Search

Background/Aims Baricitinib (BARI) is an oral, reversible, selective JAK1/2 inhibitor. Treatment with once-daily oral BARI resulted in low rates of radiographic progression for up to 2 years in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Here, we evaluate the radiographic progression of structural joint damage in patients with RA over 5 years of treatment with BARI. Methods This included patients who completed three Phase 3 trials, RA-BEGIN (DMARD-naive), RA-BUILD (csDMARD-IR), or RA-BEAM (MTX-IR), and enrolled in long-term extension study, RA-BEYOND. Patients receiving blinded BARI at the conclusion of Phase 3 trials remained on that dose (2mg/4mg, once daily) in RA-BEYOND. At 52 weeks, DMARD-naive patients receiving methotrexate(MTX) or combination therapy(BARI 4mg+MTX) were switched to BARI 4mg monotherapy; MTX-IR patients receiving adalimumab(ADA) were switched to BARI 4mg on background MTX. At 24 weeks, csDMARD-IR patients receiving placebo(PBO) were switched to BARI 4mg on background csDMARD. Analysis population included patients who had baseline and at least one radiograph collected after 2 years. Radiographic progression of structural joint damage (Years 3-5) was determined by changes from baseline in van der Heijdemodified Total Sharp Score(ΔmTSS), erosion score, and joint space narrowing. Proportion of patients showing no progression was assessed based on change from baseline mTSS(ΔmTSS) from originating study, using thresholds of 0.5 or smallest detectable change(SDC). Mixedmodel repeatedmeasures and logistic regression models were used to analyze continuous variables and categorical variables, respectively; linear extrapolation was used for imputation of missing data(maximum of 1 year). Results 82.6% (2125/2573) of patients entered long-term extension study. Among DMARD-naive patients, those on initial BARI monotherapy or in combination with MTX had significantly slower radiographic progression(ΔmTSS) versus those on initial MTX at Years 3, 4, 5 (p ≤ 0.05). They had significantly fewer erosions at these time points (p ≤ 0.05). A greater proportion of patients who received initial BARI therapy and BARI+MTX had no radiographic progression versus initial MTX monotherapy using thresholds of 0.5 (p ≤ 0.05). Among MTX-IR patients, those on initial BARI treatment had slower radiographic progression compared to PBO and results were comparable to those on initial ADA treatment at Years 3, 4, 5. A greater proportion of patients who received initial BARI therapy had no radiographic progression versus initial PBO using thresholds of SDC (p ≤ 0.05). Among csDMARD-IR patients, although differences between groups were small, patients on initial BARI 4mg had slowest radiographic progression compared to initial PBO and initial BARI 2mg. At least 74% of the structure data used in the analyses are based on observed data. Conclusion Treatment with once-daily oral BARI maintained low rates of radiographic progression for up to 5 years in different patient populations with RA. Disclosure D.M.F.M. van der Heijde: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly and Company, Galapagos NV, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, and UCB Pharma. C.E. Kartman: Shareholder/stock ownership; Eli Lilly and Company. L. Xie: Shareholder/stock ownership; Eli Lilly and Company. S. Beattie: Shareholder/stock ownership; Eli Lilly and Company. D.E. Schlichting: Shareholder/stock ownership; Eli Lilly and Company. P. Durez: Member of speakers’ bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, Pfizer, and Sanofi. Y. Tanaka: Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, Asahi-kasei, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB, and YL Biologics. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, MSD, Ono, and Taisho-Toyama and Takeda. R. Fleischmann: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB.

To the Editor: We compliment Bakirci, et al for their article1 on the prevalence of ultrasound (US) elementary lesions at mainly lower extremity enthesis sites in 80 (50 female, 30 male) healthy adults (20–80+ yrs) and their analyses of contributory factors. We also compliment the accompanying editorial by Hanova, et al 2. The core set of US enthesitis elementary lesions defined by the Outcomes in Rheumatology (OMERACT) group3 were analyzed in the following categories: (1) inflammation (hypoechogenicity and/or increased thickening of the tendon insertion, and power Doppler activity); (2) damage (enthesophytes, calcification, and erosions); and (3) total US scores, all within a 2-mm distance of the bone cortex1. The Bakirci, et al article1 followed a similar US study by Guldberg-Moller, et al 4 of 64 (32 female, 32 male) healthy adults (20–59 yrs) that did not analyze the total US score or its damage and inflammation components. The Bakirci, et al article1 concluded, “These results support the effect of biomechanical forces … Address correspondence to Dr. A. Masi, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria, One Illini Dr, Box 1649, Peoria, IL 61656, USA. Email: amasi{at}uic.edu.

Background/Aims Filgotinib (FIL) is an oral, potent, selective Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor. FINCH 1 (NCT02889796) assessed FIL efficacy, safety and patient reported outcome (PRO) data in patients (pts) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX-IR). We report data through week 52 (W52) of the FINCH 1 study. Primary outcome results at week (W)12 and W24 were previously reported. Methods This global, phase 3, double-blind, active- and placebo (PBO)-controlled study randomised MTX-IR pts with active RA on a background of stable MTX 3:3:2:3 to oral FIL 200 mg or FIL 100 mg once daily, subcutaneous adalimumab (ADA) 40 mg every 2W, or PBO up to W52; pts receiving PBO at W24 were re-randomised to FIL 100 or 200 mg. Efficacy was assessed using clinical, radiographic, and pt-reported outcomes; W52 comparisons were not adjusted for multiplicity, and nominal p-values are reported. Safety endpoints included types and rates of adverse events (AEs) and laboratory abnormalities. PRO assessment included the HAQ-DI and VAS pain scale, SF-36, and FACIT-Fatigue questionnaire. Change from baseline (CFB) at various time points was assessed up to W52 for each treatment group. Results Of 1,755 treated pts, 1,417 received study drug through W52. FIL efficacy was sustained through W52 with DAS28(CRP) Conclusion Through W52, both FIL 200 and 100 mg showed sustained efficacy, rapid and sustained improvement in patient QoL based on clinical and pt-reported outcomes and were well tolerated in MTX-IR pts with RA. Disclosure D. Walker: Consultancies; Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Roche. A. Kivitz: Consultancies; AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Flexion, Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi, Regeneron, SUN Pharma Advanced Research, Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Pfizer, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Novartis. Member of speakers’ bureau; Celgene, Merck, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Genzyme, Flexion, AbbVie. Y. Tanaka: Honoraria; AbbVie, Asahi Kasei, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and Y. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Takeda and UCB. S. Lee: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. L. Ye: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. H. Hu: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. F. Matzkies: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. B. Bartok: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. B. Bartok: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Guo: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. J.S. Sundy: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. A. Jahreis: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. R. Besuyen: Shareholder/stock ownership; Galapagos BV. Other; Employee of Galapagos BV. B. Combe: Other; Reports research support, honoraria, consulting and speaker fees from AbbVie; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly & Co.; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Janssen; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; Sanofi; and UCB. D. van der Heijde: Consultancies; AbbVie; Amgen; Astellas; AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene; Cyxone; Daiichi-Sankyo; Eisai; Eli Lilly & Co.; Galapagos; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Glaxo-Smith-Kline; Janssen;, Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Regeneron; Roche; Sanofi; Takeda; and UCB. J. Simon-Campos: None. H.S.B. Baraf: Grants/research support; AbbVie; Horizon; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Pfizer; Janssen; and Merck. U. Kumar: None. C. Tasset: Shareholder/stock ownership; Galapagos NV. Other; Employee of Galapagos NV. N. Mozaffarian: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. R.B.M. Landewé: Consultancies; AbbVie; AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly & Co.; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Galapagos NV; Novartis; Pfizer; and UCB. S. Bae: None. E. Keystone: Other; Reports research support, consulting, and speaker fees from AbbVie; Amgen; AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celltrion; F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.; Genentech, Inc; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Janssen; Lilly, ; Merck; Myriad Autoimmune; Pfizer; PuraPharm; Sandoz; Sanofi-Genzyme; Samsung Bioepsis; and UCB. P. Nash: Other; Reports research support, consulting, and speaker and personal fees from AbbVie; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celgene; Eli Lilly & Co.; Gilead Sciences, Inc; Janssen; Merck Sharp & Dohme; Novartis; Pfizer;, Roche; Sanofi; and UCB.

