Dataset Information

Do biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs reduce the spinal fracture risk related to ankylosing spondylitis? A longitudinal multiregistry matched cohort study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is associated with an increased spinal fracture risk due to the loss of elasticity in spinal motion segments. With the introduction of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) treatment for AS, the individual course of the disease has been ameliorated. This study aims to examine the association of bDMARD treatment and risk of spinal fracture. DESIGN:Longitudinal population-based multiregistry observational matched cohort study. SETTING:Swedish Patient Registry 1987-2014 and Swedish Prescribed Drugs Registry 2005-2014. PARTICIPANTS:Included were patients ?18 years of age receiving treatment at a healthcare facility for the primary diagnosis of AS. About 1352 patients received more than one prescription of bDMARD from 2005 to 2014. An untreated control group was created by propensity score matching for age, sex, comorbidity, antirheumatic prescriptions and years with AS (n=1352). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Spinal fracture-free survival. RESULTS:No bDMARD treatment-related effect on spinal fracture-free survival was observed in the matched cohorts. Male gender (HR=2.54, 95% CI 1.48 to 4.36) and Charlson Comorbidity Index score (HR=3.02, 95% CI 1.59 to 5.75) contributed significantly to spinal fracture risk. CONCLUSION:bDMARD had no medium-term effect on the spinal fracture-free survival in patients with AS. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02840695; Post-results.

SUBMITTER: Robinson Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5770921 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Do biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs reduce the spinal fracture risk related to ankylosing spondylitis? A longitudinal multiregistry matched cohort study.

Robinson Yohan Y Olerud Claes C Willander Johan J

BMJ open 20171228 12

<h4>Objectives</h4>Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is associated with an increased spinal fracture risk due to the loss of elasticity in spinal motion segments. With the introduction of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) treatment for AS, the individual course of the disease has been ameliorated. This study aims to examine the association of bDMARD treatment and risk of spinal fracture.<h4>Design</h4>Longitudinal population-based multiregistry observational matched cohort study ...[more]

PMID: 29288176

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objectives: The impact of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) on the outcomes of mild-moderate COVID-19 in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of NSAIDs, csDMARDs, and TNFi on AS patients with mild-moderate COVID-19. Methods: This cohort study utilized patient-reported PCR/antigen tests to determine the occurrence of COVID-19 and assessed clinical manifestations to determine its severity. The study focused on two primary outcomes: an increased number of COVID-19 symptoms and a prolonged disease course (longer than 10 or 28 days). Modified Poisson regression was performed to analyze the association between exposures and outcomes. Results: A total of 521 patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 34.8 (inter-quartile range: 27.2-46.7), with 420 (80.6%) being men. Among the patients, 52 (10.0%) had comorbidities and 443 (85%) had been vaccinated. After adjusting for confounding factors, there was no significant association between csDMARDs or TNFi and the presence of more than 5 symptoms in mild-moderate COVID-19 (adjusted relative risk (RRa) 1.08, 95% CI: 0.84-1.40 or 1.09, 0.92-1.29 for csDMARDs or TNFi, respectively), whereas the prevalence of experiencing more than 5 symptoms increased in patients with NSAID monotherapy (RRa 1.22, 95% CI: 1.01-1.46). Similarly, there was no significant association with having more than 10 symptoms (RRa 0.65, 95% CI: 0.26-1.64; 0.95, 0.36-2.54; and 1.01, 0.53-1.91 for NSAIDs, csDMARDs, and TNFi, respectively). Patients who had pre-existing use of NSAIDs, csDMARDs and TNFi had similar odds of experiencing a disease course longer than 10 days (RRa 1.17, 95% CI: 0.82-1.66; 1.18, 0.78-1.77; and 1.22, 0.92-1.63 for NSAIDs, csDMARDs, and TNFi, respectively) and longer than 28 days (RRa 0.94, 95% CI: 0.31-2.81; 0.97, 0.25-3.74 and 1.05, 0.44-2.49, respectively) compared to those not using medication. Conclusion: AS patients treated with csDMARDs or TNFi did not show inferior outcomes in terms of symptom burden or recovery compared to those not using medication in mild-moderate COVID-19. The observed inverse association between pre-existing NSAIDs use and COVID-19 symptom burden in AS deserves further investigation.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) by prior biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) use.MethodsData from a placebo-controlled, double-blind study of patients with active AS were analyzed. Patients received tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID) or placebo to week 16; all received open-label tofacitinib 5 mg BID to week 48 and were stratified by prior treatment (bDMARD-naive or tumor necrosis factor inhibitor [TNFi]-inadequate responder [IR], including bDMARD-experienced [non-IR]). Disease activity/safety were assessed throughout.ResultsOf 269 patients, 207 (77%) were bDMARD-naive; 62 (23%) were in the TNFi-IR subgroup. TNFi-IR patients had higher baseline BMI (28.0 vs. 26.1 kg/m2 ), longer symptom duration (14.4 vs. 13.2 years), and lower concomitant conventional synthetic DMARD use (14.5% vs. 30.9%) than bDMARD-naive patients. At week 16, for most outcomes, tofacitinib efficacy exceeded placebo for both subgroups and was sustained to week 48. At week 16, tofacitinib versus placebo differences were similar between bDMARD-naive and TNFi-IR patients (Assessment in Spondyloarthritis international Society 40 treatment difference [95% confidence interval]: 30.8% [19.1%-42.6%] vs. 19.4% [1.7%-37.0%]). Adverse event (AE) proportions were similar between tofacitinib-treated bDMARD-naive/TNFi-IR patients (77.5%/77.4%) at week 48 with no deaths. A numerically higher proportion of tofacitinib-treated TNFi-IR versus bDMARD-naive patients discontinued study drug (12.9% vs. 3.9%) or dose reduced/temporarily discontinued due to AEs (19.4% vs. 11.8%).ConclusionTofacitinib efficacy exceeded placebo at week 16 for bDMARD-naive/TNFi-IR patients and was sustained to week 48. The absolute magnitude of responses was generally greater in bDMARD-naive patients versus TNFi-IR patients. More TNFi-IR versus bDMARD-naive patients discontinued or dose reduced/temporarily discontinued tofacitinib due to AEs. Small sample size and sample size differences between subgroups limited the interpretation.

