Autoantibodies against chemokines post-SARS-CoV-2 infection correlate with disease course.

Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 associates with diverse symptoms, which can persist for months. While antiviral antibodies are protective, those targeting interferons and other immune factors are associated with adverse coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. Here we discovered that antibodies against specific chemokines were omnipresent post-COVID-19, were associated with favorable disease outcome and negatively correlated with the development of long COVID at 1 yr post-infection. Chemokine antibodies were also present in HIV-1 infection and autoimmune disorders, but they targeted different chemokines compared with COVID-19. Monoclonal antibodies derived from COVID-19 convalescents that bound to the chemokine N-loop impaired cell migration. Given the role of chemokines in orchestrating immune cell trafficking, naturally arising chemokine antibodies may modulate the inflammatory response and thus bear therapeutic potential.

Susceptibility to COVID-19 and Immunologic Response to Vaccination in Patients With Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases.

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are a highly heterogeneous group of diseases that share a common etiology of immune dysregulation, such as rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, and psoriasis, among others. It is estimated that the prevalence of IMIDs ranges between 5% and 7% in developed countries. As current management of IMIDs includes the use of immunomodulatory medications, the resulting weakened immune response can increase the risk of infection, including with SARS-CoV-2 (the causative agent of COVID-19) and reduce response to vaccination, placing these individuals at continued risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19. In this article, we summarize the current literature related to COVID-19 outcomes and the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination among patients with rheumatologically dominated IMIDs, as well as the effect of immunomodulatory therapies on these outcomes. We conclude by providing current COVID-19 vaccination recommendations for individuals with IMID.

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.

Biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs are equally effective in psoriatic arthritis patients with low and high joint counts.

OBJECTIVE: A lack of representation in pivotal trials currently limits guidance for the use of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients with a low number of actively inflamed joints. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a first bDMARD in PsA patients with low vs high number of affected joints. METHODS: PsA patients with available 66/68 joint count assessments were divided into low joint count (LJC) patients when presenting with <3 tender or < 3 swollen joints or high joint count patients (HJC) with > =3 joints in both categories. We studied drug retention as a joint count independent effectiveness variable in LJC and HJC patients in univariate and multivariable adjusted Cox regression models. RESULTS: 197 LJC patients differed not only in joint counts, but also had lower enthesitis scores, less often dactylitis, less disability and a better health related quality of life at first bDMARD initiation than 190 HJC patients. However, LJC were less often on conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs. Despite these differences at baseline, bDMARD retention was not significantly different between LJC and HJC in both crude and adjusted analyses (Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.09 [0.76-1.58], p= 0.52). Furthermore, bDMARD retention was significantly better (HR 0.63 [0.47-0.85], p< 0.002) when administered with csDMARD co-therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Biological DMARDs were similarly effective in terms of drug retention in patients with low and high joint counts. In the setting of absent remission and a significant disease burden, bDMARDs should not be withheld from patients because they exhibit only a low joint count.

Second and third TNF inhibitors in European patients with axial spondyloarthritis: Effectiveness and impact of the reason for switching.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate real-world effectiveness of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and the association with 1) treatment line (second and third TNFi-series) and 2) reason for withdrawal from the preceding TNFi (lack of efficacy (LOE) versus adverse events (AE)). METHODS: Prospectively collected routine care data from 12 European registries were pooled. Rates for 12-month drug retention and 6-month remission (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score C-reactive protein inactive disease (ASDAS-ID)) were assessed in second and third TNFi-series and stratified by withdrawal reason. RESULTS: We included 8254 s and 2939 third TNFi-series; 12-month drug retention rates were similar (71%). Six-month ASDAS-ID rates were higher for the second (23%) than third TNFi (16%). Twelve-month drug retention rates for patients withdrawing from the preceding TNFi due to AE versus LOE were similar for the second (68% and 67%) and third TNFi (both 68%), while for the second TNFi, rates were lower in primary than secondary non-responders (LOE < 26 versus ≥26 weeks) (58% versus 71%, p< 0.001). Six-month ASDAS-ID rates for the second TNFi were higher if the withdrawal reason was AE (27%) versus LOE (17%), p< 0.001, while similar for the third TNFi (19% versus 13%, p= 0.20). CONCLUSION: A similar proportion of axSpA patients remained on a second and third TNFi after one year, but with low remission rates for the third TNFi. Remission rates on the second TNFi (but not the third) were higher if the withdrawal reason from the preceding TNFi was AE versus LOE.

