Treat to Target in Axial Spondyloarthritis: Pros, Cons, and Future Directions

How to Monitor Disease Activity of Axial Spondyloarthritis in Clinical Practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Treatment guided by periodic and quantitative data assessment results in better outcomes compared to using clinical gestalt. While validated generic as well as specific disease activity measures for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) are available, there is vast scope to improve their actual utilization in routine clinical practice. In this review, we discuss available disease activity measures for axSpA, describe results from the survey conducted among general rheumatologists as well as Spondyloarthritis Research and Treatment Network (SPARTAN) members about disease activity measurement in daily practice, and discuss ways to improve axSpA disease activity using technological advances. We also discuss the definitions of active disease and target for the treatment of axSpA.

RECENT FINDINGS

The 2019 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/Spondylitis Association of America (SAA)/Spondyloarthritis Research and Treatment Network (SPARTAN) axSpA treatment guidelines conditionally recommend the regular monitoring of disease activity using a validated measure such as Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) or Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Severity Index (ASDAS). Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS)-European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) guidelines recommend ASDAS as the most appropriate instrument for the assessment of disease activity, preferably calculated using C-reactive protein (CRP). ASAS has selected a core set of variables which were updated recently and have been endorsed by the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) group in order to bring homogeneity in assessment of axSpA. In a recent study, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) measures were able to discriminate inactive, moderate, and high-very high ASDAS activity groups. A newly developed semi-objective index P4 (pain, physical function, patient global, and physician global) correlates well with BASDAI and ASDAS in axSpA and can also be used for other rheumatic diseases in busy clinical practices. Regular disease activity monitoring is critical for long-term management of axSpA and shared decision-making. The integration of electronic health records and smart devices provides a great opportunity to capture patient-reported data. Automated capture of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) is a highly efficient way and results in consistent regular monitoring and may improve the long-term outcomes. While currently used measures focus only on musculoskeletal symptoms of axSpA, a composite disease activity measure that can also incorporate extra-articular manifestations may provide a better assessment of disease activity.

Effectiveness of bDMARDs in ankylosing spondylitis patients by biologic use: experience from the CorEvitas PsA/SpA Registry

OBJECTIVE

To describe bDMARD initiators by biologic experience among ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients and change in disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in real-world US patients.

METHODS

We included patients ≥18 years with AS based on physician diagnosis enrolled between 3/2013 and 11/2019 in the CorEvitas Psoriatic Arthritis (PSA)/Spondyloarthritis Registry (NCT02530268). Patients concurrently diagnosed with PSA were excluded. Baseline (bDMARD initiation) demographics, comorbidities, disease characteristics, treatment, and PROs were collected. Response rates and changes in disease activity and PROs between baseline and 6- and 12- month follow-up visits were calculated.

RESULTS

Of the 489 AS patients in the PsA/SpA Registry, 254 AS (52.0%) patients initiated a bDMARD at enrollment or during follow-up (total initiations: AS = 313). Of the 313 AS initiations, 179 (57.2%) had a 6-month follow-up, 122 (39.0%) had a 12-month follow-up, and 94 (30.0%) had a 6- and 12-month follow-up visit. For those AS initiators with a 6-month follow-up, the mean age was 49.1 years, 44.4% were female, and 70.4%, 47.5%, 96.1%, and 46.9% had never used cDMARDs, TNFis, non-TNFis, and bDMARDs, respectively. Of these 179 AS initiators, 20.1% and 14.0% achieved ASAS20/40, respectively. Further, only 34% achieved low disease activity (ASDAS <2.1). When stratified by biologic-naivete and biologic-experience, the ASAS 20/40 achievement rates were 26.2% and 14.7%, and 21.4% and 7.4%, respectively, for this cohort.

CONCLUSION

Although AS patients initiate bDMARDs, many do not achieve optimal treatment responses. Future research is needed to investigate the aspects associated with inadequate improvement and treatment response to bDMARDs.

Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Golimumab in Ankylosing Spondylitis Patients With Early and Late Disease Through One Year of the GO-ALIVE Study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

This post hoc analysis assessed efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) golimumab in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients with early disease (ED) versus late disease (LD).

METHODS

The phase 3, double-blind, GO-ALIVE study randomized patients to IV golimumab 2 mg/kg at weeks 0 and 4 and then every 8 weeks through week 52, or placebo at weeks 0, 4, and 12 with crossover to IV golimumab at week 16. Clinical efficacy was assessed by ≥20% improvement in Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society response criteria (ASAS20), ≥50% improvement in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI 50), and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) <1.3 (inactive disease). Using self-reported duration of inflammatory back pain (IBP), patients were grouped into quartiles: first = ED and fourth = LD. Descriptive statistics summarized efficacy and safety findings through 1 year.

RESULTS

Early disease patients (n = 60) were ~10 years younger and had shorter median AS (IBP) symptom duration (2-3 years) versus LD patients (n = 52; 21-24 years). At week 16, numerically higher proportions of golimumab- than placebo-treated patients achieved ASAS20 (ED: 71% vs. 32%; LD: 67% vs. 21%), BASDAI 50 (ED: 40% vs. 12%; LD: 33% vs. 7%), and ASDAS <1.3 (ED: 17% vs. 4%; LD 8% vs. 0%) regardless of IBP duration. Efficacy was durable through 1 year of treatment; however, response rates were numerically higher in patients with ED versus LD. Through week 60, adverse events and serious adverse events, respectively, were reported by 46% and 3% of ED patients and 61% and 2% of LD patients.

CONCLUSION

Prompt diagnosis of AS and early treatment with IV golimumab may yield more robust improvements in disease activity.