Objective Guselkumab, a human monoclonal antibody specific to interleukin-23p19, demonstrated efficacy and safety versus placebo through week 24 of the phase III DISCOVER-2 trial in biologic-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Here we report 1-year DISCOVER-2 findings.Methods Adults with active PsA (>= 5 swollen and >= 5 tender joints; C-reactive protein level >= 0.6 mg/dl) despite standard nonbiologic treatment were randomized to receive subcutaneous injections of guselkumab 100 mg every 4 weeks, guselkumab 100 mg at week 0, week 4 and every 8 weeks thereafter, or placebo with crossover to guselkumab 100 mg every 4 weeks at week 24. We primarily evaluated clinical efficacy through week 52 by imputing missing data (nonresponse for categorical end points; no change/using multiple imputation for continuous end points). Observed radiographic scores and adverse events (AEs) were summarized.Results Of 739 randomized, treated patients, 93% completed week 52. The proportions of patients in whom a >= 20% improvement from baseline in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) was achieved were maintained after week 24, reaching 71% (173 of 245) and 75% (185 of 248) for patients randomized to receive treatment every 4 weeks or every 8 weeks, respectively, by week 52. The proportions of patients in whom ACR50/ACR70 and skin responses, minimal or very low disease activity, and dactylitis or enthesitis resolution were achieved at week 24 were also maintained through week 52. Further, low levels of radiographic progression, along with improvements in physical function and health-related quality of life, were sustained through week 52 with continued guselkumab treatment. Few patients experienced serious infections through week 52, with no evidence of a dosing regimen response or increase from weeks 0-24 (4 of 493 [0.8%]) to weeks 24-52 (3 of 493 [0.6%]) among guselkumab-randomized patients. No patient developed an opportunistic infection or died.Conclusion In biologic-naive PsA patients, guselkumab provided sustained improvements across diverse manifestations and maintained a favorable risk-benefit profile through week 52.

Background Limited information is available on the impact of treatment with a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) on structural lesions in patients with recent-onset axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). We compared 2-year structural lesion changes on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the sacroiliac joints (SIJ) of patients with recent-onset axSpA receiving etanercept in a clinical trial (EMBARK) to similar patients not receiving biologics in a cohort study (DESIR). We also evaluated the relationship between the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) and change in MRI structural parameters. Methods The difference between etanercept (EMBARK) and control (DESIR) in the net percentage of patients with structural lesion change was determined using the SpondyloArthritis Research Consortium of Canada SIJ Structural Score, with and without adjustment for baseline covariates. The relationship between sustained ASDAS inactive disease, defined as the presence of ASDAS Results This study included 163 patients from the EMBARK trial and 76 from DESIR. The net percentage of patients with erosion decrease was significantly greater for etanercept vs control: unadjusted: 23.9% vs 5.3%; P = 0.01, adjusted: 23.1% vs 2.9%; P = 0.01. For the patients attaining sustained ASDAS inactive disease on etanercept, erosion decrease was evident in significantly more than erosion increase: 34/104 (32.7%) vs 5/104 (4.8%); P Conclusions These data show that a greater proportion of patients achieved regression of erosion with versus without etanercept. However, the link between achieving sustained ASDAS inactive disease and structural lesion change on MRI could not be clearly established. Trial registration EMBARK: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01258738, Registered 13 December 2010; DESIR: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01648907, Registered 24 July 2012.

Objectives We report the open-label extension (OLE) of the GO-AHEAD study evaluating the long-term efficacy and safety of golimumab (GLM) in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA). Methods Patients [both GLM- and placebo (PBO)-treated in the double-blind phase] received GLM 50 mg every 4 weeks during the OLE (36-week treatment; additional 8-week safety follow-up; GLM/GLM and PBO/GLM groups). All patients who entered and received ≥1 dose of study treatment in the OLE were included in the efficacy and safety analyses. The primary efficacy evaluations were the proportions of patients achieving 20% and 40% improvement in the ASAS criteria (ASAS20 and ASAS40, respectively). Responders’ analyses were calculated using a non-responder imputation approach. Results Of 198 patients randomised, 189/198 (95.5%) entered the OLE; 174/198 patients (87.9%) completed all visits. Although the proportion of responders increased from week 16 to week 52 in the OLE in both GLM/GLM and PBO/GLM groups, the GLM/GLM group had a higher proportion of responders than the PBO/GLM group throughout the OLE from week 16 to week 52 (ASAS20: 71.1% to 83.9% vs 40.0% to 75.0%, respectively; ASAS40: 56.7% to 76.3% vs 23.0% to 59.4%, respectively; ASAS partial remission: 33.0% to 53.8% and 18.0% to 45.8%). In the OLE, the overall incidence of AEs was lower in the GLM/GLM vs PBO/GLM groups (41.9% and 54.2%). Conclusions Sustained improvement in clinical efficacy was observed at 52 weeks in patients with nr-axSpA following GLM treatment. GLM was well tolerated and provided substantial long-term benefits to patients with nr-axSpA. Trial registration NCT01453725; United States National Library of Medicine clinical trials database; www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is a chronic rheumatic disease characterised by inflammation predominantly involving the spine and the sacroiliac joints. In some patients, axial inflammation leads to irreversible structural damage that in the spine is usually quantified by the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (mSASSS). Available therapeutic options include biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), which have been proven effective in suppressing inflammation in several randomised controlled trials (RCT), the gold standard for evaluating causal treatment effects. RCTs are, however, unfeasible for testing structural effects in axSpA mainly due to the low sensitivity to change of the mSASSS. The available literature therefore mainly includes observational research, which poses serious challenges to the determination of causality. Here, we review the studies testing the effect of bDMARDs on spinal radiographic progression, making use of the principles of causal inference. By exploring the assumptions of causality under counterfactual reasoning (exchangeability, positivity and consistency), we distinguish between studies that likely have reported confounded treatment effects and studies that, on the basis of their design, have more likely reported causal treatment effects. We conclude that bDMARDs might, indirectly, interfere with spinal radiographic progression in axSpA by their effect on inflammation. Innovations in imaging are expected, so that placebo-controlled trials can in the future become a reality. In the meantime, causal inference analysis using observational data may contribute to a better understanding of whether disease modification is possible in axSpA.

ObjectivesTo characterise peripheral musculoskeletal involvement in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) including psoriatic arthritis (PsA), across the world.MethodsCross-sectional study with 24 participating countries. Patients with a diagnosis of axial SpA (axSpA), peripheral SpA (pSpA) or PsA according to their rheumatologist were included. The investigators were asked which diagnosis out of a list of six (axSpA, PsA, pSpA, inflammatory bowel disease-associated SpA, reactive arthritis or juvenile SpA (Juv-SpA)) fitted the patient best. Peripheral manifestations (ie, peripheral joint disease, enthesitis, dactylitis and root joint disease), their localisation and treatments were evaluated.ResultsA total of 4465 patients were included (61% men, mean age 44.5 years) from four geographic areas: Latin America (n=538), Europe plus North America (n=1677), Asia (n=975) and the Middle East plus North Africa (n=1275). Of those, 78% had ever suffered from at least one peripheral musculoskeletal manifestation; 57% had peripheral joint disease, 44% had enthesitis and 15% had dactylitis. Latin American had far more often peripheral joint disease (80%) than patients from other areas. Patients with PsA had predominantly upper limb and small joint involvement (52%).Hip and shoulder involvement was found in 34% of patients. The prevalence of enthesitis ranged between 41% in patients with axSpA and 65% in patients with Juv-SpA. Dactylitis was most frequent among patients with PsA (37%).ConclusionThese results suggest that all peripheral features can be found in all subtypes of SpA, and that differences are quantitative rather than qualitative. In a high proportion of patients, axial and peripheral manifestations coincided. These findings reconfirm SpA clinical subtypes are descendants of the same underlying disease, called SpA.

ObjectivesTo summarise the evidence on diagnostic issues in difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (D2T RA) informing the EULAR recommendations for the management of D2T RA.MethodsA systematic literature review (SLR) was performed regarding the optimal confirmation of a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and of mimicking diseases and the assessment of inflammatory disease activity. PubMed and Embase databases were searched up to December 2019. Relevant papers were selected and appraised.ResultsEighty-two papers were selected for detailed assessment. The identified evidence had several limitations: (1) no studies were found including D2T RA patients specifically, and only the minority of studies included RA patients in whom there was explicit doubt about the diagnosis of RA or presence of inflammatory activity; (2) mostly only correlations were reported, not directly useful to evaluate the accuracy of detecting inflammatory activity in clinical practice; (3) heterogeneous, and often suboptimal, reference standards were used and (4) (thus) only very few studies had a low risk of bias.To ascertain a diagnosis of RA or relevant mimicking disease, no diagnostic test with sufficient validity and accuracy was identified. To ascertain inflammatory activity in patients with RA in general and in those with obesity and fibromyalgia, ultrasonography (US) was studied most extensively and was found to be the most promising diagnostic test.ConclusionsThis SLR highlights the scarcity of high-quality studies regarding diagnostic issues in D2T RA. No diagnostic tests with sufficient validity and accuracy were found to confirm nor exclude the diagnosis of RA nor its mimicking diseases in D2T RA patients. Despite the lack of high-quality direct evidence, US may have an additional value to assess the presence of inflammatory activity in D2T RA patients, including those with concomitant obesity or fibromyalgia.