The impact of a csDMARD in combination with a TNF inhibitor on drug retention and clinical remission in axial spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Many axial spondylarthritis (axSpA) patients receive a conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD) in combination with a TNF inhibitor (TNFi). However, the value of this co-therapy remains unclear. The objectives were to describe the characteristics of axSpA patients initiating a first TNFi as monotherapy compared with co-therapy with csDMARD, to compare one-year TNFi retention and remission rates, and to explore the impact of peripheral arthritis. METHODS: Data was collected from 13 European registries. One-year outcomes included TNFi retention and hazard ratios (HR) for discontinuation with 95% CIs. Logistic regression was performed with adjusted odds ratios (OR) of achieving remission (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS)-CRP < 1.3 and/or BASDAI < 2) and stratified by treatment. Inter-registry heterogeneity was assessed using random-effect meta-analyses, combined results were presented when heterogeneity was not significant. Peripheral arthritis was defined as ≥1 swollen joint at baseline (=TNFi start). RESULTS: Amongst 24 171 axSpA patients, 32% received csDMARD co-therapy (range across countries: 13.5% to 71.2%). The co-therapy group had more baseline peripheral arthritis and higher CRP than the monotherapy group. One-year TNFi-retention rates (95% CI): 79% (78, 79%) for TNFi monotherapy vs 82% (81, 83%) with co-therapy (P < 0.001). Remission was obtained in 20% on monotherapy and 22% on co-therapy (P < 0.001); adjusted OR of 1.16 (1.07, 1.25). Remission rates at 12 months were similar in patients with/without peripheral arthritis. CONCLUSION: This large European study of axial SpA patients showed similar one-year treatment outcomes for TNFi monotherapy and csDMARD co-therapy, although considerable heterogeneity across countries limited the identification of certain subgroups (e.g. peripheral arthritis) that may benefit from co-therapy.

European bio-naïve spondyloarthritis patients initiating TNF inhibitor: time trends in baseline characteristics, treatment retention and response.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate time trends in baseline characteristics and retention, remission and response rates in bio-naïve axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients initiating TNF inhibitor (TNFi) treatment. METHODS: Prospectively collected data on bio-naïve axSpA and PsA patients from routine care in 15 European countries were pooled. Three cohorts were defined according to year of TNFi initiation: A (1999-2008), B (2009-2014) and C (2015-2018). Retention, remission and response rates were assessed at 6, 12 and 24 months. RESULTS: In total, 27 149 axSpA and 17 446 PsA patients were included. Cohort A patients had longer disease duration compared with B and C. In axSpA, cohort A had the largest proportion of male and HLA-B27 positive patients. In PsA, baseline disease activity was highest in cohort A. Retention rates in axSpA/PsA were highest in cohort A and differed only slightly between B and C. For all cohorts, disease activity decreased markedly from 0 to 6 months. In axSpA, disease activity at 24 months was highest in cohort A, where also remission and response rates were lowest. In PsA, remission rates at 6 and 12 months tended to be lowest in cohort A. Response rates were at all time points comparable across cohorts, and less between-cohort disease activity differences were seen at 24 months. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that over the past decades, clinicians have implemented more aggressive treatment strategies in spondyloarthritis. This was illustrated by shorter disease duration at treatment initiation, decreased retention rates and higher remission rates during recent years.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the disease course of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases: results from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether the transient reduction in rheumatology services imposed by virus containment measures during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with disease worsening in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: Patient-reported disease activity assessed during face-to-face visits and/or via a smartphone application were compared between three periods of each 2 months duration (before, during and after the COVID-19-wave) from January to June 2020 in 666 patients with axSpA, RA and PsA in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort. RESULTS: The number of consultations dropped by 52%, whereas the number of remote assessments increased by 129%. The proportion of patients with drug non-compliance slightly increased during the pandemic, the difference reaching statistical significance in axSpA (19.9% vs 13.2% before the pandemic, p=0.003). The proportion of patients with disease flares remained stable (<15%). There was no increase in mean values of the Bath Ankylosing Disease Activity Index, the Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index-5 and the Patient Global Assessment in patients with axSpA, RA and PsA, respectively. CONCLUSION: A short interruption of in-person patient-rheumatologist interactions had no major detrimental impact on the disease course of axSpA, RA and PsA as assessed by patient-reported outcomes.

