Download PDFPDF
No efficacy of anti-IL-23 therapy for axial spondyloarthritis in randomised controlled trials but in post-hoc analyses of psoriatic arthritis-related ‘physician-reported spondylitis’?
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

  • Published on:
    Correspondence on “No efficacy of anti-IL-23 therapy for axial spondyloarthritis in randomised controlled trials but in post-hoc analyses of psoriatic arthritis-related ‘physician-reported spondylitis’?”.
    • Stefan Siebert, Professor of Inflammation Medicine and Rheumatology University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
    • Other Contributors:
      • Helena Marzo-Ortega, Consultant Rheumatologist and Honorary Clinical Associate Professor

    We read with interest the Viewpoint article by Braun and Landewé regarding post-hoc analysis of back pain in trials of IL-23 inhibitor therapy in patients with peripheral psoriatic arthritis (PsA) [1]. Indeed, we share their concerns regarding study design, the use of outcome measures developed for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and, most importantly, the attribution of the diagnostic label “physician-reported spondylitis” in these patients. In addition to the issues eloquently outlined in the article, it is important to be aware that the pre-test probability of inflammatory disease being directly responsible for back pain is likely much lower in patients with PsA who are older, and therefore more likely to have mechanical or non-specific back pain, than people presenting with axSpA. In other words, even before doing any test, a middle-aged person with PsA, as represented in most phase III PsA clinical trials, is more likely to have non-inflammatory than inflammatory back pain. These “causes” of back pain do of course co-exist and are not easily distinguished by clinical or imaging assessments. For example, disc and degenerative spinal disease can lead to apparent inflammatory features, such as bone marrow oedema on magnetic resonance imaging [2, 3] that are likely a secondary response to altered biomechanical stresses rather than primary inflammatory disease and therefore unlikely to be responsive to biologic therapies. Furthermore, imaging data on the prevalence and na...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    S Siebert S. Siebert has received institutional research funding from Amgen (previously Celgene), Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, and UCB and honoraria/speaker fees from AbbVie, Biogen, Celgene, GSK, Janssen, Novartis and UCB.
    H Marzo-Ortega has received research funding from Janssen, Novartis and UCB, and speaker fees and/or honoraria from AbbVie, Biogen, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Moonlake, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda and UCB.