Objectives: There are two different approaches to involve participants in consecutive rounds of a Delphi survey: (1) invitation to every round independent of response to the previous round ("all-rounds'') and (2) invitation only when responded to the previous round ("respondents-only''). This study aimed to investigate the effect of invitation approach on the response rate and final outcome of a Delphi survey.Study Design and Setting: Both experts (N = 188) and patients (N = 188) took part in a Delphi survey to update the core outcome set (COS) for axial spondyloarthritis. A study with 1:1 allocation to two experimental groups (ie, "all-rounds'' [N = 187] and "respondents-only'' [N = 189]) was built-in.Results: The overall response rate was lower in the "respondents-only group'' (46%) compared to the "all-rounds group'' (61%). All domains that were selected for inclusion in the COS by the "respondents-only group'' were also selected by the "all-rounds group.'' Additionally, the four most important domains were identical between groups after the final round, with only minor differences in the other domains.Conclusion: Inviting panel members who missed a round to a subsequent round will lead to a better representation of opinions of the originally invited panel and reduces the chance of false consensus, while it does not influence the final outcome of the Delphi. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

ObjectivesTo summarise, by a systematic literature review (SLR), the evidence regarding pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic strategies in difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (D2T RA), informing the EULAR recommendations for the management of D2T RA.MethodsPubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched up to December 2019. Relevant papers were selected and appraised.ResultsTwo hundred seven (207) papers studied therapeutic strategies. Limited evidence was found on effective and safe disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in patients with comorbidities and other contraindications that limit DMARD options (patients with obesity, hepatitis B and C, risk of venous thromboembolisms, pregnancy and lactation). In patients who previously failed biological (b-)DMARDs, all currently used b/targeted synthetic (ts-)DMARDs were found to be more effective than placebo. In patients who previously failed a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), there was a tendency of non-TNFi bDMARDs to be more effective than TNFis. Generally, effectiveness decreased in patients who previously failed a higher number of bDMARDs. Additionally, exercise, psychological, educational and self-management interventions were found to improve non-inflammatory complaints (mainly functional disability, pain, fatigue), education to improve goal setting, and self-management programmes, educational and psychological interventions to improve self-management.The identified evidence had several limitations: (1) no studies were found in patients with D2T RA specifically, (2) heterogeneous outcome criteria were used and (3) most studies had a moderate or high risk of bias.ConclusionsThis SLR underscores the scarcity of high-quality evidence on the pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment of patients with D2T RA. Effectiveness of b/tsDMARDs decreased in RA patients who had failed a higher number of bDMARDs and a subsequent b/tsDMARD of a previously not targeted mechanism of action was somewhat more effective. Additionally, a beneficial effect of non-pharmacological interventions was found for improvement of non-inflammatory complaints, goal setting and self-management.

Objectives To investigate the determinants of patient well-being over time, and the influence of age, gender and education in patients with early axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Methods Five-year data from DESIR, a cohort of early axSpA, were analysed. The outcome was the BAS-G over 5 years. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used to test the relationship between potential explanatory variables from five outcome domains (disease activity, physical function, spinal mobility, structural damage and axial inflammation) and BAS-G over time. Longitudinal relationships were analysed using an autoregressive GEE model. Age, gender and educational level were tested as effect modifiers or confounders. Results A total of 708 patients were included. Higher BASDAI questions on fatigue [β (95% CI): 0.17 (0.13, 0.22)], back pain [0.51 (0.46, 0.56)], peripheral joint pain [0.08 (0.04, 0.12)] and severity of morning stiffness [0.08 (0.03–0.13)], and higher BASFI [0.14 (0.08, 0.19)] were associated with a higher BAS-G. In the autoregressive model, the same variables except for morning stiffness were associated with a worsening in BAS-G. Age, gender and educational level were neither effect modifiers nor confounders. Conclusion A higher level of back pain is associated with a worsening of patient well-being, as are, though to a lesser extent, higher levels of fatigue, peripheral joint pain and physical disability. Age, gender and educational level do not have an impact on these relationships.

Objective: To assess if an integrated longitudinal analysis using all available imaging data affects the precision of estimates of change in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), with completers analysis as reference standard.Methods: Patients from the DESIR cohort fulfilling the ASAS axSpA criteria were included. Radiographs and MRIs of the sacroiliac joints and spine were obtained at baseline, 1, 2 and 5 years. Each image was scored by 2 or 3 readers in 3 'reading-waves' (or campaigns). Each outcome was analyzed: i. According to a 'combination algorithm' (e.g. '2 out of 30 for binary scores); and ii. Per reader. Change over time was analyzed with generalized estimating equations by 3 approaches: (a)'integrated-analysis' (all patients with >1 score from >1 reader from all waves); (b1)Completers-only analysis (patients with 5-year follow-up, using scores from individual readers); (b2)Completers analysis using a 'combination algorithm' (as (b1) but with combined scores). Approaches (b1) and (b2) were considered the 'reference'.Results: In total, 413 patients were included. The 'integrated analysis' was more inclusive with similar levels of precision of the change estimates as compared to both completers analyses. In fact, for low-incident outcomes (e.g.% mNY-positive over 5-years), an increased incidence was 'captured', with more precision, by the 'integrated analysis' compared to the completers analysis with combined scores (% change/year (95%CI): 1.1 (0.7; 1.5) vs 1.2 (0.5; 1.8), respectively).Conclusion: An efficient and entirely assumption-free 'integrated analysis' does not jeopardize precision of the estimates of change in imaging parameters and may yield increased statistical power for detecting changes with low incidence. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

ObjectiveTo investigate if in radiographic axial Spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) low vertebral bone mineral density (BMD) is associated with development of new syndesmophytes at the same vertebral level.MethodsIn a post-hoc analysis from the ASSERT trial (infliximab vs placebo), dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry was used to measure baseline BMD (g/cm2) of the lumbar spine L1 to L4. Syndesmophyte formation was assessed in the same vertebrae on conventional radiographs defined as an increase in modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score from 0 or 1 to 2 or 3 after 2 years. Radiographs were scored by two readers. Generalised estimating equations (GEE) adjusted for within-patient correlation across multiple vertebrae, taking potential confounders into account.ResultsWe analysed 599 vertebrae in 165 r-axSpA patients (78% male, mean (SD) age 38 (10) years, 67% with at least one syndesmophyte anywhere in the spine). In total, 24 to 74 new syndesmophytes developed in 9 (5%) to 30 (18%) patients and 13 (2%) to 39 (7%) vertebrae, if either a syndesmophyte was seen by both or only one of the readers (ie, specific and sensitive definitions) respectively. In multivariable analyses, no association was found between baseline local vertebral BMD and new syndesmophyte formation after 2 years: adjOR (95% CI): 0.56 (0.01, 44.45) (specific definition) and 0.26 (0.03, 2.63) (sensitive definition).ConclusionIn patients with active and established r-axSpA, with an observed low incidence of lumbar spine syndesmophyte formation over 2 years, no relationship was found between baseline BMD and new radiographic syndesmophyte formation at the same vertebra.

Objectives To evaluate the occurrence and progression of facet joint ankylosis in the whole spine using low-dose CT (ldCT) in radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) and compare progression of facet joint ankylosis and syndesmophytes. Methods Patients with r-axSpA from the Sensitive Imaging in Ankylosing Spondylitis (SIAS) cohort underwent ldCT at baseline (n = 60) and 2 years (n = 53). Facet joints (right and left, levels C2-S1) were scored as ankylosed, not ankylosed or unable to assess. Joints that were frequently poorly visible (>15% missing), were excluded. Inter-reader reliability on the patient level was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and smallest detectable change (SDC). Ankylosis was assessed at joint level and patient level for both timepoints. Syndesmophytes were assessed with CT syndesmophyte score. Results Levels C5-T2 were difficult to assess and excluded from all further analyses. Facet joint ICCs were good to excellent for status scores (0.72–0.93) and poor to excellent for progression scores (0.10–0.91). Facet joint ankylosis was detected at every level but most frequently in the thoracic joints. In total, 48% of patients showed 2-year progression. Most progression occurred in the thoracic segment. Using SDCs as cutoff, 18% of patients had progression of facet joint ankylosis only, whereas 20% of patients had progression of syndesmophytes only. Conclusion This is the first study evaluating facet joints in the whole spine by ldCT in r-axSpA. Facet joint ankylosis was detected most often in the thoracic spine. Assessing facet joints in addition to syndesmophytes detected substantially more patients with damage progression over two years.

ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy/safety of tofacitinib in adult patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).MethodsThis phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study enrolled patients aged ≥18 years diagnosed with active AS, meeting the modified New York criteria, with centrally read radiographs, and an inadequate response or intolerance to ≥2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day or placebo for 16 weeks. After week 16, all patients received open-label tofacitinib until week 48. The primary and key secondary endpoints were Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society ≥20% improvement (ASAS20) and ≥40% improvement (ASAS40) responses, respectively, at week 16. Safety was assessed throughout.Results269 patients were randomised and treated: tofacitinib, n=133; placebo, n=136. At week 16, the ASAS20 response rate was significantly (pConclusionsIn adults with active AS, tofacitinib demonstrated significantly greater efficacy versus placebo. No new potential safety risks were identified.Trial registration numberNCT03502616

ObjectivesJanus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have been approved for use in various immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. With five agents licensed, it was timely to summarise the current understanding of JAKi use based on a systematic literature review (SLR) on efficacy and safety.MethodsExisting data were evaluated by a steering committee and subsequently reviewed by a 29 person expert committee leading to the formulation of a consensus statement that may assist the clinicians, patients and other stakeholders once the decision is made to commence a JAKi. The committee included patients, rheumatologists, a gastroenterologist, a haematologist, a dermatologist, an infectious disease specialist and a health professional. The SLR informed the Task Force on controlled and open clinical trials, registry data, phase 4 trials and meta-analyses. In addition, approval of new compounds by, and warnings from regulators that were issued after the end of the SLR search date were taken into consideration.ResultsThe Task Force agreed on and developed four general principles and a total of 26 points for consideration which were grouped into six areas addressing indications, treatment dose and comedication, contraindications, pretreatment screening and risks, laboratory and clinical follow-up examinations, and adverse events. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendations were determined based on the SLR and levels of agreement were voted on for every point, reaching a range between 8.8 and 9.9 on a 10-point scale.ConclusionThe consensus provides an assessment of evidence for efficacy and safety of an important therapeutic class with guidance on issues of practical management.

