Molecular Profiling of Axial Spondyloarthritis Patients Reveals an Association between Innate and Adaptive Cell Populations and Therapeutic Response to Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors.

This study aims at identifying molecular biomarkers differentiating responders and non-responders to treatment with Tumor Necrosis Factor inhibitors (TNFi) among patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Whole blood mRNA and plasma proteins were measured in a cohort of biologic-naïve axSpA patients (n = 35), pre and post (14 weeks) TNFi treatment with adalimumab. Differential expression analysis was used to identify the most enriched pathways and in predictive models to distinguish responses to TNFi. A treatment-associated signature suggests a reduction in inflammatory activity. We found transcripts and proteins robustly differentially expressed between baseline and week 14 in responders. C-reactive protein (CRP) and Haptoglobin (HP) proteins showed strong and early decrease in the plasma of axSpA patients, while a cluster of apolipoproteins (APOD, APOA2, APOA1) showed increased expression at week 14. Responders to TNFi treatment present higher levels of markers of innate immunity at baseline, and lower levels of adaptive immunity markers, particularly B-cells. A logistic regression model incorporating ASDAS-CRP, gender, and AFF3, the top differentially expressed gene at baseline, enabled an accurate prediction of response to adalimumab in our cohort (AUC = 0.97). In conclusion, innate and adaptive immune cell type composition at baseline may be a major contributor to response to adalimumab in axSpA patients. A model including clinical and gene expression variables should also be considered.

Determinants of health-related quality of life and global functioning and health in axSpA, pSpA, and PsA: results from the ASAS-PerSpA study.

OBJECTIVES: We aim to identify determinants of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and global functioning and health (GH) in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), peripheral spondyloarthritis (pSpA), and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: ASAS-perSpA study data were analyzed. Models for the three patient groups were performed separately to explore factors associated with HRQoL and GH, assessed by EQ-5D and ASAS-HI, respectively. RESULTS: The analyses included 4185 patients: 2719 with axSpA, 433 with pSpA, and 1033 with PsA.In axSpA, disease activity (DA) (ß=-0.061), physical function (ß=-0.041), female sex (ß=-0.019), and fibromyalgia (ß=-0.068) were associated with worse HRQoL; age (ß = 0.001) and university education (ß = 0.014) with better HRQoL. In pSpA, DA (ß=-0.04) and physical function (ß=-0.054) were associated with worse HRQoL. In PsA, DA (ß=-0.045), physical function (ß=-0.053), axial disease (ß=-0.041), and female sex (ß=-0.028) were associated with worse HRQoL.In axSpA, DA (ß = 0.889), physical function (ß = 0.887), peripheral disease (ß = 0.564), female sex (ß = 0.812) and fibromyalgia (ß = 1.639) were associated with worse GH; age (ß=-0.013) and university education (ß=-0.274) with better GH. In pSpA, physical function (ß = 1.142), and female sex (ß = 1.060) were associated with worse GH; university education (ß=-0.611) with better GH. In PsA, DA (ß = 0.703), physical function (ß = 1.025), axial involvement (ß = 0.659), female sex (ß = 0.924), and fibromyalgia (ß = 1.387) were associated with worse GH; age (ß=-0.024) and university education (ß=-0.856) with better GH. CONCLUSIONS: DA and physical function are major HRQoL and GH determinants across spondyloarthritis types, and clinical characteristics and sociodemographic factors play an important role, highlighting the importance of a holistic approach for individual patients.

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.

Identification of clinical phenotypes of peripheral involvement in patients with spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis: a cluster analysis in the worldwide ASAS-PerSpA study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify clusters of peripheral involvement according to the specific location of peripheral manifestations (ie, arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis) in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) including psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and to evaluate whether these clusters correspond with the clinical diagnosis of a rheumatologist. METHODS: Cross-sectional study with 24 participating countries. Consecutive patients diagnosed by their rheumatologist as PsA, axial SpA or peripheral SpA were enrolled. Four different cluster analyses were conducted: one using information on the specific location from all the peripheral manifestations, and a cluster analysis for each peripheral manifestation, separately. Multiple correspondence analyses and k-means clustering methods were used. Distribution of peripheral manifestations and clinical characteristics were compared across the different clusters. RESULTS: The different cluster analyses performed in the 4465 patients clearly distinguished a predominantly axial phenotype (cluster 1) and a predominantly peripheral phenotype (cluster 2). In the predominantly axial phenotype, hip involvement and lower limb large joint arthritis, heel enthesitis and lack of dactylitis were more prevalent. In the predominantly peripheral phenotype, different subgroups were distinguished based on the type and location of peripheral involvement: a predominantly involvement of upper versus lower limbs joints, a predominantly axial enthesitis versus peripheral enthesitis, and predominantly finger versus toe involvement in dactylitis. A poor agreement between the clusters and the rheumatologist's diagnosis as well as with the classification criteria was found. CONCLUSION: These results suggest the presence of two main phenotypes (predominantly axial and predominantly peripheral) based on the presence and location of the peripheral manifestations.

GO-DACT: a phase 3b randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of GOlimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) versus placebo plus MTX in improving DACTylitis in MTX-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of golimumab in combination with methotrexate (MTX) versus MTX monotherapy in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) dactylitis. METHODS: Multicentre, investigator-initiated, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-design phase 3b trial in 11 Portuguese rheumatology centres. Patients with PsA along with active dactylitis and naive to MTX and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were randomly assigned to golimumab or placebo, both in combination with MTX. The primary endpoint was Dactylitis Severity Score (DSS) change from baseline to week 24. Key secondary endpoints included DSS and Leeds Dactylitis Index (LDI) response, and changes from baseline in the LDI and MRI dactylitis score. Analysis was by intention-to-treat for the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients received golimumab plus MTX and 23 MTX monotherapy for 24 weeks. One patient from each arm discontinued. Patient inclusion was halted at 50% planned recruitment due to a favourable interim analysis. Median baseline DSS was 6 in both arms. By week 24, patients treated with golimumab plus MTX exhibited significantly greater improvements in DSS relative to MTX monotherapy (median change of 5 vs 2 points, respectively; p=0.026). In the golimumab plus MTX arm, significantly higher proportions of patients achieved at least 50% or 70% improvement in DSS and 20%, 50% or 70% improvement in LDI in comparison to MTX monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of golimumab and MTX as first-line bDMARD therapy is superior to MTX monotherapy for the treatment of PsA dactylitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02065713.

2016 update of the ASAS-EULAR management recommendations for axial spondyloarthritis.

To update and integrate the recommendations for ankylosing spondylitis and the recommendations for the use of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) into one set applicable to the full spectrum of patients with axSpA. Following the latest version of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Standardised Operating Procedures, two systematic literature reviews first collected the evidence regarding all treatment options (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) that were published since 2009. After a discussion of the results in the steering group and presentation to the task force, overarching principles and recommendations were formulated, and consensus was obtained by informal voting. A total of 5 overarching principles and 13 recommendations were agreed on. The first three recommendations deal with personalised medicine including treatment target and monitoring. Recommendation 4 covers non-pharmacological management. Recommendation 5 describes the central role of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as first-choice drug treatment. Recommendations 6-8 define the rather modest role of analgesics, and disprove glucocorticoids and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for axSpA patents with predominant axial involvement. Recommendation 9 refers to biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) including TNFi and IL-17 inhibitors (IL-17i) for patients with high disease activity despite the use (or intolerance/contraindication) of at least two NSAIDs. In addition, they should either have an elevated C reactive protein and/or definite inflammation on MRI and/or radiographic evidence of sacroiliitis. Current practice is to start with a TNFi. Switching to another TNFi or an IL-17i is recommended in case TNFi fails (recommendation 10). Tapering, but not stopping a bDMARD, can be considered in patients in sustained remission (recommendation 11). The final two recommendations (12, 13) deal with surgery and spinal fractures. The 2016 Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society-EULAR recommendations provide up-to-date guidance on the management of patients with axSpA.

