Axial spondyloarthritis guidelines - aiming for maximum impact.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review discusses international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) focusing on methodology, guideline quality, and implementation. RECENT FINDINGS: The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (ASAS/EULAR) and Pan-American League of Associations for Rheumatology (PANLAR) recently published axSpA CPGs and updates of the American College of Rheumatology/Spondylitis Association of America/Spondyloarthritis Research and Treatment Network (ACR/SAA/SPARTAN) and Asia-Pacific League of Associations for Rheumatology (APLAR) CPGs are expected. GRADE has emerged as the dominant framework for CPG development and has been used by three of the four international axSpA guidelines. Notable differences exist among these guidelines in the way that the recommendations are presented. Two of the four acknowledge the need for implementation strategies, but little detail about this is provided. The few studies that have evaluated the implementation of axSpA CPGs have identified poor adherence to recommendations on physical therapy/exercise and disease activity monitoring. Implementation science has identified many barriers and facilitators affecting guideline uptake, including those related to healthcare professionals and to the guidelines themselves. Creation of a tailored implementation plan simultaneously with the CPG is recommended. SUMMARY: While methodological rigor in the creation of evidence-based recommendations is the focus of CPG development, recommendations must be presented in a user-friendly format that makes them easy to apply. 'Living guidelines' could facilitate keeping content up to date. Implementation is critical for the success of a CPG and should be emphasized in future axSpA guideline updates. Further research is needed to better understand the factors impacting the successful implementation of axSpA CPGs.

American College of Rheumatology and Food and Drug Administration Summit: Summary of the Meeting, May 17-18, 2022.

The American College of Rheumatology and the US Food and Drug Administration co-sponsored a public meeting in May 2022 about challenges in the clinical development of drugs for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA), focusing on innovative clinical trial designs, outcome measures, and data collection methods. Recommendations include early dose-ranging studies and use of active comparators. Challenges and opportunities in assessing long-term safety by leveraging real-world data from electronic health records (EHRs) and claims data are discussed, along with insights from European registries and the evolving role of real-world evidence and artificial intelligence in regulatory evaluations. Endpoints for assessing disease activity and outcome measures used in RA and PsA trials are explored, emphasizing challenges in defining remission, assessing clinical response, and evaluating structural progression. The need for outcome measures that better reflect treatment targets and the potential of advanced imaging in future trials are highlighted. Challenges with placebo-controlled trials in RA are discussed and use of non-inferiority clinical trial design, in which new drugs are evaluated with active comparators, is proposed. Pragmatic trials in RA and PsA, employing decentralized approaches, are highlighted for their real-world relevance and administrative efficiencies. Strategies for identifying at-risk populations for RA and the challenges of using EHRs and insurance claims data in drug development are discussed. Registry data and digital health technologies show promise in bridging the gap between clinical trials and real-world effectiveness.

Association of clinical response criteria and disease activity levels with axial spondyloarthritis core domains: results from two phase 3 randomised studies, BE MOBILE 1 and 2.

OBJECTIVE: To assess how achievement of increasingly stringent clinical response criteria and disease activity states at week 52 translate into changes in core domains in patients with non-radiographic (nr-) and radiographic (r-) axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). METHODS: Patients in BE MOBILE 1 and 2 achieving different levels of response or disease activity (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) response criteria, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI50)) at week 52 were pooled, regardless of treatment arm. Associations between achievement of these endpoints and change from baseline (CfB) in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) measuring core axSpA domains, including pain, fatigue, physical function, overall functioning and health, and work and employment, were assessed. RESULTS: Achievement of increasingly stringent clinical efficacy endpoints at week 52 was generally associated with sequentially greater improvements from baseline in all PROs. Patients with nr-axSpA achieving ASAS40 demonstrated greater improvements (CfB) than patients who did not achieve ASAS40 but did achieve ASAS20, in total spinal pain (-5.3 vs -2.8, respectively), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness-Fatigue subscale (12.7 vs 6.7), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Function Index (-3.9 vs -1.8), European Quality of Life 5-Dimension 3-Level Version (0.30 vs 0.16), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-axSpA presenteeism (-35.4 vs -15.9), overall work impairment (-36.5 vs -12.9), activity impairment (-39.0 vs -21.0) and sleep (9.0 vs 3.9). Results were similar for ASDAS and BASDAI50. Similar amplitudes of improvement were observed between patients with nr-axSpA and r-axSpA. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with bimekizumab across the full axSpA disease spectrum, who achieved increasingly stringent clinical response criteria and lower disease activity at week 52, reported larger improvements in core axSpA domains.

Treatment Persistence and Switching Patterns of Adalimumab Biosimilar ABP 501 in European Patients with Rheumatologic Diseases.

INTRODUCTION: ABP 501 was an adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar approved for treating immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). In this retrospective study, we aimed to examine the treatment patterns of ABP 501 among patients with these IMIDs using German and French pharmacy claims databases. METHODS: Patients with RA, PsA, or AS who initiated ABP 501 between October 2018 and March 2020 and were observed continuously for ≥ 365 days both before and after ABP 501 initiation were included. Descriptive analyses of persistence and switch after ABP 501 discontinuation were conducted and reported for each disease cohort by prior use of ADA products (patients naïve to ADA or patients experienced with ADA). RESULTS: Median (95% confidence interval) persistence on ABP 501 was 9.4 (8.6-10.3), 10.2 (9.0-11.7), and 12.1 (11.0-13.1) months in German patients, and 11.7 (9.9-13.3), 7.1 (5.8-8.4), and 10.8 (9.6-11.9) months in French patients for RA, PsA, and AS, respectively. For patients who switched from ABP 501 to another targeted therapy during the first 12 months of follow-up, switching patterns varied between patients naïve to ADA and patients experienced with ADA in both Germany and France, with patients naïve to ADA switching most frequently to other targeted therapies including non-ADA tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), non-TNFi biologic, or Janus Kinase inhibitor (JAKi) and patients experienced with ADA switching most frequently back to ADA reference product (RP). CONCLUSIONS: Across three rheumatologic diseases, about half of patients persisted on ABP 501 at the end of 12 months after treatment initiation in both Germany and France. Patients experienced with ADA were more likely to switch back to ADA RP, regardless of indication and country, suggesting a possible nocebo effect. Future studies are warranted to understand reasons of discontinuation and switching.

Sex Differences in Time to Initiate Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs or Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs Among Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated sex differences in time to initiation of receiving nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) among patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). METHODS: Using the 2013 to 2018 IBM MarketScan Database, we identified 174,632 patients with axSpA aged ≥18 years. We evaluated the time between axSpA diagnosis and the first prescription NSAID dispensing (among those with no baseline NSAIDs reception) or bDMARDs infusion/procedure claim (among those who were dispensed two or more different prescription NSAIDs in the baseline period). Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for time to initiation of patients receiving NSAIDs or bDMARDs were computed using survival analyses. Cox proportional hazard models estimated associations between sex and predictors of treatment initiation. RESULTS: Average age at diagnosis was 48.2 years, 65.7% were female, and 37.8% were dispensed one or more NSAIDs before axSpA diagnosis. Of those who did not receive two or more different prescription NSAIDs before diagnosis, NSAID reception was initiated earlier in female patients than in male patients (NSAID reception initiators: female patients (32.9%), male patients (29.3%); aHR 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.16). Among those who received two or more different prescription NSAIDs in the baseline period, 4.2% received a bDMARD, whereas 77.9% continued receiving NSAIDs after diagnosis. Time to bDMARD reception initiation was longer for female patients than for male patients (aHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52-0.72), but bDMARDs were received sooner among those who received NSAIDs in the baseline period. CONCLUSION: Prescription NSAID reception was more common than initiation of receiving bDMARDs among patients newly diagnosed with axSpA. Female patients appeared more likely to continue receiving NSAIDs after diagnosis, and the time to initiation of receiving bDMARDs was longer for female patients than for male patients.

Modeling the Effects of Formulary Exclusions: How Many Patients Could Be Affected by a Specific Exclusion?

Background: Medication formularies, initially designed to promote the use of cost-effective generic drugs, are now designed to maximize financial benefits for the pharmacy benefit management companies that negotiate purchase prices. In the second-largest pharmacy benefit management formulary that is publicly available, 55% of mandated substitutions are not for generic or biosimilar versions of the same active ingredient and/or formulation and may not be medically or financially beneficial to patients. Methods: We modeled the effect of excluding novel agents for atrial fibrillation/venous thromboembolism, migraine prevention, and psoriasis, which all would require substitution with a different active ingredient. Using population data, market share of the 2 largest US formularies, and 2021 prescription data, we calculated how many people could be affected by such exclusions. Using data from the published literature, we calculated how many of those individuals are likely to discontinue treatment and/or have adverse events due to a formulary exclusion. Results: The number of people likely to have adverse events due to the exclusion could be as high as 1 million for atrial fibrillation/venous thromboembolism, 900 000 for migraine prevention, and 500 000 for psoriasis. The numbers likely to discontinue treatment for their condition are as high as 924 000 for atrial fibrillation/venous thromboembolism, 646 000 for migraine, and 138 000 for psoriasis. Conclusion: Substitution with a nonequivalent treatment is common in formularies currently in use and is not without substantial consequences for hundreds of thousands of patients. Forced medication substitution results in costly increases in morbidity and mortality and should be part of the cost-benefit analysis of any formulary exclusion.

Review of Adalimumab Biosimilar SB5 in Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases.

SB5 is an approved biosimilar of adalimumab, a recombinant monoclonal anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antibody. The approval of SB5 was based on the comparison with reference adalimumab in analytical studies, pharmacokinetic (PK) and immunogenicity assessments, and randomized controlled trials. Efficacy data was primarily obtained in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and extended to include additional indications such as psoriasis, Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis by extrapolation. Following its approval, additional post-marketing data have been collected comparing SB5 with reference adalimumab. This review summarizes the clinical data on SB5 from randomized controlled trials and provides a comprehensive overview of the available post-approval data. In "real-world" settings, SB5 was as effective as its reference product across different indications and countries, treatment persistence was well maintained throughout studies, and no new safety concerns were identified. In both controlled and "real-world" settings, switching from reference adalimumab to SB5 was not associated with altered efficacy or clinical complications. In post-approval studies, the quality of SB5 was consistent over time, independent of the batch and process changes, and the SB5 autoinjector was preferred over other autoinjectors by both healthcare professionals and patients. Taken together, these data support the use of SB5 whenever reference adalimumab is appropriate and demonstrate that switching from reference adalimumab to SB5 is feasible.

Walter Bauer, Marian Wilkins Ropes, and the Massachusetts General Hospital.

Walter Bauer was instrumental in the development of rheumatology as a medical subspecialty, promoting careful clinical observation and description and bringing basic scientists and clinicians together to study the "anatomy, chemical composition, and metabolism of connective tissue" in the laboratory. Marian Wilkins Ropes was a pioneering woman in medicine: the first female medical resident at the Massachusetts General Hospital, the first woman appointed as an assistant professor of clinical medicine at Harvard Medical School, the first woman elected to membership in the American Society of Clinical Investigation, and the first woman elected president of the American Rheumatism Association.

Unmet need in rheumatology: reports from the Advances in Targeted Therapies meeting, 2023.

The Advances in Targeted Therapies meets annually, convening experts in the field of rheumatology to both provide scientific updates and identify existing scientific gaps within the field. To review the major unmet scientific needs in rheumatology. The 23rd annual Advances in Targeted Therapies meeting convened with more than 100 international basic scientists and clinical researchers in rheumatology, immunology, infectious diseases, epidemiology, molecular biology and other specialties relating to all aspects of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. We held breakout sessions in five rheumatological disease-specific groups including: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpa), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), systemic sclerosis (SSc) and vasculitis, and osteoarthritis (OA). In each group, experts were asked to identify and prioritise current unmet needs in clinical and translational research. An overarching theme across all disease states is the continued need for clinical trial design innovation with regard to therapeutics, endpoint and disease endotypes. Within RA, unmet needs comprise molecular classification of disease pathogenesis and activity, pre-/early RA strategies, more refined pain profiling and innovative trials designs to deliver on precision medicine. Continued scientific questions within PsA include evaluating the genetic, immunophenotypic, clinical signatures that predict development of PsA in patients with psoriasis, and the evaluation of combination therapies for difficult-to-treat disease. For axSpA, there continues to be the need to understand the role of interleukin-23 (IL-23) in pathogenesis and the genetic relationship of the IL-23-receptor polymorphism with other related systemic inflammatory diseases (eg, inflammatory bowel disease). A major unmet need in the OA field remains the need to develop the ability to reliably phenotype and stratify patients for inclusion in clinical trials. SLE experts identified a number of unmet needs within clinical trial design including the need for allowing endpoints that reflect pharmacodynamic/functional outcomes (eg, inhibition of type I interferon pathway activation; changes in urine biomarkers). Lastly, within SSc and vasculitis, there is a lack of biomarkers that predict response or disease progression, and that allow patients to be stratified for therapies. There remains a strong need to innovate clinical trial design, to identify systemic and tissue-level biomarkers that predict progression or response to therapy, endotype disease, and to continue developing therapies and therapeutic strategies for those with treatment-refractory disease. This document, based on expert consensus, should provide a roadmap for prioritising scientific endeavour in the field of rheumatology.