Clinical and MRI responses to etanercept in early non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: 48-week results from the EMBARK study

Walter P Maksymowych, Maxime Dougados, Désirée van der Heijde, Joachim Sieper, Jürgen Braun, Gustavo Citera, Filip Van den Bosch, Isabelle Logeart, Joseph Wajdula, Heather Jones, Lisa Marshall, Randi Bonin, Ron Pedersen, Bonnie Vlahos, Sameer Kotak, Jack F Bukowski, Walter P Maksymowych, Maxime Dougados, Désirée van der Heijde, Joachim Sieper, Jürgen Braun, Gustavo Citera, Filip Van den Bosch, Isabelle Logeart, Joseph Wajdula, Heather Jones, Lisa Marshall, Randi Bonin, Ron Pedersen, Bonnie Vlahos, Sameer Kotak, Jack F Bukowski

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of etanercept (ETN) after 48 weeks in patients with early active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA).

Methods: Patients meeting Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) classification criteria for axSpA, but not modified New York radiographic criteria, received double-blind ETN 50 mg/week or placebo (PBO) for 12 weeks, then open-label ETN (ETN/ETN or PBO/ETN). Clinical, health, productivity, MRI and safety outcomes were assessed and the 48-week data are presented here.

Results: 208/225 patients (92%) entered the open-label phase at week 12 (ETN, n=102; PBO, n=106). The percentage of patients achieving ASAS40 increased from 33% to 52% between weeks 12 and 48 for ETN/ETN and from 15% to 53% for PBO/ETN (within-group p value <0.001 for both). For ETN/ETN and PBO/ETN, the EuroQol 5 Dimensions utility score improved by 0.14 and 0.08, respectively, between baseline and week 12 and by 0.23 and 0.22 between baseline and week 48. Between weeks 12 and 48, MRI Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada sacroiliac joint (SIJ) scores decreased by -1.1 for ETN/ETN and by -3.0 for PBO/ETN, p<0.001 for both. Decreases in MRI SIJ inflammation and C-reactive protein correlated with several clinical outcomes at weeks 12 and 48.

Conclusions: Patients with early active nr-axSpA demonstrated improvement from week 12 in clinical, health, productivity and MRI outcomes that was sustained to 48 weeks.

Trial registration number: NCT01258738.

Keywords: Anti-TNF; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Spondyloarthritis.

Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Patient disposition, full analysis population. AE, adverse event; ETN, etanercept; PBO, placebo; QW, once weekly.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Proportion of patients achieving (A) ASAS40 response, (B) ASAS20 response, (C) ASAS partial remission, (D) ASAS 5/6, (E) ASDAS inactive disease and (F) BASDAI50. Population is modified intention-to-treat (mITT), last observation carried forward (LOCF). The actual number of patients, observed case (OC), is also shown. p Values for differences in results between weeks 12 and 48 and between weeks 24 and week 48 for the ETN/ETN group are from McNemar’s test, OC data. ASAS, Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society; ASDAS, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score; BASDAI, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index; ETN, etanercept; ns, non-significant; PBO, placebo; Δ, change.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean change from baseline for (A) SPARCC MRI SIJ score, (B) SPARCC MRI spinal score and (C) ASspiMRI-a total score. Population is mITT, LOCF within each study period. The actual number of patients, observed case (OC), is also shown. Mean (SD) baseline values: (A) 7.9 (10.9) for ETN/ETN and 7.0 (11.0) for PBO/ETN; (B) 7.6 (11.4) for ETN/ETN and 6.9 (9.2) for PBO/ETN; (C) 1.6 (2.5) for ETN/ETN and 1.4 (1.7) for PBO/ETN. Changes in score between weeks 12 and 48: (A) −1.1 (2.9) for ETN/ETN and −3.0 (7.5) for PBO/ETN; (B) −1.9 (4.7) for ETN/ETN and −3.6 (5.9) for PBO/ETN; (C) −0.06 (0.68) for ETN/ETN and −0.46 (1.15) for PBO/ETN. Within-group p value between baseline and week 48 from paired t test:

