Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Treat-to-Target in Spondyloarthritis: Implications for Clinical Trial Designs

  • Leading Article
  • Published:
Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Spondyloarthritis (SpA) is a chronic inflammatory disease involving the spine and peripheral joints, and extra-articular manifestations such as uveitis, psoriasis and bowel inflammation. The treatment goals for SpA are maintenance of physical function, control of disease activity and prevention of radiographic progression. However, unlike the well-established treat-to-target (T2T) guidance in rheumatoid arthritis, the T2T concept for treating SpA is still immature. Clinical evidence of T2T in SpA is still lacking. To develop evidence of T2T in SpA, several research agendas need to be accomplished. Firstly, a well-accepted measureable treatment target needs to be defined through expert consensus. Secondly, a T2T treatment algorithm for monitoring disease activity and adjusting therapies needs to be generated. Finally, well-designed comparative clinical trials to compare this T2T strategy with the current standard of treatment should be conducted to demonstrate long-term benefits and risks. In SpA clinical trials, T2T comparative studies should have a clear disease definition for enrollment of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), psoriatic arthritis, axial SpA or non-radiographic axial SpA. Endpoints should be assessment with AS International Working Group criteria for 20 % improvement (ASAS20), ASAS40, and the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) with inactive and moderate disease activity at month 3. Long-term efficacy endpoints such as the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (mSASSS) of radiographic progression and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) score at 2 years are encouraged. More sensitive assessment tools to detect structural damage and new bone formation, such as low-radiation computerized tomography (CT), are promising.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rudwaleit M, 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(6):777–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rudwaleit M, et al. The Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society classification criteria for peripheral spondyloarthritis and for spondyloarthritis in general. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(1):25–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Burness CB, Deeks ED. Adalimumab: in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. Drugs. 2012;72(18):2385–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Warram JH, Manson JE, Krolewski AS. Glycosylated hemoglobin and the risk of retinopathy in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1995;332(19):1305–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Smolen JS, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(6):964–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gaujoux-Viala C, et al. Current evidence for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a systematic literature review informing the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(6):1004–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Smolen JS, et al. Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(4):631–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Smolen JS, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2013 update. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73(3):492–509.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schoels M, et al. Evidence for treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: results of a systematic literature search. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(4):638–43.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Aletaha D. ACP Journal club: target-oriented drug treatment improves clinical outcomes more than routine care in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Intern Med. 2010;153(6):JC3–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Grigor C, 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(9430):263–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Schipper LG, et al. Meta-analysis of tight control strategies in rheumatoid arthritis: protocolized treatment has additional value with respect to the clinical outcome. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010;49(11):2154–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Urata Y, Nakamura Y, Furukawa K. Comparison of initial versus delayed introduction of a treat-to-target strategy in patients with recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis: results of the T-4 3-year study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73(2):470–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Vermeer M, et al. Implementation of a treat-to-target strategy in very early rheumatoid arthritis: results of the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring remission induction cohort study. Arthritis Rheum. 2011;63(10):2865–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Schipper LG, et al. A tight control treatment strategy aiming for remission in early rheumatoid arthritis is more effective than usual care treatment in daily clinical practice: a study of two cohorts in the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring registry. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71(6):845–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kremer JM. Rheumatoid arthritis: new EULAR guidelines for RA: a job well done. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2014;10(1):6–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tugnet N, et al. To what extent is NICE guidance on the management of rheumatoid arthritis in adults being implemented in clinical practice? A regional survey. Clin Med. 2013;13(1):42–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. van der Heijde D, et al. 2010 update of the international ASAS recommendations for the use of anti-TNF agents in patients with axial spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(6):905–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Smolen JS, et al. Treating spondyloarthritis, including ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis, to target: recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73(1):6–16.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schoels MM, 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(1):238–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lukas C, et al. Development of an ASAS-endorsed disease activity score (ASDAS) in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68(1):18–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pedersen SJ, et al. Responsiveness of the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) and clinical and MRI measures of disease activity in a 1-year follow-up study of patients with axial spondyloarthritis treated with tumour necrosis factor alpha inhibitors. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(6):1065–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Fernandez-Espartero C, et al. Validity of the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) in patients with early spondyloarthritis from the Esperanza programme. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;73:1350–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Machado P, et al. Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS): defining cut-off values for disease activity states and improvement scores. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(1):47–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nell-Duxneuner VP, et al. Evaluation of the appropriateness of composite disease activity measures for assessment of psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(3):546–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mumtaz A, et al. Development of a preliminary composite disease activity index in psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(2):272–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. FitzGerald O, et al. Application of composite disease activity scores in psoriatic arthritis to the PRESTA data set. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71(3):358–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Helliwell PS, et al. The development of candidate composite disease activity and responder indices for psoriatic arthritis (GRACE project). Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(6):986–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Schoels M, et al. Application of the DAREA/DAPSA score for assessment of disease activity in psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(8):1441–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Helliwell PS, Kavanaugh A. Comparison of composite measures of disease activity in psoriatic arthritis using data from an interventional study with golimumab. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(5):749–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kavanaugh A. Psoriatic arthritis: treat-to-target. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2012;30(4 Suppl 73):S123–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Coates LC, et al. The TICOPA protocol (TIght COntrol of Psoriatic Arthritis): a randomised controlled trial to compare intensive management versus standard care in early psoriatic arthritis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:101.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. 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(4):361–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cully M. Spondyloarthritis: data-driven criteria for defining SpA using MRI. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2013;9(2):65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. van der Heijde D, et al. ASDAS, a highly discriminatory ASAS-endorsed disease activity score in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68(12):1811–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Arnbak B, Leboeuf-Yde C, Jensen TS. A systematic critical review on MRI in spondyloarthritis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2012;14(2):R55.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pedersen OB, Junker P. On the applicability of the CASPAR criteria in psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008;67(10):1495–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Mease PJ. Measures of psoriatic arthritis: Tender and Swollen Joint Assessment, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI), Modified Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (mNAPSI), Mander/Newcastle Enthesitis Index (MEI), Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI), Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC), Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesis Score (MASES), Leeds Dactylitis Index (LDI), Patient Global for Psoriatic Arthritis, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life (PsAQOL), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC), Psoriatic Arthritis Joint Activity Index (PsAJAI), Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), and Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(Suppl 11):S64–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Coates LC, Fransen J, Helliwell PS. Defining minimal disease activity in psoriatic arthritis: a proposed objective target for treatment. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(1):48–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

J. Wei declares no conflict of interest, and no funds were used to support the writing of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, No. 110, Sec. 1, Jianguo N. Rd., South District, Taichung City, 40201, Taiwan

    James Cheng-Chung Wei

  2. Division of Allergy, Immunology and Rheumatology, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung City, Taiwan

    James Cheng-Chung Wei

  3. Graduate Institute of Integrated Medicine, China Medical University, Taichung City, Taiwan

    James Cheng-Chung Wei

Authors
  1. James Cheng-Chung Wei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James Cheng-Chung Wei.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wei, J.CC. Treat-to-Target in Spondyloarthritis: Implications for Clinical Trial Designs. Drugs 74, 1091–1096 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-014-0246-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-014-0246-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation