Efficacy and safety of bimekizumab in axial spondyloarthritis: results of two parallel phase 3 randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is a complex disease with diverse manifestations, for which new treatment options are warranted. BE MOBILE 1 (non-radiographic (nr)-axSpA) and BE MOBILE 2 (radiographic axSpA (r-axSpA)) are double-blind, phase 3 trials designed to evaluate efficacy and safety of bimekizumab, a novel dual interleukin (IL)-17A and IL-17F inhibitor, across the axSpA spectrum. METHODS: In parallel 52-week trials, patients with active disease were randomised 1:1 (nr-axSpA) or 2:1 (r-axSpA) to bimekizumab 160 mg every 4 weeks:placebo. From week 16, all patients received bimekizumab 160 mg every 4 weeks. Primary (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society ≥40% improvement (ASAS40)) and secondary endpoints were assessed at week 16. Here, efficacy and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are reported up to week 24. RESULTS: 254 patients with nr-axSpA and 332 with r-axSpA were randomised. At week 16, primary (ASAS40, nr-axSpA: 47.7% bimekizumab vs 21.4% placebo; r-axSpA: 44.8% vs 22.5%; p<0.001) and all ranked secondary endpoints were met in both trials. ASAS40 responses were similar across TNFi-naïve and TNFi-inadequate responder patients. Improvements were observed in Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) states and objective measures of inflammation, including high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and MRI of the sacroiliac joints and spine. Most frequent TEAEs with bimekizumab (>3%) included nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection, pharyngitis, diarrhoea, headache and oral candidiasis. More fungal infections (all localised) were observed with bimekizumab vs placebo; no major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or active tuberculosis were reported. Incidence of uveitis and adjudicated inflammatory bowel disease was low. CONCLUSIONS: Dual inhibition of IL-17A and IL-17F with bimekizumab resulted in significant and rapid improvements in efficacy outcomes vs placebo and was well tolerated in patients with nr-axSpA and r-axSpA.

Prevalence of undiagnosed axial spondyloarthritis in inflammatory bowel disease patients with chronic back pain: secondary care cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the prevalence of undiagnosed rheumatology-verified diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis (RVD-axSpA) in patients attending routine secondary care IBD clinics with chronic back pain. METHODS: Screening questionnaires were sent to consecutive patients attending IBD clinics in a university teaching hospital. Patients fulling the eligibility criteria (gastroenterologist-verified diagnosis, 18-80 years old, biologic therapy naive, no previous diagnosis of axSpA); and a moderate diagnostic probability of axSpA [self-reported chronic back pain (CBP) >3 months, onset <45 years] were invited for rheumatology assessment. This included medical review, physical examination, patient reported outcome measures, human leucocyte antigen B27, C-reactive protein, pelvic radiograph and axSpA protocol magnetic resonance imaging. A diagnosis of RVD-axSpA was made by a panel of rheumatologists. RESULTS: Of the 470 patients approached, 91 had self-reported CBP >3 months, onset <45 years, of whom 82 were eligible for clinical assessment. The prevalence of undiagnosed RVD-axSpA in patients attending IBD clinics in a secondary care setting, with self-reported CBP, onset <45 years is estimated at 5% (95% CI 1.3, 12.0) with a mean symptom duration of 12 (s.d. 12.4) years. CONCLUSION: There is a significant hidden disease burden of axSpA among IBD patients. Appropriate identification and referral from gastroenterology is needed to potentially shorten the delay to diagnosis and allow access to appropriate therapy.

Diagnostic delay is common for patients with axial spondyloarthritis: results from the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit.

OBJECTIVES: Updated guidelines for patients with axial SpA (axSpA) have sought to reduce diagnostic delay by raising awareness among clinicians. We used the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit (NEIAA) to describe baseline characteristics and time to diagnosis for newly referred patients with axSpA in England and Wales. METHODS: Analyses were performed on sociodemographic and clinical metrics, including time to referral and assessment, for axSpA patients (n = 784) recruited to the NEIAA between May 2018 and March 2020. Comparators were patients recruited to the NEIAA with RA (n = 9270) or mechanical back pain (MBP; n = 370) in the same period. RESULTS: Symptom duration prior to initial rheumatology assessment was longer in axSpA than RA patients (P < 0.001) and non-significantly longer in axSpA than MBP patients (P = 0.062): 79.7% of axSpA patients had symptom durations of >6 months, compared with 33.7% of RA patients and 76.0% of MBP patients. Following referral, the median time to initial rheumatology assessment was longer for axSpA than RA patients (36 vs 24 days; P < 0.001) and similar to MBP patients (39 days; P = 0.30). Of the subset of patients deemed eligible for early inflammatory arthritis pathway follow-up, fewer axSpA than RA patients had disease education provided (77.5% vs 97.8%) and RA patients reported a better understanding of their condition and treatment. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic delay in axSpA remains a major challenge despite improved disease understanding and updated referral guidelines. Disease education is provided to fewer axSpA than RA patients, highlighting the need for specialist clinics and support programmes for axSpA patients.

Inflammatory back pain: a concept, not a diagnosis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The concept of inflammatory back pain (IBP) describes a cohort of patients with chronic back pain (CBP) who have distinct clinical characteristics, rather than being a diagnosis in and of itself. IBP is a common and important feature of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) but this is not the only differential. This review examines the utility of IBP in both primary and secondary care settings. RECENT FINDINGS: There are a number of suggested referral strategies for patients with suspected axSpA that include IBP. These strategies attempt to strike a balance between ensuring potential axSpA patients are not overlooked, whilst simultaneously not overwhelming secondary care services. Their success relies on the clinicians who first encounter these patients being familiar with IBP as a concept; however, it is still poorly recognized by many healthcare professionals. IBP may be helpful as part of a referral strategy; however, other clinical features, laboratory investigations and radiology must be incorporated for the final diagnostic outcome in axSpA. SUMMARY: Delayed diagnosis is a major clinical problem in axSpA and is associated with worse clinical outcomes. When recognized and utilized correctly, IBP can be a useful tool to promote prompt referral to rheumatology services.

Maintenance of clinical remission in early axial spondyloarthritis following certolizumab pegol dose reduction.

BACKGROUND: The best strategy for maintaining clinical remission in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) has not been defined. C-OPTIMISE compared dose continuation, reduction and withdrawal of the tumour necrosis factor inhibitor certolizumab pegol (CZP) following achievement of sustained remission in patients with early axSpA. METHODS: C-OPTIMISE was a two-part, multicentre phase 3b study in adults with early active axSpA (radiographic or non-radiographic). During the 48-week open-label induction period, patients received CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W). At Week 48, patients in sustained remission (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) <1.3 at Weeks 32/36 and 48) were randomised to double-blind CZP 200 mg Q2W (full maintenance dose), CZP 200 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W; reduced maintenance dose) or placebo (withdrawal) for a further 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was remaining flare-free (flare: ASDAS ≥2.1 at two consecutive visits or ASDAS >3.5 at any time point) during the double-blind period. RESULTS: At Week 48, 43.9% (323/736) patients achieved sustained remission, of whom 313 were randomised to CZP full maintenance dose, CZP reduced maintenance dose or placebo. During Weeks 48 to 96, 83.7% (87/104), 79.0% (83/105) and 20.2% (21/104) of patients receiving the full maintenance dose, reduced maintenance dose or placebo, respectively, were flare-free (p<0.001 vs placebo in both CZP groups). Responses in radiographic and non-radiographic axSpA patients were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with early axSpA who achieve sustained remission at 48 weeks can reduce their CZP maintenance dose; however, treatment should not be completely discontinued due to the high risk of flare following CZP withdrawal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02505542, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Smoking in spondyloarthritis: unravelling the complexities.

Tobacco smoking is a major threat to health. There is no doubt about the need to promote and support cessation at every opportunity. Smoking has a clear role in RA, but what evidence is there that the same relationship exists in SpA? In this review, we examine (the less cited) paradoxes and contradictions in the existing axial SpA (axSpA) and PsA literature; for example, smoking appears to be 'protective' for some axSpA manifestations. We also highlight findings from higher quality evidence: smoking is associated with increased risk of PsA and the risk of psoriasis in axSpA. The relationship between smoking and SpA is far from simple. Our aim is to highlight the harms of smoking in SpA and bring attention to inconsistencies in the literature to inform further research.

Defining the target: clinical aims in axial spondyloarthritis.