Project description:ObjectivesBiological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) have shown diminished clinical response following an inadequate response (IR) to ≥1 previous bDMARD. Here, tofacitinib was compared with placebo in patients with an IR to conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs; bDMARD-naive) and in patients with an IR to bDMARDs (bDMARD-IR).MethodsData were taken from phase II and phase III studies of tofacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Patients received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily, or placebo, as monotherapy or with background methotrexate or other csDMARDs. Efficacy endpoints and incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) of special interest were assessed.Results2812 bDMARD-naive and 705 bDMARD-IR patients were analysed. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were generally similar between treatment groups within subpopulations. Across subpopulations, improvements in efficacy parameters at month 3 were generally significantly greater for both tofacitinib doses versus placebo. Clinical response was numerically greater with bDMARD-naive versus bDMARD-IR patients (overlapping 95% CIs). Rates of safety events of special interest were generally similar between tofacitinib doses and subpopulations; however, patients receiving glucocorticoids had more serious AEs, discontinuations due to AEs, serious infection events and herpes zoster. Numerically greater clinical responses and incidence rates of AEs of special interest were generally reported for tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily versus tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (overlapping 95% CIs).ConclusionsTofacitinib demonstrated efficacy in both bDMARD-naive and bDMARD-IR patients with RA. Clinical response to tofacitinib was generally numerically greater in bDMARD-naive than bDMARD-IR patients. The safety profile appeared similar between subpopulations.Trial registration numbers(NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385).

Project description:In this article, the 2010 European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (sDMARDs and bDMARDs, respectively) have been updated. The 2013 update has been developed by an international task force, which based its decisions mostly on evidence from three systematic literature reviews (one each on sDMARDs, including glucocorticoids, bDMARDs and safety aspects of DMARD therapy); treatment strategies were also covered by the searches. The evidence presented was discussed and summarised by the experts in the course of a consensus finding and voting process. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations were derived and levels of agreement (strengths of recommendations) were determined. Fourteen recommendations were developed (instead of 15 in 2010). Some of the 2010 recommendations were deleted, and others were amended or split. The recommendations cover general aspects, such as attainment of remission or low disease activity using a treat-to-target approach, and the need for shared decision-making between rheumatologists and patients. The more specific items relate to starting DMARD therapy using a conventional sDMARD (csDMARD) strategy in combination with glucocorticoids, followed by the addition of a bDMARD or another csDMARD strategy (after stratification by presence or absence of adverse risk factors) if the treatment target is not reached within 6 months (or improvement not seen at 3 months). Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, biosimilars), abatacept, tocilizumab and, under certain circumstances, rituximab are essentially considered to have similar efficacy and safety. If the first bDMARD strategy fails, any other bDMARD may be used. The recommendations also address tofacitinib as a targeted sDMARD (tsDMARD), which is recommended, where licensed, after use of at least one bDMARD. Biosimilars are also addressed. These recommendations are intended to inform rheumatologists, patients, national rheumatology societies and other stakeholders about EULAR's most recent consensus on the management of RA with sDMARDs, glucocorticoids and bDMARDs. They are based on evidence and expert opinion and intended to improve outcome in patients with RA.

Dataset Information

Do biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs reduce the spinal fracture risk related to ankylosing spondylitis? A longitudinal multiregistry matched cohort study.

Publications

Do biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs reduce the spinal fracture risk related to ankylosing spondylitis? A longitudinal multiregistry matched cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets