%)0.27Corner BME ≥35 (50%)6 (12.2%)0.0145 (50%)11 (22.4%)0.12Corner BME ≥45 (50%)3 (6.1%)0.0025 (50%)7 (14.3%)0.022

Disclosure of Interests:

Walter P. Maksymowych Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Employee of: Chief Medical Officer of CARE Arthritis Limited, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Iris Eshed: None declared, Pedro M Machado Consultant of: PMM: Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Speakers bureau: PMM: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Susanne Juhl Pedersen Grant/research support from: Novartis, Ulrich Weber: None declared, Manouk de Hooge: None declared, Joachim Sieper Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, Stephanie Wichuk: None declared, Denis Poddubnyy Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma; Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV, Robert B.M. Landewé Consultant of: AbbVie; AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly & Co.; Galapagos NV; Novartis; Pfizer; UCB Pharma, Robert G Lambert: None declared, Mikkel Ǿstergaard Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Merck, and Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Xenofon Baraliakos Grant/research support from: Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen

THU0379 REDUCTION OF ANTERIOR UVEITIS FLARES IN PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS FOLLOWING ONE YEAR OF TREATMENT WITH CERTOLIZUMAB PEGOL: 48-WEEK INTERIM RESULTS FROM A 96-WEEK OPEN-LABEL STUDY

Background:

Acute anterior uveitis (AAU), inflammation of the anterior uveal tract, is reported in up to 40% of patients (pts) with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).1AAU is associated with significant clinical burden; symptoms include blurred vision, photophobia and pain.2Previous studies have shown that TNF inhibitors (TNFi) can reduce AAU flare incidence in pts with radiographic axSpA,3-5but few have focused on pts across the full axSpA spectrum.

Objectives:

To analyse the impact of certolizumab pegol (CZP) treatment on AAU in pts with active radiographic and non-radiographic axSpA and a recent history of AAU.

Methods:

C-VIEW (NCT03020992) is an ongoing multicentre, open-label, phase 4 study. Pts had active axSpA according to the ASAS classification, a history of recurrent AAU (≥2 AAU flares in total and ≥1 AAU flare in the year prior to study entry), were HLA-B27 positive, and were eligible for TNFi treatment (previous failure of ≥2 NSAIDs, biologic naïve or had failed ≤1 TNFi). Pts received CZP 400 mg at Weeks (Wks) 0/2/4, then 200 mg every two wks (Q2W) to Wk 96. The primary variable was incidence of AAU flares compared to historic rates. A pre-specified interim analysis compared AAU incidence in the 48 wks prior to CZP treatment with the 48 wks of treatment, using Poisson regression adjusted for possible within-pt correlations, with period (pre- and post-baseline) and axSpA disease duration as covariates. Incidence rates (IR) were calculated based on the number of cases/pts at risk over 48 wks. Observed data are reported.

Results:

Of 115 enrolled pts, 89 initiated CZP treatment; 85 completed Wk 48. Baseline characteristics are shown in the Table. The 48-wk interim analysis revealed significantly fewer AAU flares/pt during CZP treatment vs before treatment (Figure; Poisson-adjusted IR: 0.2 vs 1.5, p<0.001). The number of pts experiencing 1 and ≥2 AAU flares (64.0% and 31.5% respectively) substantially reduced during CZP treatment (12.4% and 2.2%). After 48 wks CZP treatment, disease activity improved substantially (mean ± SD Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score [ASDAS]: 2.0 ± 0.9; Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI]: 3.3 ± 2.1), with 31.4% pts achieving ASAS partial remission and 29.1% ASDAS major improvement. No new safety signals were identified.

Table.

Baseline characteristics

CZP 200 mg Q2W (N=89)Age (years), mean ± SD46.5 ± 11.2Male, n (%)56 (62.9)Racial group, n (%) Caucasian87 (97.8) Other2 (2.2)Diagnosis, n (%) Radiographic axSpA76 (85.4) Non-radiographic axSpA13 (14.6)Duration of axSpA (years), mean ± SD8.6 ± 8.4Time since onset of first uveitis flare (years), mean ± SD9.9 ± 9.0ASDAS, mean ± SD3.5 ± 0.9BASDAI, mean ± SD6.5 ± 1.5

Conclusion:

In this open-label study, AAU flare rate significantly reduced in axSpA pts with a history of recurrent AAU during the first 48 wks of CZP. Pts also experienced substantial improvements in axSpA disease activity.

References:

[1]Martin TM. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2002;14:337–41

[2]Bacchiega ABS. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2017;56:2060–7

[3]van der Heijde D. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2017;56:1498–509

[4]van Bentum RE. J Rheumatol 2019;46:153–9

[5]van Denderen JC. J Rheumatol 2014;41:1843–8

Acknowledgments:

This study was funded by UCB Pharma. Editorial services were provided by Costello Medical.