Treat-to-target (T2T) is an emerging treatment paradigm in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), originally based on evidence from other inflammatory conditions, which aims to direct therapy to a clear target such as disease remission or low disease activity, with the ultimate goal of maximizing quality of life in affected individuals. The 2016 update of the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society/EULAR guidelines for axSpA have recommended that treatment should be guided according to a predefined target but controversy remains as to what this target should be. An international task force has recommended remission or inactive disease as the desired outcome; however, there are many disease outcome measures developed for use in clinical practice in axSpA and the question remains of which is the most appropriate to use. Another important consideration when discussing the T2T paradigm is when to intervene. Although evidence is limited in this respect, the available data suggest that therapy should be commenced at an early stage of the disease, when the process of bone repair expected to occur after an inflammatory phase has not yet started. It has also been argued that the success of the T2T paradigm may depend more on the treatment strategy than the individual therapies utilized. This article will explore the feasibility of using a T2T approach in axSpA clinical practice, the utilization of new composite outcome measures of disease activity such as the ASDAS, and the validity of different treatment strategies to allow for a T2T intervention in these patients.

The clinical utility of human leucocyte antigen B27 in axial spondyloarthritis.

The association between HLA-B27 and AS was first established in the early 1970s. Since then, our understanding of this disease has changed, such that we now recognize AS to be the extreme of the clinical phenotype within a disease spectrum known as axial SpA (axSpA). Recent advances in therapeutic options have driven the need for earlier diagnosis and many screening strategies have been proposed to facilitate this. In parallel, our understanding of axSpA genetics, and especially the contribution of HLA-B27, has expanded. In this article we will present and discuss the evidence supporting the use of HLA-B27 in clinical practice. We will briefly summarize the evolution of the concept of axSpA, the prevalence of HLA-B27 and axSpA and the potential role of HLA-B27 in the aetiopathogenesis of axSpA and focus on the utility of HLA-B27 in everyday clinical practice.

Services for spondyloarthritis: a survey of patients and rheumatologists.

Objectives: There have been significant advances in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), with implications for service delivery. We evaluated the state of axSpA rheumatology services and how people with axSpA perceive their care. Methods: An online patient survey was emailed to all members of the National Ankylosing Spondylitis Society and advertised widely via social media. Separately, a Web-based questionnaire about axSpA services was sent to rheumatologists at all 172 acute hospital trusts in the UK. Results: From the National Ankylosing Spondylitis Society survey, data for 1979 surveys (56% males) were available for analysis. The majority of respondents had longstanding disease and identified their diagnosis as AS, with only 44% aware of the term axSpA. Eighty-two per cent of respondents were currently attending a rheumatologist, with 43% on biologic agents. Satisfaction scores for rheumatology care were high. Respondents' concerns included access during disease flares and adverse effects of analgesics. From the rheumatology survey, the concept and terminology of axSpA was widely accepted by respondents (88%). The majority of centres had at least one rheumatologist with a specialist interest in axSpA (62%), dedicated axSpA clinics (58%) or a multidisciplinary team for axSpA (64%). BASDAI (99%), BASFI (74%) and BASMI (65%) were routinely performed. All centres had access to MRI scans, but scanning protocols varied and were often sub-optimal. Conclusion: Although overall satisfaction with rheumatology care was high, the results indicate significant unmet patient needs and discrepancies in service provision. This information will inform the development of quality standards for axSpA in order to improve quality and deliver equitable care for all patients.

Influence of co-morbid fibromyalgia on disease activity measures and response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in axial spondyloarthritis: results from a UK national register.

Objective: To quantify the extent to which co-morbid FM is associated with higher disease activity, worse quality of life (QoL) and poorer response to TNF inhibitors (TNFis) in patients with axial SpA. Methods: A prospective study recruiting across 83 centres in the UK. Clinical information and patient-reported measures were available, including 2011 criteria for FM. Multivariable linear regression was used to model the effect of meeting the FM criteria on disease activity, QoL and response to TNFis. Results: A total of 1757 participants were eligible for analyses, of whom 22.1% met criteria for FM. Those with co-morbid FM criteria had higher disease activity [BASDAI average difference FM+ - FM- 1.04 (95% CI 0.75, 1.33)] and worse QoL [Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life score difference 1.42 (95% CI 0.88, 1.96)] after adjusting for demographic, clinical and lifestyle factors. Among 291 participants who commenced biologic therapy, BASDAI scores in those with co-morbid FM were 2.0 higher at baseline but decreased to 1.1 higher at 12 months. There was no significant difference in the likelihood of meeting Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society 20 criteria at 12 months. Less improvement in disease activity and QoL over 3 months of TNFi therapy was most strongly related to high scores on the FM criteria symptom severity scale component. Conclusion: Fulfilling criteria for FM has a modest impact on the assessment of axial SpA disease activity and QoL and does not significantly influence response to biologic therapy. Those with a high symptom severity scale on FM assessment may benefit from additional specific management for FM.