References

    1. Bennett AN, McGonagle D, O'Connor P, et al. . Severity of baseline magnetic resonance imaging–evident sacroiliitis and HLA–B27 status in early inflammatory back pain predict radiographically evident ankylosing spondylitis at eight years. Arthritis Rheum 2008;58:3413–18. 10.1002/art.24024
    1. Braun J, Bollow M, Eggens U, et al. . Use of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging with fast imaging in the detection of early and advanced sacroiliitis in spondylarthropathy patients. Arthritis Rheum 1994;37:1039–45. 10.1002/art.1780370709
    1. Heuft-Dorenbosch L, Landewé R, Weijers R, et al. . Combining information obtained from magnetic resonance imaging and conventional radiographs to detect sacroiliitis in patients with recent onset inflammatory back pain. Ann Rheum Dis 2006;65:804–8. 10.1136/ard.2005.044206
    1. Oostveen J, Prevo R, den Boer J, et al. . Early detection of sacroiliitis on magnetic resonance imaging and subsequent development of sacroiliitis on plain radiography. A prospective, longitudinal study. J Rheumatol 1999;26:1953–8.
    1. van der Heijde D, Sieper J, Maksymowych WP, et al. . Spinal inflammation in the absence of sacroiliac joint inflammation on magnetic resonance imaging in patients with active nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol 2014;66:667–73. 10.1002/art.38283
    1. Rudwaleit M, van der Heijde D, Landewé R, et al. . The development of Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis (part II): validation and final selection. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:777–83. 10.1136/ard.2009.108233
    1. Sieper J, Rudwaleit M, Baraliakos X, et al. . The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) handbook: a guide to assess spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68(Suppl 2):ii1–44. 10.1136/ard.2008.104018
    1. Callhoff J, Sieper J, Weiß A, et al. . Efficacy of TNFα blockers in patients with ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: a meta-analysis. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:1241–8. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2014-205322
    1. Landewé R, Braun J, Deodhar A, et al. . Efficacy of certolizumab pegol on signs and symptoms of axial spondyloarthritis including ankylosing spondylitis: 24-week results of a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled Phase 3 study. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;73:39–47. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204231
    1. Sieper J, van der Heijde D, Dougados M, et al. . Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: results of a randomised placebo-controlled trial (ABILITY-1). Ann Rheum Dis 2013;72:815–22. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2012-201766
    1. Song IH, Weiß A, Hermann KGA, et al. . Similar response rates in patients with ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis after 1 year of treatment with etanercept: results from the ESTHER trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2013;72:823–5. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2012-202389
    1. Barkham N, Keen HI, Coates LC, et al. . Clinical and imaging efficacy of infliximab in HLA-B27-positive patients with magnetic resonance imaging-determined early sacroiliitis. Arthritis Rheum 2009;60:946–54. 10.1002/art.24408
    1. Haibel H, Rudwaleit M, Listing J, et al. . Efficacy of adalimumab in the treatment of axial spondylarthritis without radiographically defined sacroiliitis: results of a twelve-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial followed by an open-label extension up to week fifty-two. Arthritis Rheum 2008;58:1981–91. 10.1002/art.23606
    1. Dougados M, van der Heijde D, Sieper J, et al. . Symptomatic efficacy of etanercept and its effects on objective signs of inflammation in early nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheumatol 2014;66:2091–102. 10.1002/art.38721
    1. Moltó A, Paternotte S, Claudepierre P, et al. . Effectiveness of tumor necrosis factor α blockers in early axial spondyloarthritis: data from the DESIR cohort. Arthritis Rheumatol 2014;66:1734–44. 10.1002/art.38613
    1. van der Linden S, Valkenburg HA, Cats A. Evaluation of diagnostic criteria for ankylosing spondylitis. A proposal for modification of the New York criteria. Arthritis Rheum 1984;27:361–8. 10.1002/art.1780270401
    1. European Medicines Agency, Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. Guideline on clinical investigation of medicinal products for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. 2009.
    1. Maksymowych WP, Inman RD, Salonen D, et al. . Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada magnetic resonance imaging index for assessment of spinal inflammation in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2005; 53:502–9. 10.1002/art.21337
    1. Maksymowych WP, Inman RD, Salonen D, et al. . Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada magnetic resonance imaging index for assessment of sacroiliac joint inflammation in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2005;53:703–9. 10.1002/art.21445
    1. Braun J, Baraliakos X, Golder W, et al. . Magnetic resonance imaging examinations of the spine in patients with ankylosing spondylitis, before and after successful therapy with infliximab: evaluation of a new scoring system. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:1126–36. 10.1002/art.10883
    1. Boonen A, van der Heijde D, Landewé R, et al. . How do the EQ-5D, SF-6D and the well-being rating scale compare in patients with ankylosing spondylitis? Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:771–7. 10.1136/ard.2006.060384
    1. Salaffi F, Carotti M, Gasparini S, et al. . The health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis: a comparison with a selected sample of healthy people. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2009;7:25 10.1186/1477-7525-7-25
    1. Reilly MC, Gooch KL, Wong RL, et al. . Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire in ankylosing spondylitis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2010;49:812–19. 10.1093/rheumatology/kep457
    1. Maksymowych WP, Wichuk S, Chiowchanwisawakit P, et al. . Development and preliminary validation of the spondyloarthritis research consortium of Canada magnetic resonance imaging sacroiliac joint structural score. J Rheumatol 2015;42:79–86. 10.3899/jrheum.140519
    1. Machado P, Landewé R, Lie E, et al. . Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS): defining cut-off values for disease activity states and improvement scores. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:47–53. 10.1136/ard.2010.138594
    1. Brandt J, Khariouzov A, Listing J, et al. . Six-month results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of etanercept treatment in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:1667–75. 10.1002/art.11017
    1. Braun J, van der Horst-Bruinsma IE, Huang F, et al. . Clinical efficacy and safety of etanercept versus sulfasalazine in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, double-blind trial. Arthritis Rheum 2011;63:1543–51. 10.1002/art.30223
    1. Davis JC, Van Der Heijde D, Braun J, et al. . Recombinant human tumor necrosis factor receptor (etanercept) for treating ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:3230–6. 10.1002/art.11325
    1. Davis JC, van der Heijde DM, Braun J, et al. . Efficacy and safety of up to 192 weeks of etanercept therapy in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2008;67:346–52. 10.1136/ard.2007.078139

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnere