Ankylosing spondylitis

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

EULAR recommendations for cardiovascular disease risk management in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and other forms of inflammatory joint disorders: 2015/2016 update

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other inflammatory joint disorders (IJD) have increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk compared with the general population. In 2009, the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) taskforce recommended screening, identification of CVD risk factors and CVD risk management largely based on expert opinion. In view of substantial new evidence, an update was conducted with the aim of producing CVD risk management recommendations for patients with IJD that now incorporates an increasing evidence base. A multidisciplinary steering committee (representing 13 European countries) comprised 26 members including patient representatives, rheumatologists, cardiologists, internists, epidemiologists, a health professional and fellows. Systematic literature searches were performed and evidence was categorised according to standard guidelines. The evidence was discussed and summarised by the experts in the course of a consensus finding and voting process. Three overarching principles were defined. First, there is a higher risk for CVD in patients with RA, and this may also apply to ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis. Second, the rheumatologist is responsible for CVD risk management in patients with IJD. Third, the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids should be in accordance with treatment-specific recommendations from EULAR and Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society. Ten recommendations were defined, of which one is new and six were changed compared with the 2009 recommendations. Each designated an appropriate evidence support level. The present update extends on the evidence that CVD risk in the whole spectrum of IJD is increased. This underscores the need for CVD risk management in these patients. These recommendations are defined to provide assistance in CVD risk management in IJD, based on expert opinion and scientific evidence.

Treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis with infliximab: a randomised controlled multicentre trial

BACKGROUND Treatment options for patients with ankylosing spondylitis are few. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of infliximab, an antibody to tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha, in treatment of such patients.

METHODS

In this 12-week placebo-controlled multicentre study, we randomly assigned 35 patients with active ankylosing spondylitis to intravenous infliximab (5 mg/kg) and 35 to placebo at weeks 0, 2, and 6. One patient in the infliximab group was withdrawn from the study. Our primary outcome was regression of disease activity of at least 50%. To assess response, we used validated clinical criteria from the ankylosing spondylitis assessment working group, including disease activity (BASDAI), functional indices (BASFI), metrology (BASMI), and quality of life (short form 36). Analyses were done by intention to treat.

FINDINGS

18 (53%) of 34 patients on infliximab had a regression of disease activity at week 12 of at least 50% compared with three (9%) of 35 on placebo (difference 44% [95% CI 23-61], p<0.0001). Function and quality of life also improved significantly on infliximab but not on placebo (p<0.0001 and p<0.0001, respectively). Treatment with infliximab was generally well tolerated, but three patients had to stop treatment because of systemic tuberculosis, allergic granulomatosis of the lung, or mild leucopenia.

INTERPRETATION

Our results show that treatment with infliximab is effective in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis. Since there are some potentially serious adverse effects, we recommend that this treatment mainly be used in co-operation with rheumatological centres.

Secukinumab, an Interleukin-17A Inhibitor, in Ankylosing Spondylitis

BACKGROUND

Secukinumab is an anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody that has been shown to control the symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis in a phase 2 trial. We conducted two phase 3 trials of secukinumab in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis.

METHODS

In two double-blind trials, we randomly assigned patients to receive secukinumab or placebo. In MEASURE 1, a total of 371 patients received intravenous secukinumab (10 mg per kilogram of body weight) or matched placebo at weeks 0, 2, and 4, followed by subcutaneous secukinumab (150 mg or 75 mg) or matched placebo every 4 weeks starting at week 8. In MEASURE 2, a total of 219 patients received subcutaneous secukinumab (150 mg or 75 mg) or matched placebo at baseline; at weeks 1, 2, and 3; and every 4 weeks starting at week 4. At week 16, patients in the placebo group were randomly reassigned to subcutaneous secukinumab at a dose of 150 mg or 75 mg. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with at least 20% improvement in Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS20) response criteria at week 16.