Presence of subclinical inflammation in axial spondyloarthritis patients with NSAID/anti-TNF-α drug-induced clinical remission

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the rate of subclinical inflammation in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)/anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α drug-induced clinical remission and to explore factors influencing clinical and imaging remission.

METHODS

One hundred twenty-five patients with axSpA followed up for at least 6 months were enrolled in this prospective study and randomly divided into two groups. Ninety patients were treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α or anti-TNF-α combined with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (anti-TNF-α treatment group), and thirty-five patients were treated with only NSAIDs (non anti-TNF-α treatment group). The improvements in the clinical remission rate, imaging remission rate, and disease parameters before and after the different treatments were compared. Risk factors for clinical and imaging remission were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The clinical and imaging remission rate was increased after treatment especially in the anti-TNF-α group (P < 0.001). The remission rate of imaging in the group with clinical remission was higher than that in the group with clinical non-remission (P < 0.05). After treatment, the remission rates of imaging in the clinical remission and non-remission group were significantly higher than those before treatment (P < 0.0001). The results of multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that higher CRP was a risk factor for failure of clinical remission in axSpA (OR = 2.034, 95% CI:1.595 ~ 2.617, P < 0.001), while higher ASDAScrp was a risk factor for failure of imaging remission (OR = 1.306, 95% CI:1.026 ~ 1.688, P < 0.05). Anti-TNF-α treatment was a protective factor for both clinical (OR = 0.234, 95% CI:0.091 ~ 0.605, P < 0.05) and imaging remission (OR = 0.511, 95% CI:0.286 ~ 0.914, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Even after regular treatment, some clinical remission patients continued to have evidence of subclinical inflammation. Higher CRP and ASDAScrp are risk factors for clinical and imaging non-remission in axSpA respectively, Continuous NSAID treatment (more than 1 year) can effectively improve clinical and MRI inflammation in patients, but anti-TNF-α treatment is more beneficial for clinical and imaging remission. Key Points • Some patients achieving ASDAScrp remission status continue to have inflammation when assessed with objective imaging techniques. • MRI can sensitively measure bone marrow inflammation and may provide a more accurate assessment of remission. • Controlling inflammation, especially reducing CRP and ASDAScrp levels, is a key factor for achieving clinical and imaging remission in patients with axSpA.

Early Improvements in Disease Activity Indices Predict Long-Term Clinical Remission Suggested by the Treat-to-Target Strategy in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis Receiving TNF-α Inhibitor Treatment

This study evaluated the possibility of clinical remission suggested by the treat-to-target strategy and identified predictors of clinical remission in 139 patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) receiving tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors (TNFi). Clinical remission criteria selected were AS Disease Activity Score Inactive Disease (ASDAS-ID) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) < 2 with normal C-reactive protein (CRP) levels (BASDAI-CRP). The longitudinal relationship between clinical parameters and clinical remission was assessed using generalized estimating equations (GEEs). Responders to ASDAS-ID and BASDAI-CRP increased from 32.4% to 68.9% and from 39.9% to 75.2% at months 3 and 33, respectively. Responders to ASDAS-ID and BASDAI-CRP almost overlapped. In the univariable GEE model, age and 3-month improvement in BASDAI, ASDAS-CRP, physician and patient global assessments, and spinal pain predicted clinical remission achievement, while the presence of syndesmophytes predicted ASDAS-CRP achievement, and normalized CRP at 3 months was associated with BASDAI-CRP achievement. Multivariable GEE analysis revealed age (odds ratio (OR): 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.49–0.93) and 3-month BASDAI improvement (OR: 1.70; CI, 1.19–2.41) as independent predictors of ASDAS-ID achievement and age (OR: 0.69; CI, 0.54–0.89), 3-month BASDAI improvement (OR: 2.00; CI, 1.45–2.76), and normalized CRP at 3 months (OR: 3.72; CI, 1.39–9.95) as independent predictors of BASDAI-CRP achievement.

Factors associated with remission at 5-year follow-up in recent onset axial spondyloarthritis: results from the DESIR cohort

Objective

The factors contributing to long-term remission in axial SpA (axSpA) are unclear. We aimed to characterize individuals with axSpA at the 5-year follow-up to identify baseline factors associated with remission.

Methods

We included all patients from the DESIR cohort (with recent-onset axSpA) with an available Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score–CRP (ASDAS-CRP) at 5-year follow-up. Patients in remission (ASDAS-CRP < 1.3) were compared with those with active disease by demographic, clinical, biological and imaging characteristics. A logistic model stratified on TNF inhibitor (TNFi) exposure was used.

Results

Overall, 111/449 patients (25%) were in remission after 5 years. Among those never exposed to TNFi, 31% (77/247) were in remission compared with 17% (34/202) of those exposed to TNFi. Patients in remission after 5 years were more likely to be male, HLA-B27+, have a lower BMI, and a higher education level. Baseline factors associated with 5-year remission in patients never exposed to TNFi included lower BASDAI [adjusted odds ratio (OR_a) 0.9, 95% CI: 0.8, 0.9) and history of peripheral arthritis (OR_a 2.1, 95% CI: 1.2, 5.3). In those exposed to TNFi, remission was associated with higher education level (OR_a 2.9, 95% CI: 1.6, 5.1), lower enthesitis index (OR_a 0.8, 95% CI: 0.7, 0.9), lower BASDAI (OR_a 0.9, 95% CI: 0.9, 0.9) and lower BMI (OR_a 0.8, 95% CI: 0.7, 0.9).

Conclusion

This study highlights the difficulty in achieving 5-year remission in those with recent-onset axSpA, especially for the more active cases, despite the use of TNFi. Socio-economic factors and BMI are implicated in the outcome at 5 years.