2010 update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis.

Rheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet, Landgrafenstrasse 15, 44652 Herne, Germany.
Annals of the rheumatic diseases (Impact Factor: 9.27). 06/2011; 70(6):896-904. DOI: 10.1136/ard.2011.151027
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This first update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations on the management of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is based on the original paper, a systematic review of existing recommendations and the literature since 2005 and the discussion and agreement among 21 international experts, 2 patients and 2 physiotherapists in a meeting in February 2010. Each original bullet point was discussed in detail and reworded if necessary. Decisions on new recommendations were made - if necessary after voting. The strength of the recommendations (SOR) was scored on an 11-point numerical rating scale after the meeting by email. These recommendations apply to patients of all ages that fulfill the modified NY criteria for AS, independent of extra-articular manifestations, and they take into account all drug and non-drug interventions related to AS. Four overarching principles were introduced, implying that one bullet has been moved to this section. There are now 11 bullet points including 2 new ones, one related to extra-articular manifestations and one to changes in the disease course. With a mean score of 9.1 (range 8-10) the SOR was generally very good.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Etanercept (ETN) has been widely applied in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS). As the use of ETN has increased, associated adverse effects have been reported frequently. Previous meta-analyses have focused on comparing the differences in clinical outcomes between ETN and placebo (PBO). The present meta-analysis evaluated randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the effects of ETN and a PBO or sulfasalazine (SSZ) in patients with AS. The study population characteristics and the main results, including the Assessment in AS 20% response (ASAS 20), the Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) and the Bath AS Functional Index (BASFI), were extracted. The pooled odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences (MDs) were calculated using a fixed or random effects model. Fifteen randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2,194 subjects were included. Compared with a PBO, ETN significantly improved the ASAS 20 [P<0.00001; OR, 8.25; 95% confidence interval (CI), 5.92-11.50], BASDAI (P<0.00001; MD, -18.81; 95% CI, -24.47 to -13.15) and BASFI (P<0.00001; standard MD, -0.68; 95% CI, -0.85 to -0.50). In comparison with SSZ, ETN significantly decreased the BASDAI (P<0.00001; MD, -2.40; 95% CI, -2.89 to -1.90) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels (P<0.0001; MD, -8.01; 95% CI, -11.73 to -4.29). The most common adverse effect of ETN was an injection site reaction. This meta-analysis shows that ETN monotherapy is effective in improving physical function and reducing disease activity in patients with AS. Compared with SSZ, ETN markedly decreased the BASDAI and CRP levels. However, the efficacy of ETN in treating AS requires further evaluation by more RCTs in a larger population of patients prior to recommending ETN as a substitute for synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) monotherapy, or combinations of synthetic DMARDs.
    Experimental and therapeutic medicine 11/2014; 8(5):1585-1592. · 0.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IntroductionIn clinical practice, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly discontinued after response to biologic therapy is achieved in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), but the impact of NSAID discontinuation has not been assessed in prospective controlled trials. The aim of the SPARSE study was to evaluate the effects of the anti¿tumor necrosis factor agent etanercept on NSAID intake and conventional clinical outcomes in axSpA patients.Methods In the double-blind, placebo-controlled period, patients with active (mini Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) ¿4) axSpA despite optimal NSAID intake were randomized to receive etanercept 50 mg or placebo once weekly for 8 weeks. All patients were advised to taper/discontinue their NSAID intake during the treatment period. NSAID intake was self-reported by diary and Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS)-NSAID scores calculated based on ASAS recommendations. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 8 in ASAS-NSAID score (analysis of covariance).ResultsIn 90 randomized patients at baseline, mean age (standard deviation) was 38.9 (11.8) years; disease duration, 5.7 (8.1) years; 59/90 (66%) were human leukocyte antigen-B27 positive; 51/90 (57%) had radiographic sacroiliitis; and 45/90 (50%) were magnetic resonance imaging sacroiliitis¿positive. Mean ASAS-NSAID scores were similar between etanercept and placebo groups at baseline (98.2 (39.0) versus 93.0 (23.4)), as were BASDAI (6.0 (1.7) versus 5.9 (1.5)), and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (5.2 (2.1) versus 5.1 (2.2)). Mean changes (SE) in ASAS-NSAID score from baseline to week 8 were ¿63.9 (6.1) and ¿36.6 (5.9) in the etanercept and placebo groups (between-group difference, ¿27.3; P = 0.002). Significantly higher proportions of patients receiving etanercept versus placebo had an ASAS-NSAID score <10 (46% versus 17%; P = 0.008) and ASAS-NSAID score of 0 (41% versus 14%; P = 0.013) at this time point. Significantly more patients in the etanercept versus placebo group achieved BASDAI50 (39% versus 18%; P = 0.032) and ASAS40 (44% versus 21%; P = 0.028) at week 8.Conclusions In patients with axSpA, etanercept was associated with clinically relevant NSAID-sparing effects in addition to significant improvements in conventional clinical outcomes.Trial NCT01298531. Registered 16 February 2011.
    Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 11/2014; 16(6):481. · 9.27 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recognition, diagnosis, and management of axial spondyloarthritis (axial SpA) continue to advance. The objectives of this study were to compare referrals, diagnosis, and management of axial SpA in Western Europe (WE), North America (US and Canada), and the rest of world (RoW) in academic and community rheumatology practices and to identify areas for further education. Rheumatologists responded online to the MAXIMA (Management of Axial SpA International and Multicentric Approaches) survey. Questions pertained to referral, diagnosis, and management of axial SpA. Rheumatologists (N = 809) from 56 countries completed the survey about patients with chronic back pain (≥3 months) starting before age 45 years. Responses from academic and community practice rheumatologists were generally similar. Most referrals were from primary care providers. Symptom duration of 3 years or more at referral was reported more frequently by WE and RoW than US respondents. More WE and RoW than US rheumatologists referred to the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society criteria for axial SpA in clinical practice. Rheumatologists reported prescribing disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs for the management of axial SpA. Sulfasalazine was frequently prescribed across regions; methotrexate was more commonly prescribed by US rheumatologists compared with other regions. Referral patterns, diagnosis, and disease management for axial SpA were similar among WE, North America, and RoW rheumatologists and in academic/community practices, although more WE and RoW rheumatologists referred to Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society criteria in clinical practice. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were commonly prescribed for axial SpA patients, although it was unclear whether these were prescribed for axial or peripheral symptoms.
    Journal of clinical rheumatology: practical reports on rheumatic & musculoskeletal diseases 12/2014; 20(8):411-7. · 1.19 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 27, 2014