RESULTS

In MEASURE 1, the ASAS20 response rates at week 16 were 61%, 60%, and 29% for subcutaneous secukinumab at doses of 150 mg and 75 mg and for placebo, respectively (P<0.001 for both comparisons with placebo); in MEASURE 2, the rates were 61%, 41%, and 28% for subcutaneous secukinumab at doses of 150 mg and 75 mg and for placebo, respectively (P<0.001 for the 150-mg dose and P=0.10 for the 75-mg dose). The significant improvements were sustained through 52 weeks. Infections, including candidiasis, were more common with secukinumab than with placebo during the placebo-controlled period of MEASURE 1. During the entire treatment period, pooled exposure-adjusted incidence rates of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, candida infections, and Crohn's disease were 0.7, 0.9, and 0.7 cases per 100 patient-years, respectively, in secukinumab-treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Secukinumab at a subcutaneous dose of 150 mg, with either subcutaneous or intravenous loading, provided significant reductions in the signs and symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis at week 16. Secukinumab at a subcutaneous dose of 75 mg resulted in significant improvement only with a higher intravenous loading dose. (Funded by Novartis Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01358175 and NCT01649375.).

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: results of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of adalimumab, a fully human recombinant IgG1 monoclonal antibody that specifically targets human tumor necrosis factor, in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized (2:1 ratio), double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate a subcutaneous injection of adalimumab, 40 mg every other week, compared with placebo for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the percentage of patients with a 20% response according to the ASsessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis International Working Group criteria for improvement (ASAS20) at week 12. Secondary outcome measures included the ASAS20 at week 24 and multiple measures of disease activity, spinal mobility, and function, as well as ASAS partial remission.

RESULTS

At week 12, 58.2% of adalimumab-treated patients (121 of 208) achieved an ASAS20 response, compared with 20.6% of placebo-treated patients (22 of 107) (P < 0.001). More patients in the adalimumab group (45.2% [94 of 208]) than in the placebo group (15.9% [17 of 107]) had at least a 50% improvement in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index at week 12 (P < 0.001). Significant improvements in the ASAS40 response and the response according to the ASAS5/6 criteria at weeks 12 and 24 were also demonstrated (P < 0.001). Partial remission was achieved by more adalimumab-treated patients than placebo-treated patients (22.1% versus 5.6%; P < 0.001). Adalimumab-treated patients reported more adverse events (75.0% versus 59.8% of placebo-treated patients; P < 0.05), but there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of infections. Most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity.

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab was well-tolerated during the 24-week study period and was associated with a significant and sustained reduction in the signs and symptoms of active AS.

2010 update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis

This first update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations on the management of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is based on the original paper, a systematic review of existing recommendations and the literature since 2005 and the discussion and agreement among 21 international experts, 2 patients and 2 physiotherapists in a meeting in February 2010. Each original bullet point was discussed in detail and reworded if necessary. Decisions on new recommendations were made - if necessary after voting. The strength of the recommendations (SOR) was scored on an 11-point numerical rating scale after the meeting by email. These recommendations apply to patients of all ages that fulfill the modified NY criteria for AS, independent of extra-articular manifestations, and they take into account all drug and non-drug interventions related to AS. Four overarching principles were introduced, implying that one bullet has been moved to this section. There are now 11 bullet points including 2 new ones, one related to extra-articular manifestations and one to changes in the disease course. With a mean score of 9.1 (range 8-10) the SOR was generally very good.

Assessment of outcome in ankylosing spondylitis: an extended radiographic scoring system

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate an extensive radiographic scoring system for ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

METHODS

The Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (SASSS) was modified by adding a score for the cervical spine and defining squaring. This modified SASSS (mSASSS) is the sum of the lumbar and cervical spine score (range 0-72). 370 lateral views of the lumbar and cervical spine were used for development of the mSASSS, standardisation of observers, and for studying reliability. In a 48 week NSAID study of 57 patients, change over time and construct validity were studied.

RESULTS

Interobserver correlations of the lumbar and cervical spine scores were good (r>0.95). The interobserver duplicate error was 0.55 in a range from 0 to 36. The mean change in the cervical and lumbar spine scores between weeks 0 and 48 of all patients was 1.45 (range 0-6.0) and 1.06 (0-5.0), respectively (paired t testing, p<0.001). Change in radiological score was seen in 36/57 (63%) patients (lumbar and cervical spine 11, cervical spine 12, lumbar spine 13 patients).

CONCLUSION

The mSASSS is useful for assessing extensive radiographic damage in AS. It is reliable, detects changes over 48 weeks, and shows a satisfactory face and construct validity.

Recombinant human tumor necrosis factor receptor (etanercept) for treating ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and efficacy of etanercept in a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of adults with moderate to severe active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

METHODS

Patients (n = 277) were treated with either etanercept 25 mg (n = 138) or placebo (n = 139) subcutaneously twice weekly for 24 weeks. The primary outcome measures were the percentages of patients achieving the Assessments in Ankylosing Spondylitis 20% response (ASAS20) at weeks 12 and 24. Other outcome measures included the percentage of patients achieving higher ASAS responses, and the safety of etanercept in patients with AS. All outcome measures were assessed at 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Treatment with etanercept resulted in dramatic improvement. The ASAS20 was achieved by 59% of patients in the etanercept group and by 28% of patients in the placebo group (P < 0.0001) at week 12, and by 57% and 22% of patients, respectively, at week 24 (P < 0.0001). All individual ASAS components, acute-phase reactant levels, and spinal mobility measures were also significantly improved. The safety profile of etanercept was similar to that reported in studies of patients with rheumatoid arthritis or psoriatic arthritis. The only adverse events that occurred significantly more often in the etanercept group were injection-site reactions, accidental injuries, and upper respiratory tract infections.

CONCLUSION

Etanercept is a highly effective and well tolerated treatment in patients with active AS.

Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS): defining cut-off values for disease activity states and improvement scores

BACKGROUND

The Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) is a new composite index to assess disease activity in ankylosing spondylitis (AS). It fulfils important aspects of truth, feasibility and discrimination. Criteria for disease activity states and improvement scores are important for use in clinical practice, observational studies and clinical trials and so far have not been developed for the ASDAS.

OBJECTIVE

To determine clinically relevant cut-off values for disease activity states and improvement scores using the ASDAS.

METHODS

For the selection of cut-offs data from the Norwegian disease modifying antirheumatic drug (NOR-DMARD) registry, a cohort of patients with AS starting conventional or biological DMARDs, were used. Receiver operating characteristic analysis against several external criteria was performed and several approaches to determine the optimal cut-offs used. The final choice was made on clinical and statistical grounds, after debate and voting by Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society members. Crossvalidation was performed in NOR-DMARD and in Ankylosing Spondylitis Study for the Evaluation of Recombinant Infliximab Therapy, a database of patients with AS participating in a randomised placebo-controlled trial with a tumour necrosis factor blocker.

RESULTS

Four disease activity states were chosen by consensus: inactive disease, moderate, high and very high disease activity. The three cut-offs selected to separate these states were: 1.3, 2.1 and 3.5 units. Selected cut-offs for improvement were: change ≥1.1 units for clinically important improvement and change ≥2.0 units for major improvement. Results of the crossvalidation strongly supported the cut-offs.

CONCLUSIONS

Cut-off values for disease activity states and improvement using the ASDAS have been developed. They proved to have external validity and a good performance compared to existing criteria.

Treatment of ankylosing spondylitis by inhibition of tumor necrosis factor alpha

BACKGROUND

There are few effective treatments for ankylosing spondylitis, which causes substantial morbidity. Because of the central role of tumor necrosis factor alpha in the spondyloarthritides, we performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of etanercept, a recombinant human tumor necrosis factor receptor (p75):Fc fusion protein, in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.

METHODS

Forty patients with active, inflammatory ankylosing spondylitis were randomly assigned to receive twice-weekly subcutaneous injections of etanercept (25 mg) or placebo for four months. The primary end point was a composite of improvements in measures of morning stiffness, spinal pain, functioning, the patient's global assessment of disease activity, and joint swelling. Patients were allowed to continue taking nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, oral corticosteriods (< or =10 mg per day), and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs at stable doses during the trial.

RESULTS

Treatment with etanercept resulted in significant and sustained improvement. At four months, 80 percent of the patients in the etanercept group had a treatment response, as compared with 30 percent of those in the placebo group (P=0.004). Improvements over base-line values for various measures of disease activity, including morning stiffness, spinal pain, functioning, quality of life, enthesitis, chest expansion, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and C-reactive protein, were significantly greater in the etanercept group. Longitudinal analysis showed that the treatment response was rapid and did not diminish over time. Etanercept was well tolerated, with no significant differences in rates of adverse events between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with etanercept for four months resulted in rapid, significant, and sustained improvement in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.

ASDAS, a highly discriminatory ASAS-endorsed disease activity score in patients with ankylosing spondylitis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate various validity aspects of four disease activity scores (ASDAS) for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in comparison with the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), its individual components and physician and patient global assessment of disease activity.

METHODS

The analyses were performed in two cohorts of patients with AS: (1) the NOR-DMARD database which includes patients starting on a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug or tumour necrosis factor (TNF) blocker and (2) patients participating in double-blind placebo controlled randomised clinical trials with TNF blockers in four centres. Discrimination between patients with low versus high disease activity according to various definitions and between various levels of change were analysed as the standardised mean difference (difference in the group means divided by the pooled SD of the group means) and t score.

RESULTS

The four ASDAS versions were highly discriminatory in differentiating patients with different levels of disease activity and patients with different levels of change. The ASDAS scores outperformed the BASDAI and its single components in all settings: patient- or physician-based, reflecting status or change, with normal or raised C-reactive protein (CRP), in the presence or absence of peripheral arthritis. There were no major differences between the four ASDAS scores. Based on feasibility, the ASAS membership selected the ASDAS version which included back pain, duration of morning stiffness, patient global assessment, peripheral joint complaints and CRP as the preferred version.

CONCLUSIONS

The ASDAS is a validated, highly discriminatory instrument for assessing disease activity in AS, including patient-reported outcomes and CRP levels.

A randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel-group, prospective study comparing the pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of CT-P13 and innovator infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: the PLANETAS study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the pharmacokinetics (PK), safety and efficacy of innovator infliximab (INX) and CT-P13, a biosimilar to INX, in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

METHODS

Phase 1 randomised, double-blind, multicentre, multinational, parallel-group study. Patients were randomised to receive 5 mg/kg of CT-P13 (n=125) or INX (n=125). Primary endpoints were area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) at steady state and observed maximum steady state serum concentration (Cmax,ss) between weeks 22 and 30. Additional PK, efficacy endpoints, including 20% and 40% improvement response according to Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis International Working Group criteria (ASAS20 and ASAS40), and safety outcomes were also assessed.

RESULTS

Geometric mean AUC was 32 765.8 μgh/ml for CT-P13 and 31 359.3 μgh/ml for INX. Geometric mean Cmax,ss was 147.0 μg/ml for CT-P13 and 144.8 μg/ml for INX. The ratio of geometric means was 104.5% (90% CI 94% to 116%) for AUC and 101.5% (90% CI 95% to 109%) for Cmax,ss. ASAS20 and ASAS40 responses at week 30 were 70.5% and 51.8% for CT-P13 and 72.4% and 47.4% for INX, respectively. In the CT-P13 and INX groups more than one adverse event occurred in 64.8% and 63.9% of patients, infusion reactions occurred in 3.9% and 4.9%, active tuberculosis occurred in 1.6% and 0.8%, and 27.4% and 22.5% of patients tested positive for anti-drug antibodies, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The PK profiles of CT-P13 and INX were equivalent in patients with active AS. CT-P13 was well tolerated, with an efficacy and safety profile comparable to that of INX up to week 30.

Anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody secukinumab in treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Ankylosing spondylitis is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory disease characterised by spinal inflammation, progressive spinal rigidity, and peripheral arthritis. Interleukin 17 (IL-17) is thought to be a key inflammatory cytokine in the development of ankylosing spondylitis, the prototypical form of spondyloarthritis. We assessed the efficacy and safety of the anti-IL-17A monoclonal antibody secukinumab in treating patients with active ankylosing spondylitis.

METHODS

We did a randomised double-blind proof-of-concept study at eight centres in Europe (four in Germany, two in the Netherlands, and two in the UK). Patients aged 18-65 years were randomly assigned (in a 4:1 ratio) to either intravenous secukinumab (2×10 mg/kg) or placebo, given 3 weeks apart. Randomisation was done with a computer-generated block randomisation list without a stratification process. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage of patients with a 20% response according to the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society criteria for improvement (ASAS20) at week 6 (Bayesian analysis). Safety was assessed up to week 28. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00809159.