Disclosure of Interests:

Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Rianne van Bentum: None declared, Frank Verbraak Grant/research support from: Bayer, Novartis, IDxDR, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: Bayer, Novartis, IDxDR, UCB Pharma, Thomas Rath Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma, James Rosenbaum Consultant of: AbbVie, Corvus, Eyevensys, Gilead, Novartis, Janssen, Roche, UCB Pharma; royalties from UpToDate, Maria Misterska-Skora: None declared, Bengt Hoepken Employee of: UCB Pharma, Oscar Irvin-Sellers Employee of: UCB Pharma, Brenda VanLunen Employee of: UCB Pharma, Lars Bauer Employee of: UCB Pharma, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma

THU0395 EFFICACY OF IXEKIZUMAB ON DISEASE ACTIVITY AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE NON-RADIOGRAPHIC AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS AND OBJECTIVE SIGNS OF INFLAMMATION, STRATIFIED BY BASELINE CRP/SACROILIAC JOINT MRI STATUS

Background:

Ixekizumab (IXE), a high-affinity anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody, is effective in patients (pts) with active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA), who had elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) and/or active sacroiliitis on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).1

Objectives:

To determine if disease activity and patient-reported outcomes at Week 16 were similar between groups after stratifying pts by CRP/sacroiliac joint (SIJ) MRI status at baseline.

Methods:

COAST-X (NCT02757352) included pts with active nr-axSpA and objective signs of inflammation, i.e. presence of sacroiliitis on MRI (Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society [ASAS]/ Outcome Measures in Rheumatology criteria) or elevation of serum CRP (>5.0 mg/L). Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous 80 mg IXE every 4 weeks (Q4W) or Q2W, or placebo (PBO). Depending on the baseline values of CRP and MRI SIJ (Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada [SPARCC] score), pts in the intent-to-treat population (N=239) were divided into 3 subgroups (CRP >5 and MRI ≥2; CRP ≤5 and MRI ≥2; CRP >5 and MRI <2). Logistic regression analysis with treatment, subgroup, and treatment-by-subgroup interaction was used to detect treatment group differences in ASAS40, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) <2.1 (low disease activity), and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index 50 (BASDAI50) responses at Week 16. Analysis of covariance model with baseline value, treatment, subgroup, and treatment-by-subgroup interaction was used to detect the treatment group difference in change from baseline in Short Form-36 physical component score (SF-36 PCS).

Results:

The proportion of pts achieving ASAS40 (primary endpoint), ASDAS <2.1, and BASDAI50 (secondary endpoints) was higher in IXE treatment groups compared to PBO at Week 16 (Figure 1). The response rates in IXE-treated subjects were higher in all subgroups (CRP >5 and MRI ≥2; CRP ≤5 and MRI ≥2; CRP >5 and MRI <2) without consistent differences in efficacy between the subgroups. Similarly, pts in the IXE groups showed improvement in SF-36 PCS scores (secondary endpoint) versus pts on PBO at Week 16 (Figure 2).

Conclusion:

Pts with active nr-axSpA and objective signs of inflammation at baseline who were treated with IXE showed an overall improvement in the signs and symptoms of the disease. The efficacy was not different between pts with both elevated CRP and active sacroiliitis on MRI and pts with either elevated CRP or active sacroiliitis on MRI.

References:

[1]Deodhar A, et al.Lancet.2020.

Disclosure of Interests:

Walter P Maksymowych Grant/research support from: Received research and/or educational grants from Abbvie, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: WPM is Chief Medical Officer of CARE Arthritis Limited, has received consultant/participated in advisory boards for Abbvie, Boehringer, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: Received speaker fees from Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Helena Marzo-Ortega Grant/research support from: Janssen, Novartis, Consultant of: Abbvie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, UCB, Mikkel Ǿstergaard Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Merck, and Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Lianne S. Gensler Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Novartis, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, UCB, Joerg Ermann Grant/research support from: Boehringer-Ingelheim, Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis,

Pfizer, Takeda, UCB, Atul Deodhar Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Denis Poddubnyy Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, David Sandoval Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Rebecca Bolce Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Andris Kronbergs Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Soyi Liu Leage Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Gabriel Doridot Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Vladimir Geneus Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Ann Leung: None declared, David Adams Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma

Spinal radiographic progression over 2 years in ankylosing spondylitis patients treated with secukinumab: a historical cohort comparison

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare radiographic progression in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) treated for up to 2 years with secukinumab (MEASURE 1) with a historical cohort of biologic-naïve patients treated with NSAIDs (ENRADAS).