Effectiveness and treatment retention of TNF inhibitors when used as monotherapy versus comedication with csDMARDs in 15 332 patients with psoriatic arthritis. Data from the EuroSpA collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Comedication with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) during treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) is extensively used in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), although the additive benefit remains unclear. We aimed to compare treatment outcomes in patients with PsA treated with TNFi and csDMARD comedication versus TNFi monotherapy. METHODS: Patients with PsA from 13 European countries who initiated a first TNFi in 2006-2017 were included. Country-specific comparisons of 1 year TNFi retention were performed by csDMARD comedication status, together with HRs for TNFi discontinuation (comedication vs monotherapy), adjusted for age, sex, calendar year, disease duration and Disease Activity Score with 28 joints (DAS28). Adjusted ORs of clinical remission (based on DAS28) at 12 months were calculated. Between-country heterogeneity was assessed using random-effect meta-analyses, combined results were presented when heterogeneity was not significant. Secondary analyses stratified according to TNFi subtype (adalimumab/infliximab/etanercept) and restricted to methotrexate as comedication were performed. RESULTS: In total, 15 332 patients were included (62% comedication, 38% monotherapy). TNFi retention varied across countries, with significant heterogeneity precluding a combined estimate. Comedication was associated with better remission rates, pooled OR 1.25 (1.12-1.41). Methotrexate comedication was associated with improved remission for adalimumab (OR 1.45 (1.23-1.72)) and infliximab (OR 1.55 (1.21-1.98)) and improved retention for infliximab. No effect of comedication was demonstrated for etanercept. CONCLUSION: This large observational study suggests that, as used in clinical practice, csDMARD and TNFi comedication are associated with improved remission rates, and specifically, comedication with methotrexate increases remission rates for both adalimumab and infliximab.

Discontinuation of biologic DMARDs in a real-world population of patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission: outcome and risk factors.

OBJECTIVES: Data from randomized controlled trials have shown the feasibility of discontinuation of bDMARD therapy in patients with RA that have reached remission. Criteria for selecting patients that are likely to remain in remission are still incompletely defined. We aimed to identify predictors of successful discontinuation of bDMARD therapy in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management (SCQM) registry, a real-world cohort of RA patients. METHODS: RA patients in DAS28-ESR remission who stopped bDMARD/tsDMARD treatment were included. Loss of remission was defined as a DAS28-ESR > 2.6 or restart of a bDMARD/tsDMARD. Time to loss of remission was the main outcome. Kaplan-Meier methods were applied and Cox regression was used for multivariable analyses adjusting for confounding factors. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. RESULTS: A total of 318 patients in a bDMARD/tsDMARD-free remission were followed between 1997 and 2017. In total, 241 patients (76%) lost remission after a median time of 0.9 years (95% CI: 0.7, 1.0). The time to loss of remission was shorter in women, in patients with a longer disease duration >4yrs and in patients who did not meet clinical disease activity index (CDAI) remission criteria at baseline. Remission was longer in patients with csDMARD therapy during b/tsDMARD free remission [hazard ratio (HR) 0.8, P =0.05, 95% CI: 0.6, 1.0]. CONCLUSION: In a real-world patient population, the majority of patients who discontinued b/tsDMARD treatment lost remission within <1 year. Our study confirms that fulfilment of more rigorous remission criteria and csDMARD treatment increases the chance of maintaining b/tsDMARD-free remission.