FINDINGS

37 patients with moderate-to-severe ankylosing spondylitis were screened, and 30 were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous secukinumab (n=24) or placebo (n=6). The final efficacy analysis included 23 patients receiving secukinumab and six patients receiving placebo, and the safety analysis included all 30 patients. At week 6, ASAS20 response estimates were 59% on secukinumab versus 24% on placebo (99·8% probability that secukinumab is superior to placebo). One serious adverse event (subcutaneous abscess caused by Staphylococcus aureus) occurred in the secukinumab-treated group.

INTERPRETATION

Secukinumab rapidly reduced clinical or biological signs of active ankylosing spondylitis and was well tolerated. It is the first targeted therapy that we know of that is an alternative to tumour necrosis factor inhibition to reach its primary endpoint in a phase 2 trial.

FUNDING

Novartis.

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs reduce radiographic progression in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

A 2-year randomized controlled trial was performed to test the hypothesis that long-term, continuous treatment with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), in comparison with NSAID treatment on demand only, influences radiographic progression in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

METHODS

Patients with AS (n = 215), who had previously participated in a 6-week, randomized, double-blind clinical trial that compared celecoxib, ketoprofen, and placebo, were randomly allocated to receive either continuous treatment with NSAIDs or on-demand treatment with NSAIDs for a period of 2 years. All patients began treatment with celecoxib, at a starting dosage of 100 mg twice daily; patients could increase this dosage to 200 mg twice daily or could switch to another NSAID while maintaining the same treatment strategy. Structural changes were assessed by radiographs of the lumbar and cervical spine and scored according to the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score by one observer who was blinded to the treatment strategy and temporal order of the radiographs. Statistical analyses included a between-group comparison of 1) radiographic progression scores (by Mann-Whitney U test), 2) time-averaged values of variables reflecting signs and symptoms of AS (by linear regression analysis), and 3) the frequency of reported site-specific adverse events (by chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate).

RESULTS

Complete sets of radiographs were available for 76 of the 111 patients in the continuous-treatment group and for 74 of the 104 patients in the on-demand group. The mean +/- SD scores for radiographic progression were 0.4 +/- 1.7 in the continuous-treatment group and 1.5 +/- 2.5 in the on-demand treatment group (P = 0.002). Parameters reflecting signs and symptoms were not statistically significantly different between groups. The between-group difference in radiographic progression did not disappear after adjusting for baseline values of radiographic damage or disease activity variables and for time-averaged values of disease activity variables, nor after input of missing data. Relevant adverse events tended to occur more frequently in the continuous-treatment group than in the on-demand group (for hypertension, 9% versus 3%; for abdominal pain, 11% versus 6%; for dyspepsia, 41% versus 38%), but the differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

A strategy of continuous use of NSAIDs reduces radiographic progression in symptomatic patients with AS, without increasing toxicity substantially.

ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis

OBJECTIVE

To develop evidence based recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) as a combined effort of the 'ASsessment in AS' international working group and the European League Against Rheumatism.

METHODS

Each of the 22 participants was asked to contribute up to 15 propositions describing key clinical aspects of AS management. A Delphi process was used to select 10 final propositions. A systematic literature search was then performed to obtain scientific evidence for each proposition. Outcome data for efficacy, adverse effects, and cost effectiveness were abstracted. The effect size, relative risk, number needed to treat, and incremental cost effectiveness ratio were calculated. On the basis of the search results, 10 major recommendations for the management of AS were constructed. The strength of recommendation was assessed based on the strength of the literature evidence, risk-benefit trade-off, and clinical expertise.

RESULTS

The final recommendations considered the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (conventional NSAIDs, coxibs, and co-prescription of gastroprotective agents), disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, treatments with biological agents, simple analgesics, local and systemic steroids, non-pharmacological treatment (including education, exercise, and physiotherapy), and surgical interventions. Three general recommendations were also included. Research evidence (categories I-IV) supported 11 interventions in the treatment of AS. Strength of recommendation varied, depending on the category of evidence and expert opinion.

CONCLUSION

Ten key recommendations for the treatment of AS were developed and assessed using a combination of research based evidence and expert consensus. Regular updating will be carried out to keep abreast of new developments in the management of AS.

