results from the German Spondyloarthritis Inception Cohort

Background Functional status and spinal mobility in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) are known to be determined both by disease activity and by structural damage in the spine. The impact of structural damage in the sacroiliac joints (SIJ) on physical function and spinal mobility in axSpA has not been studied so far. The objective of the study was to analyze the impact of radiographic sacroiliitis on functional status and spinal mobility in patients with axSpA. Methods In total, 210 patients with axSpA were included in the analysis. Radiographs of SIJ obtained at baseline and after 2 years of follow up were scored by two trained readers according to the modified New York criteria grading system (grade 0–4). The mean of two readers’ scores for each joint and a sum score for both SIJ were calculated for each patient giving a sacroiliitis sum score between 0 and 8. The Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) at baseline and after 2 years were used as outcome measures. Results Longitudinal mixed model analysis adjusted for structural damage in the spine (modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score - mSASSS), disease activity (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index - BASDAI and C-reactive protein level) and gender, revealed an independent association of the sacroiliitis sum score with the BASFI: b = 0.10 (95% CI 0.01–0.19) and the BASMI: b = 0.12 (95% CI 0.03–0.21), respectively, indicating that change by one radiographic sacroiliitis grade in one joint is associated with BASFI/BASMI worsening by 0.10/0.12 points, respectively, independently of disease activity and structural damage in the spine. Conclusion Structural damage in the SIJ might have an impact on functional status and spinal mobility in axSpA independently of spinal structural damage and disease activity. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01277419. Registered on 14 January 2011

Study protocol: Comparison of the effect of treatment with Nonsteroidal anti- inflammatory drugs added to anti-tumour necrosis factor a therapy versus anti- tumour necrosis factor a therapy alone on progression of Structural damage in the spine over two years in patients with ankyLosing spondylitis (CONSUL) – an open-label randomized controlled multicenter trial

Introduction There is some evidence that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), in particular celecoxib, might possess not only a symptomatic efficacy but also disease-modifying properties in ankylosing spondylitis (AS), retarding the progression of structural damage in the spine if taken continuously. In contrast, this remains controversial for tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors, despite their good clinical efficacy. The impact of a combined therapy (a TNF inhibitor plus an NSAID) on radiographic spinal progression in AS is unclear. Methods and analysis The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of treatment with an NSAID (celecoxib) when added to a TNF inhibitor (golimumab) compared with TNF inhibitor (golimumab) alone on progression of structural damage in the spine over 2 years in patients with AS. The study consists of a 6-week screening period, a 12-week period (phase I: run-in phase) of treatment with golimumab for all subjects followed by a 96-week controlled treatment period (phase II: core phase) with golimumab plus celecoxib versus golimumab alone, and a safety follow-up period of 4 weeks. At week 108, the primary study endpoint radiographic spinal progression (as assessed by the change in the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score after 2 years) will be evaluated. Ethics and dissemination The study will be performed according to the principles of good clinical practice and the German drug law. The written approval of the independent ethics committee and of the German federal authority have been obtained. On study completion, results are expected to be published in a peer- reviewed journal. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov register (NCT02758782) and European Union Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT No 2016-000615-33)

Diagnostic accuracy of inflammatory back pain for axial spondyloarthritis in rheumatological care

Objective: Inflammatory back pain (IBP), the key symptom of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), including ankylosing spondylitis, has been proposed as a screening test for patients presenting with chronic back pain in primary care. The diagnostic accuracy of IBP in the rheumatology setting is unknown. Methods: Six rheumatology centres, representing secondary and tertiary rheumatology care, included routinely referred patients with consecutive chronic back pain with suspicion of axSpA. IBP (diagnostic test) was assessed in each centre by an independent (blinded) rheumatologist; a second (unblinded) rheumatologist made the diagnosis (axSpA or no-axSpA), which served as reference standard. Results: Of 461 routinely referred patients, 403 received a final diagnosis. IBP was present in 67.3%, and 44.6% (180/403) were diagnosed as axSpA. The sensitivity of IBP according to various definitions (global judgement, Calin, Berlin, Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society criteria for IBP) was 74.4%-81.1 % and comparable to published figures, whereas the specificity was unexpectedly low (25.1%-43.9%). The resulting positive likelihood ratios (LR+) were 1.1-1.4 and without major differences between sets of IBP criteria. The presence of IBP according to various definitions increased the probability of axSpA by 2.5%-8.4% only (from 44.6% to 47.1%-53.0%). Conclusions: The diagnostic utility of IBP in the rheumatology setting was smaller than expected. However, this was counterbalanced by a high prevalence of IBP among referred patients, demonstrating the effective usage of IBP in primary care as selection parameter for referral to rheumatology. Notably, this study illustrates potential shifts in specificity and LR+ of diagnostic tests if these tests are used to select patients for referral