Predictive value of anti-CarP and anti-PAD3 antibodies alone or in combination with RF and ACPA for the severity of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to analyse the predictive value of anti-carbamylated protein (anti-CarP) and anti-peptidyl-arginine deiminase type-3 (anti-PAD3) antibodies, alone or in combination with RF and ACPA, to identify patients at high risk of developing severe RA outcomes. METHODS: Patients within the Swiss Clinical Quality Management registry with a biobank sample were tested for RF, ACPA, anti-CarP, and anti-PAD3 antibodies. We examined the association of each autoantibody with DAS28, HAQ and radiographic damage (Ratingen) at baseline and longitudinally. RESULTS: Analyses included 851 established RA patients and 516 disease controls [axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA = 320) and PsA (196)]. Anti-CarP and anti-PAD3 antibodies were, respectively, present in 22.4% and 10.7% of the whole RA population, and in 13.2% and 3.8% of the RF and ACPA double seronegative patients. At baseline, RA patients with anti-PAD3 had higher DAS28 (4.2 vs 3.7; P= 0.005) and significantly more radiographic damage (14.9 vs 8.8; P= 0.02) than anti-PAD3-negative patients. In the ACPA-negative subgroup, baseline Ratingen scores were significantly higher in anti-PAD3-positive patients (P= 0.01). The combination of anti-PAD3, RF IgM, and ACPA was associated with significantly higher baseline radiographic scores than the double seropositive group (P= 0.04). The presence of any two of the previous autoantibodies was associated with significantly greater radiographic progression over 10 years than if all were absent (P= 0.02). There were no differences in RA outcome measures with regards to anti-CarP. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-PAD3 antibodies are associated with higher disease activity and joint damage scores in RA patients.

Effectiveness of secukinumab versus an alternative TNF inhibitor in patients with axial spondyloarthritis previously exposed to TNF inhibitors in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To compare effectiveness of treatment with secukinumab (SEC) with that of alternative tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) after withdrawal from one or more TNFis. METHODS: Patients diagnosed as having axSpA in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort were included if they had initiated SEC (n=106) or an alternative TNFi (n=284) after experiencing TNFi failure. Drug retention was investigated with matching weights propensity score (PS) analyses and multiple adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Matching weights PS-based analyses and multiple-adjusted logistic regression analyses were used to assess the proportion of patients reaching 50% reduction in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI50) at 1 year. RESULTS: SEC was more often used as third-line or later-line biological drug (76% vs 40% for TNFi). Patients starting SEC had higher BASDAI, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index and C reactive protein levels. A comparable risk of drug discontinuation was found for SEC versus TNFi (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.68 in the PS-based analysis and HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.71 in the multiple-adjusted analysis). No significant difference in BASDAI50 responses at 1 year was demonstrated between the two modes of biological drug action, with CI of estimates being, however, wide (OR for SEC vs TNFi 0.76, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.18 and 0.78, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.48 in the PS-based and the covariate-adjusted model, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest a comparable effectiveness of SEC versus an alternative TNFi after prior TNFi exposure.

EULAR/eumusc.net standards of care for rheumatoid arthritis: cross-sectional analyses of importance, level of implementation and care gaps experienced by patients and rheumatologists across 35 European countries.

OBJECTIVE: As part of European League against Rheumatism (EULAR)/European Musculoskeletal Conditions Surveillance and Information Network, 20 user-focused standards of care (SoCs) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) addressing 16 domains of care were developed. This study aimed to explore gaps in implementation of these SoCs across Europe. METHODS: Two cross-sectional surveys on the importance, level of and barriers (patients only) to implementation of each SoC (0-10, 10 highest) were designed to be conducted among patients and rheumatologists in 50 European countries. Care gaps were calculated as the difference between the actual and maximum possible score for implementation (ie, 10) multiplied by the care importance score, resulting in care gaps (0-100, maximal gap). Factors associated with the problematic care gaps (ie, gap≥30 and importance≥6 and implementation<6) and strong barriers (≥6) were further analysed in multilevel logistic regression models. RESULTS: Overall, 26 and 31 countries provided data from 1873 patients and 1131 rheumatologists, respectively. 19 out of 20 SoCs were problematic from the perspectives of more than 20% of patients, while this was true for only 10 SoCs for rheumatologists. Rheumatologists in countries with lower gross domestic product and non-European Union countries were more likely to report problematic gaps in 15 of 20 SoCs, while virtually no differences were observed among patients. Lack of relevance of some SoCs (71%) and limited time of professionals (66%) were the most frequent implementation barriers identified by patients. CONCLUSIONS: Many problematic gaps were reported across several essential aspects of RA care. More efforts need to be devoted to implementation of EULAR SoCs.