METHODS

Baseline and 2-year lateral cervical and lumbar spine radiographs were independently evaluated using mSASSS by two readers, who were blinded to the chronology and cohort of the radiographs. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with no radiographic progression (mSASSS change ≤ 0 from baseline to year 2). The Primary Analysis Set included patients with baseline (≤ day 30) and post-baseline day 31-743 radiographs. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the comparison between the two cohorts, as follows: Sensitivity Analysis Set 1 included all patients with baseline (≤ day 30) and year 2 (days 640-819) radiographs; Sensitivity Analysis Set 2 included all patients with baseline and post-baseline (> day 30) radiographs.

RESULTS

A total of 168 patients (84%) from the MEASURE 1 cohort and 69 (57%) from the ENRADAS cohort qualified for the Primary Analysis Set. Over 2 years, the LS (SE) mean change from baseline in mSASSS for the primary analysis was 0.55 (0.139) for MEASURE 1 vs 0.89 (0.216) for ENRADAS (p = 0.1852). Mean changes from baseline in mSASSS were lower in MEASURE 1 vs ENRADAS for the primary and sensitivity analyses. The proportion of patients with no radiographic progression was consistently higher in the MEASURE 1 vs ENRADAS cohort across all cutoffs for no radiographic progression (change in mSASSS from baseline to year 2 of ≤ 0, ≤ 0.5, ≤ 1, and ≤ 2), but the differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Secukinumab-treated patients demonstrated a numerical, but statistically non-significant, higher proportion of non-progressors and lower change in mSASSS over 2 years versus a cohort of biologic-naïve patients treated with NSAIDs.

Observed Incidence of Uveitis Following Certolizumab Pegol Treatment in Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis

Objective

Axial spondyloarthritis (axial SpA) is characterized by inflammation of the spine and sacroiliac joints and can also affect extraarticular sites, with the most common manifestation being uveitis. Here we report the incidence of uveitis flares in axial SpA patients from the RAPID‐axSpA trial, including ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and nonradiographic (nr) axial SpA.

Methods

The RAPID‐axSpA (NCT01087762) trial is double‐blind and placebo‐controlled to week 24, dose‐blind to week 48, and open‐label to week 204. Patients were randomized to certolizumab pegol (CZP) or placebo. Placebo patients entering the dose‐blind phase were re‐randomized to CZP. Uveitis events were recorded on extraarticular manifestation or adverse event forms. Events were analyzed in patients with/without history of uveitis, and rates reported per 100 patient‐years.

Results

At baseline, 38 of 218 CZP‐randomized patients (17.4%) and 31 of 107 placebo‐randomized patients (29.0%) had past uveitis history. During the 24‐week double‐blind phase, the rate of uveitis flares was lower in CZP (3.0 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.6–8.8] per 100 patient‐years) than in placebo (10.3 [95% CI 2.8–26.3] per 100 patient‐years). All cases observed during the 24‐week double‐blind phase were in patients with a history of uveitis; in these patients, rates were similarly lower for CZP (17.1 [95% CI 3.5–50.1] per 100 patient‐years) than placebo (38.5 [95% CI 10.5–98.5] per 100 patient‐years). Rates of uveitis flares remained low up to week 96 (4.9 [95% CI 3.2–7.4] per 100 patient‐years) and were similar between AS (4.4 [95% CI 2.3–7.7] per 100 patient‐years) and nr‐axial SpA (5.6 [95% CI 2.9–9.8] per 100 patient‐years).

Conclusion

The rate of uveitis flares was lower for axial SpA patients treated with CZP than placebo during the randomized controlled phase. Incidence of uveitis flares remained low to week 96 and was comparable to rates reported for AS patients receiving other anti–tumor necrosis factor antibodies.

[International quality indicators in rheumatology. Suggestions for rheumatoid arthritis]

Quality measurement of medical care has become increasingly important in Germany in recent years. Essentially, three areas can be distinguished: the quality of structure, process and outcome. For the measurement of quality, quality indicators are necessary. The Federal Joint Committee has recently been responsible for defining such quality indicators. Because proposals for quality indicators for the indication for rheumatoid arthritis in have already been published in international rheumatology, we selected and translated the three most important European publications in order to present them to the rheumatology community. The ultimate aim is the initiation of a process for the joint development of quality indicators within the professional association and the two associations in Germany in order to then be able to adequately discuss these with policy-makers.

Early Disease Activity or Clinical Response as Predictors of Long-Term Outcomes With Certolizumab Pegol in Axial Spondyloarthritis or Psoriatic Arthritis

Objective

Early identification of patients unlikely to achieve good long‐term disease control with anti–tumor necrosis factor therapy in axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is important for physicians following treat‐to‐target recommendations. Here we assess associations between disease activity or clinical response during the first 12 weeks of treatment and attainment of treatment targets at week 48 in axial SpA and PsA patients receiving certolizumab pegol.