Serum levels of biomarkers of bone and cartilage destruction and new bone formation in different cohorts of patients with axial spondyloarthritis with and without tumor necrosis factor-alpha blocker treatment

INTRODUCTION: Recent data about radiographic progression during treatment with tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) blocker agents in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have prompted an intensive discussion about the link between inflammation/bone destruction and new bone formation and the order of events. Therefore, we analysed parameters of cartilage degradation, neoangiogenesis, and new bone formation in different cohorts of patients with axial spondyloarthritis with and without treatment with TNF-α blocker agents. METHOD: TNF-α blocker-naïve AS patients were investigated for serum levels of metalloproteinase-3 (MMP-3) (n = 71), vasoendothelial growth factor (VEGF) (n = 50), and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BALP) (n = 71) at baseline and after 1 and 2 years. This was compared with 34 adalimumab-treated patients with axial spondyloarthritis (22 AS and 12 non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis patients) before and after 36 to 52 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: There were no significant changes in serum levels of MMP-3 (P > 0.05), VEGF (P > 0.05), and BALP (P > 0.05) in a large cohort of TNF-α blocker-naïve AS patients followed for 2 years. In contrast, adalimumab-treated spondyloarthritis (AS and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis) patients had a significant decrease of VEGF (P < 0.001) and MMP-3 (P = 0.022) after 36 to 52 weeks of therapy. Most interestingly, the level of BALP increased significantly after 36 to 52 weeks of therapy (P < 0.001). A decrease in MMP-3 serum levels correlated significantly to an increase of BALP (r = -0.398, P = 0.02). In the case of VEGF, there was a negative correlation without significance (r = -0.214, P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Rising levels of BALP and the negative correlation between MMP-3 and BALP in spondyloarthritis patients with TNF-α blocker treatment indicate that new bone formation in AS occurs if inflammation is successfully treated and might be part of a healing process

Distinct Effects of Interleukin-1β Inhibition upon Cytokine Profile in Patients with Adult-Onset Still’s Disease and Active Articular Manifestation Responding to Canakinumab

Adult-onset Still’s disease (AOSD) is a systemic auto-inflammatory disease characterized by the presence of immunologically mediated inflammation and deficient resolution of inflammation. Canakinumab is an approved IL-1β inhibitor in the treatment of AOSD with a balanced efficacy and safety profile. Since inflammatory cytokines play a major role in the pathogenesis of AOSD, we investigated the effects of canakinumab on the cytokine profile of AOSD patients from a randomized controlled trial. Multiplex analysis and ELISA were used to test the concentrations of several cytokines at three time points—week 0 (baseline), week 1 and week 4—in two patient groups—placebo and canakinumab. Two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed a significant temporal effect on the concentrations of MRP 8/14, S100A12, IL-6 and IL-18 with a significant decrease at week 4 in the canakinumab group exclusively. Comparing responders with non-responders to canakinumab showed a significant decrease in MRP 8/14, IL-1RA, IL-18 and IL-6 in responders at week 4, while S100A12 levels decreased significantly in responders and non-responders. In summary, canakinumab showed a striking effect on the cytokine profile in patients with AOSD, exhibiting a clear association with clinical response

Screening strategies in SpA Personal non-commercial use only

ABSTRACT. Objective. To evaluate 2 referral strategies for axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) in patients with chronic low back pain at the primary care level. Methods. Referral physicians (n = 259) were randomly assigned to either Strategy 1 or Strategy 2 in order to refer patients with chronic back pain (duration &gt; 3 months), age at onset of back pain &lt; 45 years, and no diagnosis of axial SpA, to a cooperating rheumatologist (n = 43). According to Strategy 1, suitable patients were referred if at least 1 of the following screening criteria was present: inflammatory back pain, HLA-B27, or sacroiliitis detected by imaging. According to Strategy 2, patients were referred if 2 out of 5 criteria were positive: the same 3 criteria from Strategy 1 and additionally a positive family history of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) or a good treatment response to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs. The final diagnosis of the rheumatologist was used as the &quot;gold standard.&quot; Results. In total, 560 consecutively referred patients were included in the analysis

Clinical and functional remission: even though biologics are superior to conventional DMARDs overall success rates remain low – results from RABBIT, the German biologics register