Impact of discordance between patient's and evaluator's global assessment on treatment outcomes in 14 868 patients with spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of 'patient's minus evaluator's global assessment of disease activity' (ΔPEG) at treatment initiation on retention and remission rates of TNF inhibitors (TNFi) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) patients across Europe. METHODS: Real-life data from PsA and axSpA patients starting their first TNFi from 11 countries in the European Spondyloarthritis Research Collaboration Network were pooled. Retention rates were compared by Kaplan-Meier analyses with log-rank test and by Cox regression, and remission rates by χ2 test and by logistic regression across quartiles of baseline ΔPEG, separately in female and male PsA and axSpA patients. RESULTS: We included 14 868 spondyloarthritis (5855 PsA, 9013 axSpA) patients. Baseline ΔPEG was negatively associated with 6/12/24-months' TNFi retention rates in female and male PsA and axSpA patients (P <0.001), with 6/12/24-months' BASDAI < 2 (P ≤0.002) and ASDAS < 1.3 (P ≤0.005) in axSpA patients, and with DAS28CRP(4)<2.6 (P ≤0.04) and DAPSA28 ≤ 4 (P ≤0.01), but not DAS28CRP(3)<2.6 (P ≥0.13) in PsA patients, with few exceptions on remission rates. Retention and remission rates were overall lower in female than male patients. CONCLUSION: High baseline patient's compared with evaluator's global assessment was associated with lower 6/12/24-months' remission as well as retention rates of first TNFi in both PsA and axSpA patients. These results highlight the importance of discordance between patient's and evaluator's perspective on disease outcomes.

Do patients with axial spondyloarthritis with radiographic sacroiliitis fulfil both the modified New York criteria and the ASAS axial spondyloarthritis criteria? Results from eight cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Patients with spondyloarthritis with radiographic sacroiliitis are traditionally classified according to the modified New York (mNY) criteria as ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and more recently according to the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) criteria as radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the agreement between the mNY criteria for AS and the ASAS criteria for r-axSpA and reasons for disagreement. METHODS: Patients with back pain ≥3 months diagnosed as axSpA with radiographic sacroiliitis (mNY radiographic criterion) were selected from eight cohorts (ASAS, Esperanza, GESPIC, OASIS, Reuma.pt, SCQM, SPACE, UCSF). Subsequently, we calculated the percentage of patients who fulfilled the ASAS r-axSpA criteria within the group of patients who fulfilled the mNY criteria and vice versa in six cohorts with complete information. RESULTS: Of the 3882 patients fulfilling the mNY criteria, 93% also fulfilled the ASAS r-axSpA criteria. Inversely, of the 3434 patients fulfilling the ASAS r-axSpA criteria, 96% also fulfilled the mNY criteria. The main cause for discrepancy between the two criteria sets was the reported age at onset of back pain. CONCLUSION: Almost all patients with axSpA with radiographic sacroiliitis fulfil both ASAS and mNY criteria, which supports the interchangeable use of the terms AS and r-axSpA.

Treatment response and drug retention rates in 24 195 biologic-naïve patients with axial spondyloarthritis initiating TNFi treatment: routine care data from 12 registries in the EuroSpA collaboration.

OBJECTIVE: To study drug retention and response rates in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) initiating a first tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi). METHODS: Data from 12 European registries, prospectively collected in routine care, were pooled. TNFi retention rates (Kaplan-Meier statistics), Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) Inactive disease (<1.3), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) <40 mm and Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society responses (ASAS 20/40) were assessed at 6, 12 and 24 months. RESULTS: A first TNFi was initiated in 24 195 axSpA patients. Heterogeneity of baseline characteristics between registries was observed. Twelve-month retention was 80% (95% CI 79% to 80%), ranging from 71% to 94% across registries. At 6 months, ASDAS Inactive disease/BASDAI<40 rates were 33%/72% (LUNDEX-adjusted: 27%/59%), ASAS 20/40 response rates 64%/49% (LUNDEX-adjusted 52%/40%). In patients initiating first TNFi after 2009, 6097 patients was registered to fulfil ASAS criteria for axSpA, 2935 was registered to fulfil modified New York Criteria for Ankylosing Spondylitis and 1178 patients was registered as having non-radiographic axSpA. In nr-axSpA patients, we observed lower 12-month retention rates (73% (70%-76%)) and lower 6-month LUNDEX adjusted response rates (ASDAS Inactive disease/BASDAI40 20%/50%, ASAS 20/40 45%/33%). For patients initiating first TNFi after 2014, 12-month retention rate, but not 6-month response rate, was numerically higher compared with patients initiating TNFi in 2009-2014. CONCLUSION: A large European database of patients with axSpA initiating a first TNFi treatment in routine care, demonstrated that 27% of patients achieved ASDAS inactive disease after 6 months, while 59% achieved BASDAI <40. Four of five patients continued treatment after 1 year.

