Efficacy of a tight-control and treat-to-target strategy in axial spondyloarthritis: results of the open-label, pragmatic, cluster-randomised TICOSPA trial

Anna Molto, Clementina López-Medina, Filip E Van den Bosch, Annelies Boonen, Casper Webers, Emanuelle Dernis, Floris A van Gaalen, Martin Soubrier, Pascal Claudepierre, Athan Baillet, Mirian Starmans-Kool, Anneke Spoorenberg, Peggy Jacques, Philippe Carron, Rik Joos, Jan Lenaerts, Laure Gossec, Sophie Pouplin, Adeline Ruyssen-Witrand, Laetitia Sparsa, Astrid van Tubergen, Désirée van der Heijde, Maxime Dougados, Anna Molto, Clementina López-Medina, Filip E Van den Bosch, Annelies Boonen, Casper Webers, Emanuelle Dernis, Floris A van Gaalen, Martin Soubrier, Pascal Claudepierre, Athan Baillet, Mirian Starmans-Kool, Anneke Spoorenberg, Peggy Jacques, Philippe Carron, Rik Joos, Jan Lenaerts, Laure Gossec, Sophie Pouplin, Adeline Ruyssen-Witrand, Laetitia Sparsa, Astrid van Tubergen, Désirée van der Heijde, Maxime Dougados

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the benefits of a tight-control/treat-to-target strategy (TC/T2T) in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with those of usual care (UC).

Methods: Pragmatic, prospective, cluster-randomised, controlled, open, 1-year trial (NCT03043846). 18 centres were randomised (1:1). Patients met Axial Spondylo Arthritis International Society (ASAS) criteria for axSpA, had an Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) ≥2.1, received non-optimal treatment by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and were biologic-naive.

Interventions: (1) TC/T2T: visits every 4 weeks and prespecified strategy based on treatment intensification until achieving target (ie, ASDAS <2.1); (2) UC: visits every 12 weeks and treatment at the rheumatologist's discretion.

Main outcome: Percentage of patients with a ≥30% improvement on the ASAS-Health Index (ASAS-HI). Other efficacy outcomes and adverse events were recorded. A health economic evaluation was performed.

Statistical analysis: Two-level mixed models were used to estimate efficacy outcomes. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for TC/T2T versus UC.

Results: 160 patients were included (80/group). Mean (SD) age was 37.9 (11.0) years and disease duration was 3.7 (6.2) years; 51.2% were men. ASDAS at inclusion was 3.0 (0.7), and ASAS-HI was 8.6 (3.7). ASAS-HI improved by ≥30% in 47.3% of the TC/T2T arm and in 36.1% of those receiving UC (non-significant). All secondary efficacy outcomes were more frequent in the TC/T2T arm, although not all statistically significant. Safety was similar in both arms. From a societal perspective, TC/T2T resulted in an additional 0.04 QALY, and saved €472 compared with UC.

Conclusion: TC/T2T was not significantly superior to UC for the primary outcome, while many secondary efficacy outcomes favoured it, had a similar safety profile and was favourable from a societal health economic perspective.

Trial registration number: NCT03043846.

Keywords: ankylosing; healthcare; outcome and process assessment; spondylitis; therapeutics.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: Dr van Tubergen reports grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants from Pfizer, grants from UCB, grants from Biogen, grants from AbbVie, outside the submitted work. Dr van der Heijde reports personal fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma, outside the submitted work; and Director of Imaging Rheumatology bv. Dr van Gaalen reports grants from Stichting vrienden van Sole Mio, grants from Stichting ASAS, grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants from UCB, personal fees from MSD, personal fees from AbbVie, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, outside the submitted work. AB received a research grant to her department from AbbVie, consultation fees from Eli Lilly and Galapagos and a speakers fee from UCB, all paid to her department. Dr Van den Bosch reports personal fees from AbbVie, personal fees from Celgene, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees from Galapagos, personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from UCB, outside the submitted work. Dr Claudepierre reports personal fees from Roche Chugai, Novartis, Pfizer, MSD, grants from Roche Chugai, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, MSD, AbbVie, Lilly, Celgene, Janssen, BMS, outside the submitted work. Dr Molto reports grants from UCB during the conduct of the study; personal fees from AbbVie, grants and personal fees from UCB, personal fees from BMS, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, grants and personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Gilead, personal fees from Lilly, outside the submitted work. Dr Gossec reports grants from Amgen, Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi, Galapagos, personal fees from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Biogen, Celgene, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, outside the submitted work. Dr Dougados reports grants from UCB, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from AbbVie, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, grants and personal fees from Lilly, grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from Roche, grants and personal fees from BMS, grants and personal fees from Merck, outside the submitted work. Dr Dernis, Dr Ruyssen-Witrand, Dr Lenaerts, Dr Lopez-Medina, Dr Sparsa, Dr Starmans-Kool, Dr C Webers, Dr Pouplin, Dr Soubrier and Dr Joos have nothing to declare.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the study. ASDAS, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score; SpA, spondyloarthritis; TC/T2T, tight control and treat-to-target; UC, usual care.
Figure 2
Figure 2
ASAS-HI improvement ≥30%, ASDAS LDA status and ASAS40 response estimated at 48 weeks. *Statistical significance. ASAS-HI, Axial Spondyloarthritis International Society-Health Index; ASDAS, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score; LDA, low disease activity; T2T/TC, treat-to-target and tight control; UC, usual care.