Tumour necrosis factor inhibitor survival and predictors of response in axial spondyloarthritis-findings from a United Kingdom cohort.

Objectives: To analyse long-term survival and efficacy of TNFi, reasons for switching or discontinuing, baseline predictors of response and remission in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) patients in a UK cohort. Methods: All patients with a physician-verified diagnosis of axSpA attending two specialist centres who fulfilled the eligibility criteria for TNFi were included. Routinely recorded patient data were reviewed retrospectively. Initial TNFi was recorded as the index drug. Results: Six hundred and fifty-one patients (94% AS) were included; adalimumab (n = 332), etanercept (n = 205), infliximab (n = 51), golimumab (n = 40) and certolizumab pegol (n = 23) were index TNFi. The mean (s.d.) duration from symptom onset to time of diagnosis was 8.6 (8.7) years and mean (s.d.) duration from diagnosis to TNFi initiation was 12.6 (11.5) years. A total of 224 (34.4%) stopped index TNFi, and 105/224 switched to a second TNFi. Median drug survival for index and second TNFi were 10.2 years (95% CI: 8.8, 11.6 years) and 5.5 years (95% CI: 2.7, 8.3 years), respectively (P < 0.05). Survival rates were not influenced by choice of TNFi. HLA-B27 predicted BASDAI50 and/or two or more point reduction within 6 months and long-term drug survival (P < 0.05). Low disease activity was predicted by non-smoking and low baseline BASDAI (P < 0.05). Conclusion: We have observed good TNFi survival rates in axSpA patients treated in a real-life setting. This is best for first TNFi and not influenced by drug choice.

Should axial spondyloarthritis without radiographic changes be treated with anti-TNF agents?

A spectrum of disease extends beyond the rigid confines of ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) encompasses non-radiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA) in individuals without established radiographic changes but with other clinical/imaging axSpA features and AS in those with definite sacroiliac joint changes on pelvic X-rays. A broad consensus about the management of nr-axSpA is emerging among clinicians, but the evidence base remains open to question. To explore whether nr-axSpA and AS should be treated similarly, we examined the literature on their prevalence, natural history, disease burden, and treatment. There is strong evidence that nr-axSpA and AS are expressions of the same disease. Approximately 10% of patients with nr-axSpA will develop radiographic disease over 2 years; after >20 years, the figure may exceed 80%. Nr-axSpA patients have lower CRP and less spinal inflammation on MRI than AS patients but similar disease activity, pain, and quality-of-life impairment. Most patients with nr-axSpA manage well with conservative treatment, but a minority has severe disabling symptoms. Anti-TNF therapy has demonstrated similar efficacy and safety in nr-axSpA and AS. Current evidence does not clearly indicate that anti-TNF treatment can inhibit or limit bony progression of AS, the basis of conservative and anti-TNF treatment is control of symptoms and function. For some patients with nr-axSpA, the need for powerful treatments is as great as in some with AS; thus, treatment of axSpA should be consistent across the axSpA spectrum with anti-TNF agents being available, irrespective of radiographic change, according to the same criteria as those applied to AS.

The prevalence of axial spondyloarthritis in the UK: a cross-sectional cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate prevalence data are important when interpreting diagnostic tests and planning for the health needs of a population, yet no such data exist for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) in the UK. In this cross-sectional cohort study we aimed to estimate the prevalence of axSpA in a UK primary care population. METHODS: A validated self-completed questionnaire was used to screen primary care patients with low back pain for inflammatory back pain (IBP). Patients with a verifiable pre-existing diagnosis of axSpA were included as positive cases. All other patients meeting the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) IBP criteria were invited to undergo further assessment including MRI scanning, allowing classification according to the European Spondyloarthropathy Study Group (ESSG) and ASAS axSpA criteria, and the modified New York (mNY) criteria for ankylosing spondylitis (AS). RESULTS: Of 978 questionnaires sent to potential participants 505 were returned (response rate 51.6 %). Six subjects had a prior diagnosis of axSpA, 4 of whom met mNY criteria. Thirty eight of 75 subjects meeting ASAS IBP criteria attended review (mean age 53.5 years, 37 % male). The number of subjects satisfying classification criteria was 23 for ESSG, 3 for ASAS (2 clinical, 1 radiological) and 1 for mNY criteria. This equates to a prevalence of 5.3 % (95 % CI 4.0, 6.8) using ESSG, 1.3 % (95 % CI 0.8, 2.3) using ASAS, 0.66 % (95 % CI 0.28, 1.3) using mNY criteria in chronic back pain patients, and 1.2 % (95 % CI 0.9, 1.4) using ESSG, 0.3 % (95 % CI 0.13, 0.48) using ASAS, 0.15 % (95 % CI 0.02, 0.27) using mNY criteria in the general adult primary care population. CONCLUSIONS: These are the first prevalence estimates for axSpA in the UK, and will be of importance in planning for the future healthcare needs of this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN76873217.