Objective The aim was to assess the safety and efficacy of up to 156 weeks of ixekizumab (an IL-17A antagonist) treatment in PsA patients. Methods In a phase III study, patients naïve to biologic treatment were randomized to placebo, adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks (ADA; active reference) or ixekizumab 80 mg every 2 weeks (IXEQ2W) or every 4 weeks (IXEQ4W) after an initial dose of 160 mg. At week 24 (week 16 for inadequate responders), ADA (after 8-week washout) and placebo patients were re-randomized to IXEQ2W or IXEQ4W. Outcomes were evaluated using a modified non-responder imputation [linear extrapolation for radiographic progression (modified total Sharp score = 0)] during extended treatment until week 156. Results Of 417 patients, 381 entered the extension, and 243 of 381 (63.8%) completed the 156-week study. Incidence rates of treatment-emergent and serious adverse events, respectively, were 38.0 and 5.2 with IXEQ2W (n = 189) and 38.1 and 8.0 with IXEQ4W (n = 197). One death occurred (IXEQ4W). With IXEQ2W and IXEQ4W, respectively, the response rates persisted to week 156 as measured by the ACR response ≥20% (62.5 and 69.8%), ≥50% (56.1 and 51.8%) and ≥70% (43.8 and 33.4%), psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) 75 (69.1 and 63.5%), PASI 90 (64.5 and 51.2%) and PASI 100 (60.5 and 43.6%). Inhibition of radiographic progression also persisted to week 156 in 61% of IXEQ2W and 71% of IXEQ4W patients. Conclusion In this 156-week study of ixekizumab, the safety profile remained consistent with previous reports, and improvements in signs and symptoms of PsA were observed, including persistent low rates of radiographic progression. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01695239, EudraCT 2011-002326-49.

Background Patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are at increased risk of depression. This increased risk has been hypothesized to be solely secondary due to AS-related symptoms, or additionally due to a common inflammatory pathway. From a clinical perspective, it is important to know whether treatment with tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors reduces depressive symptoms, while from a pathophysiological point of view, it would be insightful to understand whether such an effect would be a direct result of reduced inflammation, the result of reduced AS-related symptoms, or both. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of infliximab on depressive symptoms in patients with AS in a randomized-controlled trial setting. Methods Data were retrieved from a subgroup of patients from the AS Study for the Evaluation of Recombinant Infliximab Therapy (ASSERT). Patients were randomly allocated to infliximab (n = 16) or placebo (n = 7) until week 24, after which all received infliximab until week 54. Associations between treatment group and depressive symptoms, measured with the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale (CES-D, range 0–60 (best-worst)) at baseline and over time, were explored with generalized estimating equations (GEE). Results Mean CES-D score at baseline was 15.5 (SD 9.3) in the infliximab group and 17.3 (SD 5.7) in the placebo group. Twelve patients (52%) had a CES-D score > 16, suggestive for clinical depression. After 24 weeks, mean CES-D had decreased to 9.5 (SD 11.4) in the infliximab group, but was 18.0 (SD 6.9) in the placebo group. GEE revealed larger improvements in depressive symptoms (B = − 6.63, 95%CI − 13.35 to 0.09) and odds of possible depression (OR = 0.02, 95%CI 0.00 to 0.72) in the infliximab group, compared to the placebo group. Both associations largely disappeared when adjusted for self-reported disease activity and/or physical function. Additional adjustment for C-reactive protein (CRP) did not change results. Conclusions Depressive symptoms are common in patients with AS and active disease. Infliximab improves these depressive symptoms in AS when compared to placebo by improving disease symptoms. We did not find an indication for a direct link between CRP-mediated inflammation and depressive symptoms. Trial registration Trial registration (ASSERT): NCT00207701. Registered on September 21, 2005 (retrospectively registered).

Objective: To investigate the relationship between smoking and imaging outcomes over 5 years in axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) and to assess whether socioeconomic factors influence these relationships. Methods: Axial SpA patients from the Devenir des Spondylarthropathies Indifferérenciées Récentes cohort were included. The following 4 imaging outcomes were assessed by 3 central readers at baseline, 2 years, and 5 years: spine radiographs (using the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score [mSASSS]), sacroiliac (SI) joint radiographs (using the modified New York criteria), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine (using the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada [SPARCC] score), and MRI of the SI joint (using the SPARCC score). The explanatory variable of interest was smoking status at baseline. Interactions between smoking and socioeconomic factors (i.e., job type [blue-collar or manual work versus white-collar or nonmanual work] and education [low versus high]) were first tested, and if significant, analyses were run using separate strata. Generalized estimating equations models were used, with adjustments for confounders. Results: In total, 406 axial SpA patients were included (52% male, 40% smokers, and 18% blue collar). Smoking was independently associated with more MRI-detected SI joint inflammation at each visit over the 5 years, an effect that was seen only in patients with blue-collar professions (β = 5.41 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.35, 9.48]) and in patients with low education levels (β = 2.65 [95% CI 0.42,4.88]), using separate models. Smoking was also significantly associated with spinal inflammation (β = 1.69 [95% CI 0.45, 2.93]) and SI joint damage (β = 0.57 [95% CI 0.18, 0.96]) across all patients, irrespective of socioeconomic factors and other potential confounders. Conclusion: Strong associations were found between smoking at baseline and MRI-detected SI joint inflammation at each visit over a time period of 5 years in axial SpA patients with a blue-collar job or low education level. These findings suggest a possible role for mechanical stress amplifying the effect of smoking on axial inflammation in axial SpA. publishersversion published

Introduction Achievement of remission is a key treatment goal for patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). C-OPTIMISE assessed achievement of sustained clinical remission in patients with axSpA, including radiographic (r) and non-radiographic (nr) axSpA, during certolizumab pegol (CZP) treatment, and subsequent maintenance of remission following CZP dose continuation, dose reduction or withdrawal. Here, we report outcomes from the first 48 weeks (induction period) of C-OPTIMISE, during which patients received open-label CZP. Methods C-OPTIMISE (NCT02505542) was a two-part, multicenter, phase 3b study in adult patients with early axSpA (r-/nr-axSpA), including a 48-week open-label induction period followed by a 48-week maintenance period. Patients with active adult-onset axSpA

© 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved, Background: Clinical outcomes in elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis (EORA), starting after the age of 60, are conflicting. Thus, we aimed to investigate in a unique biopsy-driven, treatment-naïve early arthritis cohort, the relationship between synovial pathobiology of elderly- (EORA) and younger-onset rheumatoid arthritis (YORA) patients through clinical, imaging and treatment response outcome-measures. Methods: Patients (n = 140) with early RA (, This work was supported by the Medical Research Council (grant number 36661, to PEAC); Arthritis Research UK (now Versus Arthritis; Experimental Arthritis Treatment Centre Grant, number 20022, to Centre for Experimental Medicine and Rheumatology); Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (Interno Doutorando Bursary reference SFRH/SINTD/95030/2013, to VCR); European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR Scientific Training Bursary 2014, to VCR); and Sociedade Portuguesa de Reumatologia (Fundo de Apoio à Investigação da SPR 2015, to VCR).

Objective.The Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (RAMRIS) is validated for hand MRI. Its reliability applied to metatarsophalangeal (MTP 1–5) joints is unknown and was studied in early arthritis and clinically suspect arthralgia.Methods.Patients underwent 1.5 Tesla MRI of MTP, metacarpophalangeal (MCP 2–5), and wrist joints. Two paired readers scored bone marrow edema (BME), synovitis, tenosynovitis, and erosions. Interreader reliability was assessed of 441 consecutive early arthritis patients at baseline, 215 by 2 readers, and the remaining 226 by 2 different readers. Two readers scored baseline MRI of 82 consecutive patients with clinically suspect arthralgia, and 40 randomly selected patients by 9 readers. Intrareader reliability was determined on a random set of 15 early arthritis patients, scored twice by 2 readers. For change scores, 30 early arthritis patients with baseline and 1-year followup MRI were scored by 2 readers. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), Bland-Altman (BA) plots, and smallest detectable change (SDC) were determined. MRI data of MTP joints were compared to wrist and MCP joints.Results.Interreader ICC and mean scores in early arthritis were BME ICC 0.91–0.92 (mean 1.5 ± SD 2.6), synovitis 0.90–0.92 (1.3 ± 1.7), tenosynovitis 0.80–0.85 (1.1 ± 1.8), and erosions 0.88–0.89 (0.7 ± 1.0). In patients with clinically suspect arthralgia, ICC were comparable. Intrareader ICC for inflammatory MRI features were 0.84–0.98, for erosions 0.71 (reader 1), and 0.92 (reader 2). Change score ICC were ≥ 0.90, except erosions (0.77). SDC were ≤ 1.0. BA plots showed no systematic bias. Reliability scores of MTP joints were similar to MCP and wrist joints.Conclusion.Status and change MRI scores of BME, synovitis, tenosynovitis, and erosions of MTP joints can be assessed reliably by RAMRIS.