We investigated the frequency of remission according to the disease activity score (DAS28) definition, modified American Rheumatology Association (ARA) criteria, and the frequency of an achievement of a functional status above defined thresholds ('functional remission', 'physical independence') in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with either biologics or conventional DMARDs. We used the data of a prospective cohort study, the German biologics register RABBIT (German acronym for Rheumatoid Arthritis – Observation of Biologic Therapy) to investigate the outcomes in RA patients with two or more DMARD failures who received new treatment with biologics (BIOL; n = 818) or a conventional DMARD (n = 265). Logistic regression analysis was applied to adjust for differences in baseline risks. Taking risk indicators such as previous DMARD failures or baseline clinical status into account, we found that biologics doubled the chance of remission compared to conventional DMARD therapies (DAS28 remission, adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.95 (95% confidenece interval (CI) 1.2–3.2)); ARA remission, OR 2.05 (95% CI 1.2–3.5)). High remission rates (DAS28 remission, 30.6%; ARA remission, 16.9%) were observed in BIOL patients with a moderate disease activity (DAS28, 3.2 to 5.1) at the start of treatment. These rates decreased to 8.5% in patients with DAS28 > 6. Sustained remission at 6 and 12 months was achieved in <10% of the patients. Severely disabled patients (≤50% of full function) receiving biologic therapies were significantly more likely to achieve a status indicating physical independence (≥67% of full function) than controls (OR 3.88 (95% CI 1.7–8.8)). 'Functional remission' (≥83% of full function) was more often achieved in BIOL than in controls (OR 2.18 (95% CI 1.04–4.6)). In conclusion, our study shows that biologics increase the chance to achieve clinical remission and a status of functional remission or at least physical independence. However, temporary or even sustained remission remain ambitious aims, which are achieved in a minority of patients only

Impact of disease activity and treatment of comorbidities on the risk of myocardial infarction in rheumatoid arthritis

Background The aim was to estimate the impact of individual risk factors and treatment with various disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on the incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods We analysed data from 11,285 patients with RA, enrolled in the prospective cohort study RABBIT, at the start of biologic (b) or conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs. A nested case–control study was conducted, defining patients with MI during follow-up as cases. Cases were matched 1:1 to control patients based on age, sex, year of enrolment and five cardiovascular (CV) comorbidities. Generalized linear models were applied (Poisson regression with a random component, conditional logistic regression). Results In total, 112 patients developed an MI during follow-up. At baseline, during the first 6 months of follow-up and prior to the MI, inflammation markers (erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP)) but not 28-joint-count disease activity score (DAS28) were significantly higher in MI cases compared to matched controls and the remaining cohort. Baseline treatment with DMARDs was similar across all groups. During follow-up bDMARD treatment was significantly more often discontinued or switched in MI cases. CV comorbidities were significantly less often treated in MI cases vs. matched controls (36 % vs. 17 %, p < 0.01). In the adjusted regression model, we found a strong association between higher CRP and MI (OR for log-transformed CRP at follow-up: 1.47, 95 % CI 1.00; 2.16). Furthermore, treatment with prednisone ≥10 mg/day (OR 1.93, 95 % CI 0.57; 5.85), TNF inhibitors (OR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.40; 2.10) or other bDMARDs (OR 0.85, 95 % CI 0.27; 2.72) was not associated with higher MI risk. Conclusions CRP was associated with risk of MI. Our results underline the importance of tight disease control taking not only global disease activity, but also CRP as an individual marker into account. It seems irrelevant with which class of (biologic or conventional) DMARD effective control of disease activity is achieved. However, in some patients the available treatment options were insufficient or insufficiently used - regarding DMARDs to treat RA as well as regarding the treatment of CV comorbidities

study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background Osteoarthritis (OA) is a heterogeneous group of conditions with disturbed integrity of articular cartilage and changes in the underlying bone. The pathogenesis of OA is multifactorial and not just a disease of older people. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is a disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) typically used for the treatment of various rheumatic and dermatologic diseases. Three studies of HCQ in OA, including one abstract and one letter, are available and use a wide variety of outcome measures in small patient populations. Despite initial evidence for good efficacy of HCQ, there has been no randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial in a larger patient group. In the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), evidence-based recommendations for the management of hand OA, HCQ was not included as a therapeutic option because of the current lack of randomized clinical trials. Methods/Design OA TREAT is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. A total of 510 subjects with inflammatory and erosive hand OA, according to the classification criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), with recent X-ray will be recruited across outpatient sites, hospitals and universities in Germany. Patients are randomized 1:1 to active treatment (HCQ 200 to 400 mg per day) or placebo for 52 weeks. Both groups receive standard therapy (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAID], coxibs) for OA treatment, taken steadily two weeks before enrollment and continued further afterwards. If disease activity increases, the dose of NSAID/coxibs can be increased according to the drug recommendation. The co-primary clinical endpoints are the changes in Australian-Canadian OA Index (AUSCAN, German version) dimensions for pain and hand disability at week 52. The co-primary radiographic endpoint is the radiographic progression from baseline to week 52. A multiple endpoint test and analysis of covariance will be used to compare changes between groups. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Discussion The OA TREAT trial will examine the clinical and radiological efficacy and safety of HCQ as a treatment option for inflammatory and erosive OA over 12 months. OA TREAT focuses on erosive hand OA in contrast to other current studies on symptomatic hand OA, for example, HERO [Trials 14:64, 2013]