Ankylosing spondylitis assessment group preliminary definition of short-term improvement in ankylosing spondylitis

OBJECTIVE

To develop criteria for symptomatic improvement in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), using outcome domain data from placebo-controlled clinical trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

METHODS

Patient data from 5 short-term, randomized, controlled trials were used to assess equivalence, reliability, and responsiveness of multiple items in the 5 outcome domains for AS treatment: physical function, pain, spinal mobility, patient global assessment, and inflammation. At least one measure per domain was responsive (standardized response mean of > 0.5), except for the spinal mobility domain, which was omitted from the criteria. We developed and tested candidate improvement criteria in a random two-thirds subset from the 3 largest trials and used the remaining one-third for validation. These 3 largest trials included 923 patients (631 receiving NSAIDs, 292 in placebo groups). We selected the multiple domain definition that best distinguished NSAID treatment from placebo by chi-square test and that had a placebo response rate of < or = 25%.

RESULTS

Candidate definitions were changes in single domains and in multiple measure indices, as well as combinations of improvements in multiple domains. Worsening in a domain was defined as a change for the worse of > or = 20% and a net change for the worse of > or = 10 units on a scale of 0-100. Partial remission (for comparison purposes) was defined as an end-of-trial value of < 20/100 in each of the 4 domains. Among 20 candidate criteria, change of > or = 20% and > or = 10 units in each of 3 domains and absence of worsening in the fourth discriminated best in the development subset (51% of patients improved with NSAIDs, 25% with placebo; chi2 = 36.4, P < 0.001). Results were confirmed in the validation subset. Almost all patients satisfying the definition of partial disease remission at the end of the trial had also improved by this criterion. Among all 923 patients, improvement rates using this criterion were 49% for NSAID-treated patients and 24% for placebo-treated patients.

CONCLUSION

Although further validation using data from new trials is still needed, we conclude that we have developed a clinically valid, easy-to-use measure of short-term improvement in AS.

2019 Update of the American College of Rheumatology/Spondylitis Association of America/Spondyloarthritis Research and Treatment Network Recommendations for the Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis and Nonradiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To update evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis (SpA).

METHODS

We conducted updated systematic literature reviews for 20 clinical questions on pharmacologic treatment addressed in the 2015 guidelines, and for 26 new questions on pharmacologic treatment, treat-to-target strategy, and use of imaging. New questions addressed the use of secukinumab, ixekizumab, tofacitinib, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) biosimilars, and biologic tapering/discontinuation, among others. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations and required at least 70% agreement among the voting panel.

RESULTS

Recommendations for AS and nonradiographic axial SpA are similar. TNFi are recommended over secukinumab or ixekizumab as the first biologic to be used. Secukinumab or ixekizumab is recommended over the use of a second TNFi in patients with primary nonresponse to the first TNFi. TNFi, secukinumab, and ixekizumab are favored over tofacitinib. Co-administration of low-dose methotrexate with TNFi is not recommended, nor is a strict treat-to-target strategy or discontinuation or tapering of biologics in patients with stable disease. Sulfasalazine is recommended only for persistent peripheral arthritis when TNFi are contraindicated. For patients with unclear disease activity, spine or pelvis magnetic resonance imaging could aid assessment. Routine monitoring of radiographic changes with serial spine radiographs is not recommended.

CONCLUSION

These recommendations provide updated guidance regarding use of new medications and imaging of the axial skeleton in the management of AS and nonradiographic axial SpA.

Adalimumab: long-term safety in 23 458 patients from global clinical trials in rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, psoriasis and Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

As long-term treatment with antitumour necrosis factor (TNF) drugs becomes accepted practice, the risk assessment requires an understanding of anti-TNF long-term safety. Registry safety data in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are available, but these patients may not be monitored as closely as patients in a clinical trial. Cross-indication safety reviews of available anti-TNF agents are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the long-term safety of adalimumab treatment.

METHODS

This analysis included 23 458 patients exposed to adalimumab in 71 global clinical trials in RA, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis (AS), psoriatic arthritis, psoriasis (Ps) and Crohn's disease (CD). Events per 100 patient-years were calculated using events reported after the first dose through 70 days after the last dose. Standardised incidence rates for malignancies were calculated using a National Cancer Institute database. Standardised death rates were calculated using WHO data.

RESULTS

The most frequently reported serious adverse events across indications were infections with greatest incidence in RA and CD trials. Overall malignancy rates for adalimumab-treated patients were as expected for the general population; the incidence of lymphoma was increased in patients with RA, but within the range expected in RA without anti-TNF therapy; non-melanoma skin cancer incidence was raised in RA, Ps and CD. In all indications, death rates were lower than, or equivalent to, those expected in the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of adverse events of interest through nearly 12 years of adalimumab exposure in clinical trials across indications demonstrated individual differences in rates by disease populations, no new safety signals and a safety profile consistent with known information about the anti-TNF class.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Ankylosing spondylitis: an overview

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a complex, potentially debilitating disease that is insidious in onset, progressing to radiological sacroiliitis over several years. Patients with symptomatic AS lose productivity owing to work disability and unemployment, have a substantial use of healthcare resources, and reduced quality of life. The pathogenesis of AS is poorly understood. However, immune mediated mechanisms involving human leucocyte antigen (HLA)-B27, inflammatory cellular infiltrates, cytokines (for example, tumour necrosis factor alpha and interleukin 10), and genetic and environmental factors are thought to have key roles. The detection of sacroiliitis by radiography, magnetic resonance imaging, or computed tomography in the presence of clinical manifestations is diagnostic for AS, although the presence of inflammatory back pain plus at least two other typical features of spondyloarthropathy (for example, enthesitis and uveitis) is highly predictive of early AS. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) effectively relieve inflammatory symptoms and are presently first line drug treatment. However, NSAID treatment has only a symptomatic effect and probably does not alter the disease course. For symptoms refractory to NSAIDs, second line treatments, including corticosteroids and various disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, are employed but are of limited benefit. Emerging biological therapies target the inflammatory processes underlying AS, and thus, may favourably alter the disease process, in addition to providing symptom relief.

Efficacy of certolizumab pegol on signs and symptoms of axial spondyloarthritis including ankylosing spondylitis: 24-week results of a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled Phase 3 study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol (CZP) after 24 weeks in RAPID-axSpA (NCT01087762), an ongoing Phase 3 trial in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), including patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and non-radiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA).

METHODS

Patients with active axSpA were randomised 1:1:1 to placebo, CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) or CZP 400 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W). In total 325 patients were randomised. Primary endpoint was ASAS20 (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society 20) response at week 12. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) linear.

RESULTS

Baseline disease activity was similar between AS and nr-axSpA. At week 12, ASAS20 response rates were significantly higher in CZP 200 mg Q2W and CZP 400 mg Q4W arms versus placebo (57.7 and 63.6 vs 38.3, p≤0.004). At week 24, combined CZP arms showed significant (p<0.001) differences in change from baseline versus placebo in BASFI (-2.28 vs -0.40), BASDAI (-3.05 vs -1.05), and BASMI (-0.52 vs -0.07). Improvements were observed as early as week 1. Similar improvements were reported with CZP versus placebo in both AS and nr-axSpA subpopulations. Adverse events were reported in 70.4% vs 62.6%, and serious adverse events in 4.7% vs 4.7% of All CZP versus placebo groups. No deaths or malignancies were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

CZP rapidly reduced the signs and symptoms of axSpA, with no new safety signals observed compared to the safety profile of CZP in RA. Similar improvements were observed across CZP dosing regimens, and in AS and nr-axSpA patients.

Diclofenac sodium. A reappraisal of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic efficacy

Diclofenac is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) advocated for use in painful and inflammatory rheumatic and certain non-rheumatic conditions. It is available in a number of administration forms which can be given orally, rectally or intramuscularly. Conveniently, dosage adjustments are not required in the elderly or in those patients with renal or hepatic impairment. The drug has a relatively short elimination half-life, which limits the potential for drug accumulation. In numerous clinical trials the efficacy of diclofenac is equivalent to that of the many newer and established NSAIDs with which it has been compared. As an analgesic it has a fast onset and long duration of action. When administered intramuscularly it is at least comparable to, and frequently superior to, many narcotic and spasmolytic combinations in renal and biliary colic. Extensive clinical experience has been gained with diclofenac, clearly establishing its safety profile. It is well tolerated compared with other NSAIDs and rarely produces gastrointestinal ulceration or other serious side effects. Thus, diclofenac can be considered as one of the few NSAIDs of 'first choice' in the treatment of acute and chronic painful and inflammatory conditions.