The prevalence of inflammatory back pain in a UK primary care population.

OBJECTIVE: Inflammatory back pain (IBP) is the earliest and most common symptom of axial SpA. However, there is very little information about the prevalence of IBP in the UK. In this cross-sectional cohort study we examined the prevalence of IBP in a UK primary care population using three published IBP criteria. METHODS: Potential participants aged 18-80 years were identified from the records of a large general practice in Norfolk, UK, with 17 177 patients. Read codes were used to identify those who had consulted their general practitioner on at least one occasion with back pain. A self-completed screening questionnaire was sent to a sample of 978 patients, enquiring about symptoms of IBP and extra-spinal manifestations of SpA. Questionnaire responses were used to determine whether patients met the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS), Calin and Berlin IBP criteria. RESULTS: Five hundred and five completed questionnaires were returned (response rate 51.6%). The median age of respondents was 60 years [interquartile range (IQR) 48-67] and 44.8% were male. The minimum prevalence of IBP among patients with at least one previous consultation for back pain was 7.7% (95% CI 6.2, 9.5) using the ASAS criteria, 13.5% (11.5, 15.8) using the Calin criteria and 15.4% (13.3, 17.8) using the Berlin criteria. There was no significant difference in prevalence between men and women, and between different age groups. Extrapolated to the practice population as a whole, the minimum prevalence of IBP in a UK primary care population is 1.7-3.4%. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of IBP varies significantly depending on the criteria used for classification.

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the 52-Week Efficacy of Bimekizumab Versus Secukinumab and Ixekizumab for the Treatment of Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis.

INTRODUCTION: A previous network meta-analysis established 16-week relative efficacy with bimekizumab, an inhibitor of interleukin (IL)-17F in addition to IL-17A, versus other treatments for patients with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA; i.e., ankylosing spondylitis), including the IL-17A inhibitors secukinumab and ixekizumab. This matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) assessed 52-week relative efficacy of bimekizumab versus secukinumab and ixekizumab. METHODS: Individual patient data from BE MOBILE 2 (bimekizumab 160 mg; N = 220) were matched to pooled summary data from MEASURE 1/2/3/4 (secukinumab 150 mg), MEASURE 3 (secukinumab 300 mg; escalated dose for inadequate responders), COAST-V (ixekizumab) and COAST-V/-W (ixekizumab). BE MOBILE 2 patients were reweighted using propensity score weights based on age, sex, ethnicity, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) exposure, weight, baseline ASDAS and BASFI (secukinumab) and baseline BASDAI (ixekizumab), and 52-week efficacy outcomes from the trial recalculated. Odds ratios (OR) or mean difference for unanchored comparisons are reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: At week 52, MAIC demonstrated that patients may have higher likelihood of improvement in key efficacy outcomes with bimekizumab versus secukinumab 150 mg (e.g., ASAS40: [OR (95% CI): 1.48 (1.05, 2.10); p = 0.026]; effective sample size [ESS] = 177). Differences in 52-week efficacy outcomes between bimekizumab and secukinumab 300 mg dose escalation were non-significant (ESS = 120). Bimekizumab versus ixekizumab 80 mg comparisons (COAST-V only; ESS = 84) also suggested that differences were non-significant for most key efficacy outcomes. Other ixekizumab comparisons (COAST-V/-W; ESS = 45) suggested bimekizumab may have higher comparative efficacy for many of the same efficacy outcomes, however ixekizumab analyses were limited by poor population overlap, likely due to the greater proportion of patients with previous TNFi exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with bimekizumab may have a higher likelihood of achieving improved longer-term efficacy versus secukinumab 150 mg, suggesting bimekizumab may be a favorable therapeutic option for r-axSpA. Differences in efficacy outcomes with bimekizumab versus ixekizumab 80 mg were mostly non-significant, depending on the populations considered.