References

    1. Garrett S, Jenkinson T, Kennedy LG, et al. . A new approach to defining disease status in ankylosing spondylitis: the Bath ankylosing spondylitis disease activity index. J Rheumatol 1994;21:2286–91.
    1. Lukas C, Landewé R, Sieper J, et al. . Development of an ASAS-endorsed disease activity score (ASDAS) in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:18–24. 10.1136/ard.2008.094870
    1. van der Heijde D, Braun J, Dougados M, et al. . Sensitivity and discriminatory ability of the ankylosing spondylitis disease activity score in patients treated with etanercept or sulphasalazine in the ASCEND trial. Rheumatology 2012;51:1894–905. 10.1093/rheumatology/kes142
    1. Machado PM, Landewé R, Heijde Dvander, et al. . Ankylosing spondylitis disease activity score (ASDAS): 2018 update of the nomenclature for disease activity states. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77:1539–40. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-213184
    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. van der Heijde D, Ramiro S, Landewé R, et al. . 2016 update of the ASAS-EULAR management recommendations for axial spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:978–91. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-210770
    1. SPRINT Research Group, Wright JT, Williamson JD, et al. . A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med 2015;373:2103–16. 10.1056/NEJMoa1511939
    1. ACCORD Study Group, ACCORD Eye Study Group, Chew EY, et al. . Effects of medical therapies on retinopathy progression in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2010;363:233–44. 10.1056/NEJMoa1001288
    1. Grigor C, Capell H, Stirling A, et al. . Effect of a treatment strategy of tight control for rheumatoid arthritis (the TICORA study): a single-blind randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004;364:263–9. 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16676-2
    1. Coates LC, Moverley AR, McParland L, et al. . Effect of tight control of inflammation in early psoriatic arthritis (TICOPA): a UK multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015;386:2489–98. 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00347-5
    1. Meurer WJ, Lewis RJ. Cluster randomized trials: evaluating treatments applied to groups. JAMA 2015;313:2068–9. 10.1001/jama.2015.5199
    1. Schoels MM, Braun J, Dougados M, et al. . Treating axial and peripheral spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis, to target: results of a systematic literature search to support an international treat-to-target recommendation in spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;73:238–42. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203860
    1. Smolen JS, Braun J, Dougados M, et al. . Treating spondyloarthritis, including ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis, to target: recommendations of an international Task force. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;73:6–16. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203419
    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. Kiltz U, van der Heijde D, Boonen A, et al. . Development of a health index in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (ASAS HI): final result of a global initiative based on the ICF guided by ASAS. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:830–5. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203967
    1. Brandt J, Listing J, Sieper J, et al. . Development and preselection of criteria for short term improvement after anti-TNF alpha treatment in ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:1438–44. 10.1136/ard.2003.016717
    1. Rudwaleit M, Listing J, Brandt J, et al. . Prediction of a major clinical response (BASDAI 50) to tumour necrosis factor alpha blockers in ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:665–70. 10.1136/ard.2003.016386
    1. Jones SD, Steiner A, Garrett SL, et al. . The Bath ankylosing spondylitis patient global score (BAS-G). Br J Rheumatol 1996;35:66–71. 10.1093/rheumatology/35.1.66
    1. Calin A, Garrett S, Whitelock H, et al. . A new approach to defining functional ability in ankylosing spondylitis: the development of the Bath ankylosing spondylitis functional index. J Rheumatol 1994;21:2281–5.
    1. Tsang HHL, Cheung JPY, Wong CKH, et al. . Psychometric validation of the EuroQoL 5-dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire in patients with spondyloarthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 2019;21:41. 10.1186/s13075-019-1826-x
    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 2010;49:812–9. 10.1093/rheumatology/kep457
    1. Dougados M, Simon P, Braun J, et al. . ASAS recommendations for collecting, analysing and reporting NSAID intake in clinical trials/epidemiological studies in axial spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:249–51. 10.1136/ard.2010.133488
    1. Baillet A, Gossec L, Carmona L, et al. . Points to consider for reporting, screening for and preventing selected comorbidities in chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases in daily practice: a EULAR initiative. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:965–73. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-209233
    1. National Health Care Institute . Ministerie van Volksgezondheid W en S. Guideline for economic evaluations in healthcare, 2016. Available: [Accessed 29 Jun 2020].
    1. Hemming K, Girling AJ, Sitch AJ, et al. . Sample size calculations for cluster randomised controlled trials with a fixed number of clusters. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011;11:102. 10.1186/1471-2288-11-102
    1. R: the R project for statistical computing. Available: [Accessed 14 May 2020].
    1. Allison PD. 312-2012: handling missing data by maximum likelihood 2012;21.
    1. Baillet A, Gossec L, Carmona L, et al. . Points to consider for reporting, screening for and preventing selected comorbidities in chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases in daily practice: a EULAR initiative. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:965–73. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-209233
    1. Willan AR, Briggs AH, Hoch JS. Regression methods for covariate adjustment and subgroup analysis for non-censored cost-effectiveness data. Health Econ 2004;13:461–75. 10.1002/hec.843
    1. Pearson . Greene, Econometric analysis. Available: [Accessed 14 May 2020].
    1. Davison AC, Hinkley DV. Bootstrap methods and their application. Cambridge Core, 1997.
    1. Flynn TN, Peters TJ. Use of the bootstrap in analysing cost data from cluster randomised trials: some simulation results. BMC Health Serv Res 2004;4:33. 10.1186/1472-6963-4-33
    1. Gomes M, Ng ES-W, Grieve R, et al. . Developing appropriate methods for cost-effectiveness analysis of cluster randomized trials. Med Decis Making 2012;32:350–61. 10.1177/0272989X11418372
    1. Essers I, Hiligsmann M, Kiltz U, et al. . Development of one general and six country-specific algorithms to assess societal health utilities based on ASAS HI. RMD Open 2019;5:e000872. 10.1136/rmdopen-2018-000872
    1. Zorginstituut Nederland . Ministerie van Volksgezondheid W en S. Ziektelast in de praktijk - De theorie en praktijk van het berekenen van ziektelast bij pakketbeoordelingen, 2018. Available: [Accessed 29 Jun 2020].
    1. Pocock SJ, Stone GW. The primary outcome fails — what next? N Engl J Med Overseas Ed 2016;375:861–70. 10.1056/NEJMra1510064
    1. Smolen JS, Burmester G-R, Combe B, et al. . Head-To-Head comparison of certolizumab pegol versus adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis: 2-year efficacy and safety results from the randomised EXXELERATE study. Lancet 2016;388:2763–74. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31651-8
    1. Weinblatt ME, Schiff M, Valente R, et al. . Head-To-Head comparison of subcutaneous abatacept versus adalimumab for rheumatoid arthritis: findings of a phase IIIB, multinational, prospective, randomized study. Arthritis Rheum 2013;65:28–38. 10.1002/art.37711
    1. McInnes IB, Behrens F, Mease PJ, et al. . Secukinumab versus adalimumab for treatment of active psoriatic arthritis (EXCEED): a double-blind, parallel-group, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3b trial. Lancet 2020;395:1496–505. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30564-X

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera