Article Text

Download PDFPDF

  1. M. Torgutalp1,
  2. V. Rios Rodriguez1,
  3. M. Verba1,
  4. M. Protopopov1,
  5. F. Proft1,
  6. J. Rademacher1,2,
  7. H. Haibel1,
  8. M. Rudwaleit3,
  9. J. Sieper1,
  10. D. Poddubnyy1,4
  1. 1Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Division of Gastroenterology, Infectious Diseases and Rheumatology, Berlin, Germany
  2. 2Berlin Institute of Health,., Berlin, Germany
  3. 3Klinikum Bielefeld, Department of Internal Medicine and Rheumatology, Bielefeld, Germany
  4. 4Deutsches Rheuma-Forschungszentrum Berlin (DRFZ), Epidemiology Unit, Berlin, Germany


Background: Observational cohort studies have shown that there is low, but still detectable progression level in radiographic sacroiliitis, which might also have an impact on the function in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Recent data showed that tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) might retard spinal progression when initiated earlier and taken longer in patients with axSpA. However, the question of whether they also have such an effect on radiographic progression in sacroiliac joints (SIJs) is still unclear.

Objectives: To investigate the longitudinal association between radiographic sacroiliitis progression and treatment with TNFi in patients with early axial SpA in a long-term inception cohort.

Methods: Based on the availability of at least two sets of SIJ radiographs, 301 patients (166 with nr-axSpA, symptom duration ≤5 years and 135 with r-axSpA, symptom duration ≤10 years) from the German Spondyloarthritis Inception Cohort (GESPIC) were included in this analysis. These patients contributed with a total of 737 2-year radiographic intervals. Two trained and calibrated central readers scored the radiographs according to the modified New York criteria. If both scored an image as definite radiographic sacroiliitis, the patient was classified as having r-axSpA. The sacroiliac sum score was calculated as a mean of both readers. The association between previous as well as current TNFi use and radiographic sacroiliitis progression, which was defined as the change in the sacroiliitis sum score over 2 years, was analysed using longitudinal generalized estimating equations (GEE) analysis.

Results: At baseline, 9 (3.0%) patients were treated with a TNFi, and 87 (28.9%) patients received at least one TNFi during the entire follow-up period. A total of 141 of the radiographic intervals were covered with TNFi of any duration, while 109 of them were covered with a TNFi of at least 12 months. While receiving ≥12 months TNFi in the previous interval was associated with a lower progression of the sacroiliitis sum score compared to not receiving TNFi in the previous interval, this was not the case in patients who received TNFi ≥12 months in the current 2-year interval (Figure 1). The significant association between TNF ≥12 months in the previous interval and progression in the sacroiliitis sum score were confirmed in the adjusted multivariable longitudinal GEE analysis. In addition, a similar trend for the beneficial effects was observed in different models, which included other treatment definitions with TNFi in the previous 2-year interval (Table).

Table 1.

The longitudinal GEE analysis of the association between progression in the sacroiliitis sum score and TNFi use.

Conclusion: Treatment with TNFi was associated with retardation of radiographic sacroiliitis progression in patients with axSpA. This effect becomes evident between 2 and 4 years after treatment initiation.

Acknowledgements: GESPIC was initially supported by the BMBF. As a consequence of the funding reduction by BMBF according to schedule in 2005 and stopped in 2007, complementary financial support has been obtained also from Abbott, Amgen, Centocor, Schering–Plough, and Wyeth. Starting from 2010, the core GESPIC cohort was supported by AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests: Murat Torgutalp: None declared, Valeria Rios Rodriguez: None declared, Maryna Verba: None declared, Mikhail Protopopov: None declared, Fabian Proft: None declared, Judith Rademacher: None declared, Hildrun Haibel: None declared, Martin Rudwaleit Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma, Joachim Sieper: None declared, Denis Poddubnyy Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biocad, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.