Comparative Effectiveness of Tocilizumab and TNF Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: Data from the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register, Reuma.pt.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of TNF inhibitors (TNFi) and tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment, according to different response criteria. METHODS: We included RA patients registered in the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register treated with TNFi or tocilizumab for at least 6 months, between January 2008 and July 2013. We assessed remission/low disease activity (LDA) at 6 months according to DAS28, CDAI, and SDAI, as well as Boolean ACR/EULAR remission and EULAR response rate, adjusting for measured confounders. RESULTS: Tocilizumab-treated patients (n = 95) presented higher baseline disease activity and were less frequently naïve to biologics compared to TNFi users (n = 429). Multivariate logistic regression analysis including the propensity score for receiving tocilizumab showed that patients treated with tocilizumab were more likely to achieve remission or LDA according to DAS28 (OR = 11.0/6.2, 95% CI 5.6-21.6/3.2-12.0), CDAI (OR = 2.8/2.6, 95% CI 1.2-6.5/1.3-5.5), or SDAI (OR = 3.6/2.5, 95% CI 1.5-8.7/1.1-5.5), as well as a good EULAR response (OR = 6.4, 95% CI 3.4-12.0). However, both groups did not differ in Boolean remission (OR = 1.9, 95% CI 0.8-4.8) or good/moderate EULAR response (OR = 1.8, 95% CI 0.8-4.5). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TNFi, tocilizumab was associated with greater likelihood of achieving DAS28, CDAI, and SDAI remission/LDA and EULAR good response. Boolean remission and EULAR good/moderate response did not differ significantly between groups.

Comparative effectiveness and predictors of response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitor therapies in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab are effective TNF inhibitors (TNFis) in the treatment of RA, but no randomized clinical trials have compared the three agents. Prior observational data are not consistent. We compared their effectiveness over 1 year in a prospective cohort. METHODS: Analyses were performed on subjects' first episode of TNFi use in the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register, Reuma.pt. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with European League Against Rheumatism good response sustained at two consecutive observations separated by 3 months during the first year of TNFi use. Comparisons were performed using conventional adjusted logistic regression, as well as matching subjects across the three agents using a propensity score. In addition, baseline predictors of treatment response to TNFi were identified. RESULTS: The study cohort included 617 RA patients, 250 starting etanercept, 206 infliximab and 161 adalimumab. Good response was achieved by 59.6% for adalimumab, 59.2% for etanercept and 51.9% for infliximab (P = 0.21). The modelled probability of good response did not significantly differ across agents (etanercept vs adalimumab OR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.55, 1.71; etanercept vs infliximab OR = 1.25, 95% CI 0.74, 2.12; infliximab vs adalimumab OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.47, 1.36). Matched propensity score analyses also showed no significant treatment response differences. Greater educational attainment was a predictor of better response, while smoking, presence of ACPA, glucocorticoid use and worse physician assessment of disease activity at baseline each predicted a reduced likelihood of treatment response. CONCLUSION: Over 1 year, we found no difference in effectiveness between adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab.

Differential features between primary ankylosing spondylitis and spondylitis associated with psoriasis and inflammatory bowel disease.

OBJECTIVE: To describe differential characteristics of axial involvement in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) as compared with that seen in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in a cohort of Ibero-American patients. METHODS: This study included 2044 consecutive patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA; ESSG criteria). Demographic, clinical, disease activity, functional ability, quality of life, work status, radiologic, and therapeutic data were evaluated and collected by RESPONDIA members from different Ibero-American countries between June and December 2006. Patients selected for analysis met modified New York criteria (mNY) for AS. RESULTS: A total of 1264 patients met the New York criteria for AS: 1072 had primary AS, 147 had psoriatic, and 45 had IBD-associated spondylitis. Median disease duration was comparable among the 3 patient groups. Patients with primary AS were significantly younger (p = 0.01) and presented a higher frequency of males (p = 0.01) than the other 2 groups. Axial manifestations such as inflammatory back pain and sacroiliac pain were significantly more frequent in patients with primary AS (p = 0.05) versus other groups, whereas frequency of dactylitis, enthesitis, and peripheral arthritis was more common in patients with psoriatic spondylitis (p = 0.05). Spinal mobility was significantly more limited in patients with primary AS versus the other 2 groups (p = 0.0001). Radiologic changes according to BASRI total score were equally significant in primary AS. Disease activity (BASDAI), functional ability (BASFI), and quality of life (ASQoL) scores were comparable in the 3 groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with primary AS had more severe axial involvement than those with spondylitis associated with psoriasis or IBD. Functional capacity, disease activity, and quality of life were comparable among the groups studied.