Safety and immunogenicity of tetanus/diphtheria vaccination in patients with rheumatic diseases-a prospective multi-centre cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of a diphtheria/tetanus vaccine booster dose in three different patient groups with rheumatic diseases on a variety of immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory medications compared with healthy controls (HCs). METHODS: We conducted a multi-centre prospective cohort study in Switzerland. We enrolled patients with RA, axial SpA/PsA, vasculitis (Behçet's disease, ANCA-associated vasculitis) and HCs. Diphtheria/tetanus vaccination was administered according to the Swiss vaccination recommendations. Blood samples were drawn before vaccination, and 1 month and 3 months afterwards. Antibody concentrations against vaccine antigens were measured by ELISA. Immunogenicity was compared between patient and medication groups. A mixed model was applied for multivariate analysis. Missing data were dealt with using multiple imputation. RESULTS: Between January 2014 and December 2015, we enrolled 284 patients with rheumatic diseases (131 RA, 114 SpA/PsA, 39 vasculitis) and 253 HCs. Of the patients, 89% were on immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory medication. Three months post-vaccination 100% of HCs vs 98% of patients were protected against tetanus and 84% vs 73% against diphtheria. HCs and SpA/PsA patients had significantly higher responses than RA and vasculitis patients. Assessing underlying diseases and medications in a multivariate model, rituximab was the only factor negatively influencing tetanus immunogenicity, whereas only MTX treatment had a negative influence on diphtheria antibody responses. No vaccine-related serious adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSION: Diphtheria/tetanus booster vaccination was safe. Tetanus vaccination was immunogenic; the diphtheria component was less immunogenic. Vaccine responses were blunted by rituximab and MTX. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT01947465.

TNF blockers inhibit spinal radiographic progression in ankylosing spondylitis by reducing disease activity: results from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the impact of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) on spinal radiographic progression in ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: Patients with AS in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort with up to 10 years of follow-up and radiographic assessments every 2 years were included. Radiographs were scored by two readers according to the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score (mSASSS) with known chronology. The relationship between TNFi use before a 2-year radiographic interval and progression within the interval was investigated using binomial generalised estimating equation models with adjustment for potential confounding and multiple imputation of missing values. Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) was regarded as mediating the effect of TNFi on progression and added to the model in a sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: A total of 432 patients with AS contributed to data for 616 radiographic intervals. Radiographic progression was defined as an increase in ≥2 mSASSS units in 2 years. Mean (SD) mSASSS increase was 0.9 (2.6) units in 2 years. Prior use of TNFi reduced the odds of progression by 50% (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.88) in the multivariable analysis. While no direct effect of TNFi on progression was present in an analysis including time-varying ASDAS (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.08), the indirect effect, via a reduction in ASDAS, was statistically significant (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.97). CONCLUSION: TNFis are associated with a reduction of spinal radiographic progression in patients with AS. This effect seems mediated through the inhibiting effect of TNFi on disease activity.

[Early undifferentiated arthritis]. / Frühe undifferenzierte Arthritis.

Early recognition and treatment of inflammatory arthritis is imperative for the further course of the disease. Patients with inflammatory arthritis should be referred as early as possible to a rheumatologist for further management. A combination of anamnesis, clinical examination, imaging and laboratory measurements enable a differential diagnosis. If a specific diagnosis is not possible, the disease is called early undifferentiated arthritis. Early effective treatment should be instituted for those at risk of developing persistent and/or erosive arthritis. Treatment includes both pharmacological and non-pharmacological options. In the management of early arthritis a combination of regular monitoring and optimal treatment interventions are paramount to achieve remission and improve outcome of the disease (treat-to-target).