ObjectivesTo summarise radiographic data in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) as part of the radiographic inhibition claim of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) approved for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsA systemic literature review was performed using the Medline database from 1994 to February 2020. The results were grouped based on the scoring methods (Sharp, Genant modification, van der Heijde modification) and RA patient populations.ResultsOne hundred sixty-eight publications were selected. After detailed assessment, 52 RCTs (7 methotrexate (MTX)-naive, 23 MTX inadequate response (IR), 9 DMARDs IR and 3 tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors (TNFi) IR studies) were finally included. Information on patient population, scoring method used, reader reliability, statistical analyses and detailed radiographic data on baseline and change scores over multiple follow-up periods are presented.ConclusionThe data gathered in this review serve as a repository for the design of future trials with radiographic damage as an outcome.

Objective To confirm validity of the Self-administered Comorbidity Questionnaire modified for patients with SpA (mSCQ), and assess whether validity improves when adding items on extra-articular manifestations (EAMs), i.e. uveitis, psoriasis, and IBD, and osteoporosis and fractures. Methods Data from the Assessment in SpondyloArthritis international Society COMOrbidities in SPondyloArthritis study were used. Criterion validity of presence of EAMs, osteoporosis and fractures was assessed as agreement (kappa) between patients’ self-reported and physician-confirmed disease. Construct validity of the mSCQ including EAMs, osteoporosis and/or fractures (SpA-SCQ) was assessed by testing hypotheses about correlations with demographics, physical function, work ability, health utility and disease activity, and was compared with construct validity of the rheumatic disease comorbidity index. Results In total, 3984 patients contributed to the analyses. Agreement between patient-reported and physician-reported EAMs was substantial to almost perfect (uveitis ĸ = 0.81, IBD ĸ = 0.73, psoriasis ĸ = 0.86). Agreement for osteoporosis (ĸ = 0.38) and fractures (ĸ = 0.39) was fair. As hypothesized, the mSCQ correlated moderately to weakly with age, physical function, work limitations and health utility, and very weakly with disease activity. In contrast to our hypothesis, adding EAMs, osteoporosis and/or fractures to the mSCQ decreased correlations with several external constructs, especially among patients with peripheral SpA. Correlations with the different constructs were stronger for the both mSCQ and SpA-SCQ (rBASFI = 0.34; rEQ-5D = −0.33) compared with the rheumatic disease comorbidity index (rBASFI = 0.24; rEQ-5D = −0.21). Conclusion The mSCQ is a valid self-report instrument to assess the influence of comorbidities on health outcomes in patients with SpA. Adding EAMs and/or osteoporosis or fractures does not improve validity of the mSCQ.

Objective To evaluate the effect of secukinumab on radiographic progression through 52 weeks in patients with PsA from the FUTURE 5 study. Methods Patients with active PsA, stratified by prior anti-TNF use (naïve or inadequate response), were randomized to s.c. secukinumab 300 mg load (300 mg), 150 mg load (150 mg), 150 mg no load regimens or placebo at baseline, at weeks 1, 2 and 3 and every 4 weeks starting at week 4. Radiographic progression was assessed by change in van der Heijde-modified total Sharp score (vdH-mTSS; mean of two readers). Statistical analysis used a linear mixed-effects model (random slope) at weeks 24 and 52, and observed data at week 52. Assessments at week 52 included additional efficacy endpoints (non-responders imputation and mixed-effects models for repeated measures) and safety. Results The majority (86.6%) of patients completed 52 weeks of treatment. The proportion of patients with no radiographic progression (change from baseline in vdH-mTSS ⩽0.5) was 91.8, 85.2 and 87.2% in 300, 150 and 150 mg no load groups, respectively, at week 52. The change in vdH-mTSS from baseline to week 52 using random slope [mean change (s.e.)] was –0.18 (0.17), 0.11 (0.18) and –0.20 (0.18) in 300, 150 and 150 mg no load groups, respectively; the corresponding observed data [mean change (s.d.)] was –0.09 (1.02), 0.13 (1.39) and 0.21 (1.15). Clinical efficacy endpoints were sustained, and no new or unexpected safety signals were reported through 52 weeks. Conclusion Secukinumab 300 and 150 mg with or without s.c. loading regimen provided sustained low rates of radiographic progression through 52 weeks of treatment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02404350.

ObjectiveTo perform an update of a review of the efficacy and safety of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsThis is a systematic literature research of 2015–2018 publications on all DMARDs in patients with PsA, searching Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Efficacy was assessed in randomised controlled trials. For safety, cohort studies, case–control studies and long-term extensions (LTEs) were analysed.Results56 publications (efficacy: n=33; safety n=23) were analysed. The articles were on tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (n=6; golimumab, etanercept and biosimilars), interleukin (IL)-17A inhibitors (n=10; ixekizumab, secukinumab), IL-23-p19 inhibitors (n=2; guselkumab, risankizumab), clazakizumab (IL-6 inhibitor), abatacept (CD80/86 inhibitor) and ABT-122 (anti-TNF/IL-17A), respectively. One study compared ustekinumab (IL-12/23i) with TNF inhibitor therapy in patients with entheseal disease. Three articles investigated DMARD tapering. Trials on targeted synthetic DMARDs investigated apremilast (phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor) and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi; tofacitinib, filgotinib). Biosimilar comparison with bio-originator showed non-inferiority. Safety was evaluated in 13 LTEs, 9 cohort studies and 1 case–control study investigating malignancies, infections, infusion reactions, multiple sclerosis and major cardiovascular events, as well as efficacy and safety of vaccination. No new safety signals were identified; however, warnings on the risk of venous thromboembolic events including pulmonary embolism when using JAKi were issued by regulators based on other studies.ConclusionMany drugs in PsA are available and have demonstrated efficacy against placebo. Efficacy varies across PsA manifestations. Safety must also be taken into account. This review informed the development of the European League Against Rheumatism 2019 updated PsA management recommendations.

ObjectivesTo perform a systematic literature review (SLR) concerning the safety of synthetic (s) and biological (b) disease-modifying anti rheumatic dugs (DMARDs) to inform the 2019 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsAn SLR of observational studies comparing safety outcomes of any DMARD with another intervention for the management of RA. A comparator group was required for inclusion. For treatments still without registry data (eg, sarilumab and the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors baricitinib, upadacitinib), randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and long-term extensions (LTEs) were used. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed according to standard procedures.ResultsForty-two observational studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, addressing safety outcomes with bDMARDs and sDMARDs. Nine studies showed no difference in the risk of serious infections across bDMARDs and two studies (high RoB) showed an increased risk with bDMARDs compared with conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (adjusted incidence rate ratio 3.1–3.9). The risk of Herpes zoster infection was similar across bDMARDs, but one study showed an increased risk with tofacitinib compared with abatacept (adjusted HR (aHR) 2.0). Five studies showed no increased risk of cancer for bDMARDs compared with csDMARDs. An increased risk of lower intestinal perforation was found for tocilizumab compared with csDMARDs (aHR 4.5) and tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) (aHR 2.6–4.0). Sixty manuscripts reported safety data from RCTs/LTEs. Overall, no unexpected safety outcomes were found, except for the possibly increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) with JAK inhibitors.ConclusionData obtained by this SLR confirm the known safety profile of bDMARDs. The risk of VTE in RA, especially in patients on JAK inhibitors, needs further evaluation.

ObjectivesTo inform the 2019 update of the European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsA systematic literature research (SLR) to investigate the efficacy of any disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) (conventional synthetic (cs)DMARD, biological (b) and biosimilar DMARD, targeted synthetic (ts)DMARD) or glucocorticoid (GC) therapy in patients with RA was done by searching MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library for articles published between 2016 and 8 March 2019.Results234 abstracts were selected for detailed assessment, with 136 finally included. They comprised the efficacy of bDMARDs versus placebo or other bDMARDs, efficacy of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (JAKi) across different patient populations and head-to-head of different bDMARDs versus JAKi or other bDMARDs. Switching of bDMARDs to other bDMARDs or tsDMARDs, strategic trials and tapering studies of bDMARDs, csDMARDs and JAKi were assessed. The drugs evaluated included abatacept, adalimumab, ABT-122, baricitinib, certolizumab pegol, SBI-087, CNTO6785, decernotinib, etanercept, filgotinib, golimumab, GCs, GS-9876, guselkumab, hydroxychloroquine, infliximab, leflunomide, mavrilimumab, methotrexate, olokizumab, otilimab, peficitinib, rituximab, sarilumab, salazopyrine, secukinumab, sirukumab, tacrolimus, tocilizumab, tofacitinib, tregalizumab, upadacitinib, ustekinumab and vobarilizumab. The efficacy of many bDMARDs and tsDMARDs was shown. Switching to another tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) or non-TNFi bDMARDs after TNFi treatment failure is efficacious. Tapering of DMARDs is possible in patients achieving long-standing stringent clinical remission; in patients with residual disease activity (including patients in LDA) the risk of flares is increased during the tapering. Biosimilars are non-inferior to their reference products.ConclusionThis SLR informed the task force regarding the evidence base of various therapeutic regimen for the development of the update of EULAR’s RA management recommendation.