Methods

The relationship between disease activity or clinical response during the first 12 weeks of treatment and achievement of week‐48 targets (for axial SpA: inactive disease based on Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score [ASDAS] using the C‐reactive protein [CRP] level, or Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index <2 with normal CRP level; and for PsA: minimal disease activity) was assessed post hoc using RAPID‐axSpA and RAPID‐PsA trial data.

Results

A clear relationship between disease activity from week 2 to 12 and achievement of week‐48 treatment targets was observed in both axial SpA and PsA populations. In axial SpA, week‐48 ASDAS inactive disease was achieved by 0% of patients (0 of 21) with ASDAS very high disease activity at week 12, compared to 68% of patients (34 of 50) with week‐12 ASDAS inactive disease. For PsA, week‐48 minimal disease activity was achieved by 0% of patients (0 of 26) with Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) using the CRP level >5.1 at week 12, compared to 73% of patients (57 of 78) with DAS28‐CRP <2.6. Similar results were observed regardless of the disease activity measure used. Clinical response at week 12 also predicted week‐48 outcomes, though to a lesser extent than disease activity.

Conclusion

Using disease activity and the clinical response state during the first 12 weeks of certolizumab pegol treatment, it was possible to identify a subset of axial SpA and PsA patients unlikely to achieve long‐term treatment goals.

Effect of certolizumab pegol over ninety-six weeks in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: results from a phase III randomized trial

Objective

Previous reports of the RAPID-axSpA trial (NCT01087762) described the efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol (CZP) over 24 weeks in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (SpA), including ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and nonradiographic axial SpA. We report efficacy and safety data up to week 96 of the study.

Methods

The RAPID-axSpA trial is double-blind and placebo-controlled to week 24, dose-blind to week 48, and open-label to week 204. Outcome variables included Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society criteria for 20% and 40% improvement in disease activity (ASAS20/40), ASAS partial remission responses (analyzed by nonresponder imputation), AS Disease Activity Score (ASDAS), ASDAS inactive disease, ASDAS major improvement, Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), Bath AS Functional Index (BASFI), and Bath AS Metrology Index (BASMI) linear score (analyzed by the last observation carried forward method). Safety data were collected for patients treated with ≥1 dose of CZP.

Results

Of the 325 patients who were randomized, 218 received CZP from week 0. Of these, 93% completed week 24, 88% completed week 48, and 80% completed week 96. Improvements in ASAS responses were maintained to week 96 (for ASAS20, 67.4%, 72.0%, and 62.8% at weeks 24, 48, and 96, respectively), as well as improvements in ASDAS, BASDAI (mean score 3.3, 3.1, and 3.0 at weeks 24, 48, and 96, respectively), BASFI, and BASMI linear score. Comparable improvements were observed with both dosing regimens (200 mg every 2 weeks or 400 mg every 4 weeks) and in patients with AS and those with nonradiographic axial SpA. In the safety set, adverse events occurred in 279 patients (88.6%) and serious adverse events in 41 (13.0%). No deaths or malignancies were reported.

Conclusion

Clinical improvements to week 24 in both CZP dosing regimens were sustained to week 96. Similar sustained improvements were observed in AS and nonradiographic axial SpA subpopulations. The safety profile was consistent with previous reports from RAPID-axSpA, with no new safety signals observed with longer exposure.

EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging in the diagnosis and management of spondyloarthritis in clinical practice

A taskforce comprised of an expert group of 21 rheumatologists, radiologists and methodologists from 11 countries developed evidence-based recommendations on the use of imaging in the clinical management of both axial and peripheral spondyloarthritis (SpA). Twelve key questions on the role of imaging in SpA were generated using a process of discussion and consensus. Imaging modalities included conventional radiography, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography, single photon emission CT, dual-emission x-ray absorptiometry and scintigraphy. Experts applied research evidence obtained from systematic literature reviews using MEDLINE and EMBASE to develop a set of 10 recommendations. The strength of recommendations (SOR) was assessed by taskforce members using a visual analogue scale. A total of 7550 references were identified in the search process, from which 158 studies were included in the systematic review. Ten recommendations were produced using research-based evidence and expert opinion encompassing the role of imaging in making a diagnosis of axial SpA or peripheral SpA, monitoring inflammation and damage, predicting outcome, response to treatment, and detecting spinal fractures and osteoporosis. The SOR for each recommendation was generally very high (range 8.9–9.5). These are the first recommendations which encompass the entire spectrum of SpA and evaluate the full role of all commonly used imaging modalities. We aimed to produce recommendations that are practical and valuable in daily practice for rheumatologists, radiologists and general practitioners.