Objective.Compelling evidence supports a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy for optimal outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). There is limited knowledge regarding the factors that impede implementation of T2T, particularly in a setting where adherence to T2T is protocol-specified. We aimed to assess clinical factors that associate with failure to adhere to T2T.Methods.Patients with RA from 10 countries who were starting or changing conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and/or starting tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were followed for 2 years. Participating physicians were required per protocol to adhere to the T2T strategy. Factors influencing adherence to T2T low disease activity (T2T-LDA; 44-joint count Disease Activity Score ≤ 2.4) were analyzed in 2 types of binomial generalized estimating equations models: (1) including only baseline features (baseline model); and (2) modeling variables that inherently vary over time as such (longitudinal model).Results.A total of 571 patients were recruited and 439 (76.9%) completed 2-year followup. Failure of adherence to T2T-LDA was noted in 1765 visits (40.5%). In the baseline multivariable model, a high number of comorbidities (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02–1.19), smoking (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.08–1.63) and high number of tender joints (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02–1.04) were independently associated with failure to implement T2T, while anticitrullinated protein antibody/rheumatoid factor positivity (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.50–0.80) was a significant facilitator of T2T. Results were similar in the longitudinal model.Conclusion.Lack of adherence to T2T in the RA BIODAM cohort was evident in a substantial proportion despite being a protocol requirement, and this could be predicted by clinical features. [Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) BIODAM cohort; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01476956].

ObjectiveTo update the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsAccording to the EULAR standardised operating procedures, a systematic literature review was followed by a consensus meeting to develop this update involving 28 international taskforce members in May 2019. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendations were determined.ResultsThe updated recommendations comprise 6 overarching principles and 12 recommendations. The overarching principles address the nature of PsA and diversity of both musculoskeletal and non-musculoskeletal manifestations; the need for collaborative management and shared decision-making is highlighted. The recommendations provide a treatment strategy for pharmacological therapies. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and local glucocorticoid injections are proposed as initial therapy; for patients with arthritis and poor prognostic factors, such as polyarthritis or monoarthritis/oligoarthritis accompanied by factors such as dactylitis or joint damage, rapid initiation of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs is recommended. If the treatment target is not achieved with this strategy, a biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) targeting tumour necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin (IL)-17A or IL-12/23 should be initiated, taking into account skin involvement if relevant. If axial disease predominates, a TNF inhibitor or IL-17A inhibitor should be started as first-line disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. Use of Janus kinase inhibitors is addressed primarily after bDMARD failure. Phosphodiesterase-4 inhibition is proposed for patients in whom these other drugs are inappropriate, generally in the context of mild disease. Drug switches and tapering in sustained remission are addressed.ConclusionThese recommendations provide stakeholders with an updated consensus on the pharmacological management of PsA, based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion.

Objectives To evaluate self-reported and assessor-reported joint counts for pain and their value in measuring pain and joint activity in hand OA patients. Methods A total of 524 patients marked painful joints on hand diagrams. Nurses assessed tenderness upon palpation. Pain was measured with a visual analogue scale pain and the Australian/Canadian hand OA index subscale pain. Synovitis and bone marrow lesions in right hand distal/proximal interphalangeal joints on MRI served as measure of joint activity. Agreement was assessed on the patient (intraclass correlation coefficient, Bland–Altman plot) and joint level (percentage absolute agreement). Correlations with measures of pain and joint activity were analysed, and joint level associations with synovitis/bone marrow lesions were calculated. Results Self-reported painful joint count (median 8, interquartile range 4–13) was consistently higher than assessor-reported tender joint count (3, 1–7). Agreement between patients and nurses on overall scores was low. Percentage absolute agreement on the joint level was 61–89%. Joint counts correlated similarly but weakly with measures of pain and joint activity (r = 0.14–0.38). On the joint level, assessor-reported tenderness was more strongly associated with synovitis/bone marrow lesions than self-reported pain. Conclusion In hand OA, self- and assessor-reported joint counts cannot be used interchangeably, and measure other pain aspects than questionnaires. Assessor-reported tenderness was most closely related to MRI-defined joint activity.

ObjectiveIt is unknown if in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) patients’ illness perceptions and coping strategies change when disease activity changes.MethodsPatients diagnosed with axSpA and with 1 or more follow-up visits (1 and/or 2 yrs in the SPACE cohort) were included. Mixed linear models were used for illness perceptions (range 1–5), coping (range 1–4), back pain (numeric rating scale range 0–10), health-related quality of life (range 0–100), physical and mental component summary (PCS and MCS; range 0–100), work productivity loss (WPL; range 0–100), and activity impairment (AI; range 0–100%), separately, to test if they changed over time.ResultsAt baseline, 150 axSpA patients (mean age 30.4 yrs, 51% female, 65% HLA-B27+) had a mean (SD) numeric rating scale back pain of 4.0 (2.5), PCS of 28.8 (14.0), MCS of 47.8 (12.4), WPL of 34.1% (29.8), and AI of 38.7% (27.9). Over 2 years, clinically and statistically significant improvements were seen in the proportion of patients with an Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) of low disease activity (from 39% at baseline to 68% at 2 years), back pain (−1.5, SD 2.2), AI (−14.4%, SD 27.2), PCS (11.1, SD 13.3), and WPL (−15.3%, SD 28.7), but MCS did not change (0.7, SD 13.9; P = 0.201). In contrast, illness perceptions and coping strategies did not change over a period of 2 years. For example, at 2 years patients believed that their illness had severe “consequences” (2.8, SD 0.9) and they had negative emotions (e.g., feeling upset or fear) towards their illness [“emotional representation”, 2.5 (0.8)]. Patients most often coped with their pain by putting pain into perspective [“comforting cognitions”, 2.8 (0.6)] and tended to cope with limitations by being optimistic [“optimism”, 2.9 (0.7)].ConclusionWhile back pain, disease activity, and health outcomes clearly improved over 2 years, illness perceptions and coping strategies remained remarkably stable.

Background Filgotinib (FIL), an orally administered, potent, selective inhibitor of janus kinase 1 (JAK1), has shown good efficacy and was well tolerated for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objectives of this study were to compare efficacy and safety of FIL with and without methotrexate (MTX) in patients with RA who were naïve to MTX therapy. Methods This Phase 3, double-blind, active-controlled study randomised patients with moderately to severely active RA (2:1:1:2) to FIL 200mg daily+MTX, FIL 100mg+MTX, FIL 200mg (+placebo [PBO]), or MTX (+PBO) up to 52 weeks; results are through week 24. Primary endpoint was proportion achieving ACR20 response at week 24. Safety endpoints included adverse events types and rates. Results Of 1,252 randomised patients, 1,249 received study drug (416 FIL 200mg+MTX; 207 FIL 100mg+MTX; 210 FIL 200mg monotherapy; 416 MTX monotherapy) and were analysed; 1,130 completed week 24. Most (76.9%) were female; mean time since RA diagnosis was 2.2 years (median 0.4 years); mean (standard deviation [SD]) DAS28-CRP was 5.7 (1.0); and 35.9% were using oral steroids at baseline. At week 24, significantly more patients in the FIL 200mg+MTX (81.0%; P Conclusion The JAK1 inhibitor FIL in combination with MTX led to significant improvements in RA signs and symptoms, physical function, and patient-reported outcomes compared to MTX alone and was well tolerated in patients with early active RA naïve to MTX. Clinically meaningful response to FIL occurred as early as 2 weeks after treatment initiation. Disclosures N. McKay: None. D. van der Heijde: Corporate appointments; Director of Imaging Rheumatology bv. Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd., UCB. R. Westhovens: Corporate appointments; Advisor for Celltrion and Galapagos/Gilead. Other; Advisor for Celltrion and Galapagos/Gilead. W.F.C. Rigby: Consultancies; Consultant for Gilead. D.W.T. Ching: Corporate appointments; Speaker for AbbVie. Member of speakers’ bureau; Speaker for AbbVie. B. Bartok: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. F. Matzkies: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Z. Yin: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Guo: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. C. Tasset: Corporate appointments; Employee of Galapagos NV. J.S. Sundy: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. N. Mozaffarian: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. O.D. Messina: Honoraria; Received Honoraria from Pfizer, Amgen, and Americas Health Foundation (AHF). R.B.M. Landewé: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Galapagos, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and UCB. T. Atsumi: None. G.R. Burmester: Honoraria; Received Honoraria from AbbVie, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer.

Background Filgotinib (FIL) is an oral, potent, selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor that has shown good efficacy and was well tolerated for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objective of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of FIL treatment in patients with RA who have had an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). Methods This Phase 3, double-blind, active- and placebo (PBO)-controlled study randomised patients with active RA (3:3:2:3) to FIL 200mg, FIL 100mg, adalimumab [ADA] 40mg every 2 weeks, or PBO daily for up to 52 weeks; results through week 24 are presented. Patients also received background MTX. Primary efficacy endpoint was proportion of patients achieving ACR20 at week 12; additional clinical assessments included ACR50 and ACR70 and DAS28-CRP score ≤3.2 and 50% of ADA response) was performed for DAS28-CRP ≤3.2 and Results Of 1,759 patients randomised, 1,755 received study drug: 475 FIL 200mg; 480 FIL 100mg; 325 ADA; and 475 PBO, of which 89.5%, 90.4%, 88.9%, and 81.3%, respectively, completed 24 weeks of study drug. 81.8% were female, mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of RA was 7.8 (7.6) years, and mean (SD) DAS28-CRP was 5.7 (0.9). At week 12, significantly more patients in the FIL 200mg and 100mg arms achieved an ACR20 improvement vs PBO (Table 1). More patients receiving FIL achieved ACR50 and ACR70 improvements, DAS28-CRP scores ≤3.2 and Conclusion FIL 200mg and 100mg led to significant improvement in signs and symptoms of RA, prevented radiographic progression, improved physical function compared to PBO, and was well-tolerated. Efficacy of FIL 200mg was non-inferior to ADA based on DAS28-CRP ≤3.2. Disclosures D. Walker: Other; Received support from Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis and Roche. B.G. Combe: Honoraria; Received honoraria from AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Co., MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Sanofi and UCB. A.J. Kivitiz: Consultancies; Consultant to AbbVie, Celgene, Horizon, Jansses, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Genzyme, Sanofi, Regeneron, SUN Pharma Advanced Research, Boehringer Ingelheim, Flexion and Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Novartis. Y. Tanaka: Honoraria; Honoraria from Daiichi-Sankyo, Astellas, Chugai, Eli Lilly ans Co., Pfizer, AbbVie, YL Biologics, BMS, Takeda, Misubishi-Tanabe, Novartis, Eisai, Janssen, Teijin. Grants/research support; Grant support from Asahi-Kasei, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Chugai, Takeda, Sanofi, BMS, UCB, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Ono, Astellas, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Abbvi and YL. D. van der Heijde: Corporate appointments; Director of Imaging Rheumatology bv. Consultancies; Consultant for consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, and UCB. F. Matzkies: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. B. Bartok: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. L. Ye: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc.. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Guo: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. C. Tasset: Corporate appointments; Employee of Galapagos NV. J.S. Sundy: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. N. Mozaffarian: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. R.B.M. Landewé: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Galapagos, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and UCB.. S. Bae: None. E.C. Keystone: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca Pharma, Biotest, BMS Canada, Celltrion, Crescendo, Bioscience, F.Hoffman-La Roche Inc., Genentech, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Co., Merck, Pfizer,, PuraPharm, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi-Genzyme, Samsumg Bioepsis, and UCB. P. Nash: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, BMS, Jansses, Pfizer, Roche, Lilly, Sanofi, MSD, Novartis, Celgene and Gilead.

Background Secukinumab demonstrated sustained efficacy, inhibition of radiographic progression and a stable safety profile over 52 weeks in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in FUTURE 5. We report the end-of-study (2-year) results on the effect of secukinumab on radiographic progression in PsA patients in FUTURE 5. Methods Adults (N = 996) with active PsA were randomised to subcutaneous secukinumab 300 mg load, 150 mg load, 150 mg no load or placebo at baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3 and 4, and every 4 weeks thereafter. The secukinumab dose could be escalated from 150 to 300 mg from Week 52 onwards, based on physician judgement. Radiographic progression (mean change in vdH-mTSS) was based on hand/wrist/foot radiographs obtained at baseline, and Weeks 16 (nonresponders), 24, 52 and 104, assessed by two blinded readers (plus an adjudicator if required). Radiographic data were analysed using a linear mixed-effects model (random intercept, random slopes) at Weeks 24 and 52, and as observed at Week 104. Data are presented for patients originally randomised to secukinumab (300 and 150 mg); the 150 mg groups also included patients who had dose escalation to 300 mg. Analyses by prior TNF inhibitor (TNFi) status (naive vs inadequate response) were also performed. Results Overall, 85% (300 mg), 82% (150 mg) and 75% (150 mg no load) of patients completed 2 years of treatment. A total of 86 (39%) and 92 (41%) patients had their dose escalated to 300 mg in the 150 mg and 150 mg no load groups, respectively. In the overall population, the proportions of patients with no radiographic progression (change from baseline in vdH-mTSS≤0.5) with secukinumab were 89.5% (300 mg), 82.3% (150 mg) and 81.1% (150 mg no load) at 2 years; the corresponding proportions of patients with changes from baseline in vdH-mTSS≤0.0 were: 81.2%, 69.1% and 73.4%, respectively. Radiographic progression was low in secukinumab-treated patients in the overall population and by prior TNFi use over 2 years (Table 1). Clinical responses were sustained through 2 years of secukinumab treatment. Conclusion Low radiographic progression was observed over 2 years of treatment with secukinumab 300 and 150 mg in PsA patients. Disclosures H. Tahir: Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis. Grants/research support; Novartis, Eli Lilly. P. Mease: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Leo, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, INC pharma, UCB, Crescendo Bioscience. Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Leo, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Crescendo Bioscience. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Leo, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, INC pharma, UCB, Crescendo Bioscience. R. Landewé: None. P. Rahman: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB. Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis. Grants/research support; Janssen, Novartis. A. Singhal: Grants/research support; AbbVie, Gilead, Sanofi, Regeneron, Amgen, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Astra Zeneca, MedImmune, FujiFilm, Nichi-Iko, Mallinckrodt. E. Böttcher: Consultancies; Amgen, Roche, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, MSD, Novartis. Member of speakers’ bureau; Amgen, Roche, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, MSD, Novartis. S. Navarra: Member of speakers’ bureau; Astellas, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Pfizer. A. Readie: Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis. Other; Employee of: Novartis. S. Mpofu: Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis. Other; Employee of: Novartis. E. Delicha: Consultancies; Novartis. L. Pricop: Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis. Other; Employee of: Novartis. D. van der Heijde: Corporate appointments; Imaging Rheumatology BV. Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma.

Background Certolizumab pegol (CZP) treatment has been shown to significantly improve work and household productivity and social participation compared to placebo in active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) patients up to 24 weeks. Here, we report the impact of CZP in combination with non-biologic background medication (NBBM) on signs and symptoms of nr-axSpA compared to placebo+NBBM. Methods C-axSpAnd (NCT02552212) is a 3-year, phase 3, multicentre study including a 52-week double-blind, placebo-controlled period (completed). Patients had active nr-axSpA, objective signs of inflammation (OSI; elevated CRP and/or positive MRI of the sacroiliac joint), previous inadequate response to ≥ 2 NSAIDs and were randomised 1:1 to CZP (400 mg at Weeks 0/2/4, then 200 mg every 2 weeks) or placebo. The validated arthritis-specific Work Productivity Survey (WPS) assessed the impact of nr-axSpA on work and household productivity and social participation. Missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) post hoc in the Full Analysis Set (randomised patients who received ≥1 dose of CZP). Results 317 patients were randomised (CZP: 159; placebo: 158). Mean age at baseline was 37.3 years and 51.4% of patients were female. At baseline, most patients were employed (CZP: 124 [77.8%]; placebo: 123 [78.0%]) and reported a mean 3.7 (CZP) and 3.5 (placebo) workdays missed per month due to disease (Table 1). By Week 12, work absenteeism substantially improved in the CZP group compared with placebo (0.9 vs 2.1 days missed per month, LOCF), with further improvements at Week 52 (0.3 vs 2.0 days missed per month, LOCF). Between Week 12 and Week 52, most placebo patients (104, 65.8%) switched to open-label CZP, impacting Week 52 imputed outcomes. Despite this, similar patterns of improvement following CZP treatment were seen for absenteeism, workdays with impaired productivity, household days with missed/reduced productivity and social participation between imputed and observed case data (Table 1). Improvements were similar between male and female patients (data not shown). Conclusion CZP treatment resulted in improvements in work and household productivity and social participation for nr-axSpA patients as early as Week 12 compared to background medication only, with benefits maintained to Week 52. Disclosures K. Gaffney: Other; Research Grants/Consultancy Fees from Abbvie, Biogen, Celgene, Gilead, Izana, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma. A. Deodhar: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Glaxo Smith and Klein, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB. Grants/research support; BMS, Eli Lilly, Glaxo Smith & Kline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB. L. Gensler: Consultancies; Galapagos, Eli Lilly and Janssen. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Amgen, Novartis, UCB Pharma. J. Kay: Consultancies; AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion Healthcare, Horizon Therapeutics, Merck Sharp & Dohme, MorphoSys, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz and UCB Pharma. Grants/research support; Gilead Sciences, Novartis AG, Pfizer and UCB Pharma. W. Maksymowych: Other; Consultant and/or speaker fees and/or grants from AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, Synarc, Sanofi and UCB Pharma. N. Haroon: Consultancies; Abbvie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis and UCB Pharma. R. Landewé: Consultancies; Abbott, Ablynx, Amgen, Astra-Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Centocor, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, Schering-Plough, UCB Pharma, Wyeth. Member of speakers’ bureau; Abbott, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Centocor, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, Schering-Plough, UCB Pharma, Wyeth. Grants/research support; Abbott, Amgen, Centocor, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Schering-Plough, UCB Pharma, Wyeth. M. Rudwaleit: Consultancies; Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma. S. Hall: Other; Consulting fees/ research grants from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and UCB Pharma. L. Bauer: Other; Employee of UCB Pharma. B. Hoepken: Other; Employee of UCB Pharma. N. de Peyrecave: Other; Employee of UCB Pharma. T. Kumke: Other; Employee of UCB Pharma. D. van der Heijde: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB. Other; Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV.

Objective To investigate whether spinal radiographic progression relates to structural damage at the sacroiliac level in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Methods Patients classified as nonradiographic (nr-) and radiographic (r-) axSpA in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort with radiographs performed every 2 years, scored according to the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score (mSASSS), were included. The relationship between classification status and spinal progression during 2 years was investigated using binomial generalized estimating equations models with adjustment for sex, ankylosing spondylitis disease activity score (ASDAS) and tumour necrosis factor inhibitor treatment. Baseline spinal damage was considered an intermediate variable and included in sensitivity analyses. Results In total, 88 nr-axSpA and 418 r-axSpA patients contributed to data for 725 radiographic intervals. R-axSpA patients were more frequently male, had a longer disease duration and higher structural damage at baseline. Mean (SD) mSASSS change over 2 years was 0.16 (0.62) units in nr-axSpA and 0.92 (2.78) units in r-axSpA, p = 0.01. Nr-axSpA was associated with a significantly lower progression in 2 years (defined as an increase in ≥2 mSASSS units) in adjusted analyses (OR 0.33, 95%CI 0.13; 0.83), confirmed with progression defined as the formation of ≥1 syndesmophyte. Mediation analyses revealed that sacroiliitis exerted its effect on spinal progression indirectly by being associated with the appearance of a first syndesmophyte (OR 0.09, 95%CI 0.02; 0.36 for nr-axSpA vs r-axSpA). Baseline syndesmophytes were predictors of further progression. Conclusion Spinal structural damage is mainly restricted to patients with r-axSpA, leading to relevant prognostic and therapeutic implications.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an immune-mediated, clinically heterogeneous disease characterized by arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, spondylitis, and psoriasis of the skin and nails. Persistent articular inflammation in patients with PsA can lead to structural damage, which can result in reduced physical function and quality of life. Structural damage can occur rapidly, and irreversible joint damage may be observed if patients are not treated promptly and appropriately. Therefore, evaluating therapeutic agents for their ability to inhibit structural progression has become increasingly important, with radiographic progression becoming a key efficacy outcome in clinical trials in PsA. Here, we review how structural damage and progression are assessed in clinical trials and the use of radiographic progression as a study outcome. We also discuss possible limitations in the current assessment of radiographic progression as well as areas of research that may improve the assessment of structural damage in clinical trials of PsA.

Objective Sarilumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks IL-6 from binding to membrane-bound and soluble IL-6 receptor-α. We assessed the long-term safety of sarilumab in patients from eight clinical trials and their open-label extensions. Methods Data were pooled from patients with rheumatoid arthritis who received at least one dose of sarilumab in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs; combination group) or as monotherapy (monotherapy group). Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) and AEs and laboratory values of special interest were assessed. Results 2887 patients received sarilumab in combination with csDMARDs and 471 patients received sarilumab monotherapy, with mean exposure of 2.8 years and 1.7 years, maximum exposure 7.3 and 3.5 years, and cumulative AE observation period of 8188 and 812 patient-years, respectively. Incidence rates per 100 patient-years in the combination and monotherapy groups, respectively, were 9.4 and 6.7 for serious AEs, 3.7 and 1.0 for serious infections, 0.6 and 0.5 for herpes zoster (no cases were disseminated), 0.1 and 0 for gastrointestinal perforations, 0.5 and 0.2 for major adverse cardiovascular events, and 0.7 and 0.6 for malignancy. Absolute neutrophil counts Conclusion The long-term safety profile of sarilumab, either in combination with csDMARDs or as monotherapy, remained stable and consistent with the anticipated profile of a molecule that inhibits IL6 signalling.

ObjectiveTo study changes on MRI of the spine and sacroiliac joint (SIJ) in early axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) over time.MethodsIn the Devenir des Spondyloarthropathies Indifférenciées Récentes cohort, MRI-spine and MRI-SIJ at baseline and 2 and 5 years were scored by central readers for bone marrow oedema (BME), fatty lesions, erosions, sclerosis, ankylosis and spinal bone spurs. The average mean number of lesions was reported or the agreement of ≥2 out of 3 readers for binary outcomes. Net progression was calculated by subtracting the patients that ‘improved’ from those that ‘worsened’ divided by the total number of patients.ResultsOver 5 years, in 155 patients with axSpA (mean age 33.5 (SD 8.9) years, symptom duration 1.4 (0.8) years, 63% human leucocyte antigen+, 14% modified New York+), BME on MRI-SIJ decreased by a mean Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada score of 1.4 (SD 6.5) (p=0.009). The largest BME decrease was observed in patients using biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs at 5 years. Spinal BME increased by 0.3 (4.6) (p=0.41). Fatty lesions and/or erosions on MRI-SIJ increased by a mean of 1.0 (SD 2.6) (pConclusionOver 5 years, BME on MRI-SIJ decreased and spinal BME remained similar, but numerically, little progression of structural lesions on MRI of the SIJ and spine was seen.

ObjectivesThe Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) aimed to develop a set of quality standards (QS) to help improve the quality of healthcare provided to adult patients affected by axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) worldwide.MethodsAn ASAS task force developed a set of QS using a stepwise approach. First, key areas for quality improvement were identified, discussed, rated and agreed on. Thereafter, areas were prioritised and statements for the most important key areas were phrased on consensus. Appropriate quality measures were defined to allow quantification of the QS at the community level.ResultsThe ASAS task force, consisting of 20 rheumatologists, two physiotherapists and two patients, selected and proposed 34 potential key areas for quality improvement which were then commented by 140 ASAS members and patients. Within that process three new key areas came up, which led to a re-evaluation of all 37 key areas by 120 ASAS members and patients. Five key areas were identified as most important to determine quality of care: referral including rapid access, rheumatology assessment, treatment, education/self-management and comorbidities. Finally, nine QS were agreed on and endorsed by the whole ASAS membership.ConclusionsASAS successfully developed the first set of QS to help improving healthcare for adult patients with axSpA. Even though it may currently not be realistic to achieve the QS in all healthcare systems, they provide high-quality of care framework for patients with axSpA that should be aimed for.

Summary Background Ixekizumab, a high-affinity interleukin-17A (IL-17A) monoclonal antibody, has previously shown efficacy in radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (also known as ankylosing spondylitis). We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ixekizumab, an IL-17 inhibitor, in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. Here, we report the primary results of COAST-X. Methods COAST-X was a 52-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study done at 107 sites in 15 countries in Europe, Asia, North America, and South America. Eligible participants were adults (aged ≥18 years) with active axial spondyloarthritis without definite radiographic sacroiliitis (non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis), objective signs of inflammation (via MRI or C-reactive protein), and an inadequate response or intolerance to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive subcutaneous 80 mg ixekizumab every 4 weeks (Q4W) or every 2 weeks (Q2W), or placebo. Changing background medications or switching to open-label ixekizumab Q2W, or both, was allowed after week 16 at investigator discretion. Primary endpoints were Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society-40 (ASAS40) response (defined as an improvement of 40% or more and an absolute improvement from baseline of 2 units or more [range 0–10] in at least three of the four domains [patient global, spinal pain, function, and inflammation] without any worsening in the remaining one domain) at weeks 16 and 52. Patients who switched to open-label ixekizumab were imputed as non-responders in logistic regression analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02757352 . Findings Between Aug 2, 2016, and Jan 29, 2018, 303 patients were enrolled (105 to placebo, 96 to ixekizumab Q4W, and 102 to ixekizumab Q2W). Both primary endpoints were met: ASAS40 at week 16 (ixekizumab Q4W: 34 [35%] of 96, p=0·0094 vs placebo; ixekizumab Q2W: 41 [40%] of 102, p=0·0016; placebo: 20 [19%] of 105) and ASAS40 at week 52 (ixekizumab Q4W: 29 [30%] of 96, p=0·0045; ixekizumab Q2W: 32 [31%] of 102, p=0·0037; placebo: 14 [13%] of 105). 60 (57%) of 104 patients in the placebo group, 63 (66%) of 96 in the ixekizumab Q4W group, and 79 (77%) of 102 in the ixekizumab Q2W group had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events in the ixekizumab groups were nasopharyngitis and injection site reaction. Of the treatment-emergent adverse events of special interest, there was one case of serious infection in the ixekizumab Q4W group. The frequency of serious adverse events was low (four [1%] of 302) and similar across the three groups. There were no malignancies or deaths. No new safety signals were identified. Interpretation Ixekizumab was superior to placebo for improving signs and symptoms in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis at weeks 16 and 52. Reports of adverse events were similar to those of previous ixekizumab studies. Ixekizumab offers a potential therapeutic option for patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis who had an inadequate response or were intolerant to NSAID therapy. Funding Eli Lilly and Company.