Zeitschrift für Rheumatologie

, Volume 72, Issue 1, pp 81–88 | Cite as

ASAS-Empfehlungen zur Anwendung von TNF-Blockern bei Patienten mit axialer Spondyloarthritis

Evaluation des Updates von 2010 im deutschsprachigen Raum
Originalien
First Online:

Zusammenfassung

Die ASAS-Empfehlungen zur Anwendung von Tumor-Nekrose-Faktor(TNF)-Blockern bei Patienten mit axialer Spondyloarthritis sind im Jahr 2010 überarbeitet worden. Es sind wesentliche Neuerungen in das Update eingeflossen. Die Diagnose ist von der ankylosierenden Spondylitis (AS) auf die gesamte Patientengruppe der axialen Spondyloarthritis erweitert worden. Es ist eine Vorbehandlung mit mindestens zwei nichtsteroidalen Antiphlogistika (NSAR) für 4 Wochen vorgesehen. Der Therapieerfolg der Therapie mit TNF-Blocker wird nach mindestens 12 Wochen erhoben.

Im vorliegenden Bericht werden die Ergebnisse der Evaluation der deutschen Übersetzung dieser Empfehlungen vorgestellt. Insgesamt 25 Experten aus Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz haben die Übersetzung hinsichtlich eines Empfehlungsgrades auf einer Skala zwischen 0 (keine Übereinstimmung) bis 10 (volle Übereinstimmung) bewertet. Die Übereinstimmung der Experten mit den Empfehlungen war mit 8,96 ± 1,25 insgesamt sehr hoch.

Schlüsselworte

Nichtsteroidales Antirheumatikum  Spondyloarthritis Ankylosierende Spondylitis Tumor-Nekrose-Faktor-Blocker Nichtröntgenologische axiale Spondyloarthritis 

Abkürzung

AS

Ankylosierender Spondylitis

ASAS

Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society

AxSpA

Axiale Spondyloarthritis

DMARDs

Disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug

nr-axSpA

Nichtröntgenologische axiale Spondyloarthritis

NSAR

Nichtsteroidales Antirheumatikum

SIG

Sakroiliakalgelenke

SpA

Spondyloarthritis

ASAS recommendations on the use of TNF inhibitors for patients with axial spondyloarthritis

Evaluation of the 2010 update in the German-speaking area

Abstract

The ASAS recommendations on the use of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors for patients with axial spondyloarthritis were amended in 2010. Essential new aspects have been included in the update. The diagnosis is extended from patients with ankylosing spondlitis (AS) to all patient groups of axial spondyloarthritis. Pretreatment with at least two non-steroidal anti-rheumatic drugs (NSARD) for 4 weeks is recommended. The success of therapy with TNF inhibitors is to be compiled after at least 12 weeks.

This article presents the results of the evaluation of the German translation of these recommendations. A total of 25 experts from Germany, Austria and Switzerland have scored the translation on a scale between 0 (no agreement) and 10 (full agreement) with respect to the recommendation grade. The agreement on the recommendations between the experts was very high (8.98 ± 1.25).

Keywords

Non-steroidal anti-rheumatic drugs Spondyloarthritis Ankylosing spondylitis Tumor necrosis factor inhibitor Non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Danksagung

Xenofon Baraliakos, Beat Michel, Heinrich Böhm, Jan Brandt, Cem Gabay, Winfried Graininger, Michael Hammer, Kirsten Karberg, Herbert Kellner, Lars Köhler, Klaus Krüger, Jens Kuipers, Heinz-Jürgen Lakomek, Burkhard Leeb, Elisabeth Märker-Hermann, Bernhard Manger, Wilfried Mau, Denis Poddubnyy, Stefan Rehart, Martin Rudwaleit, Michael Schirmer, In-Ho Song, Peter Villiger, Ueli Weber, Jürgen Wollenhaupt.

Interessenkonflikt

Keine Angaben.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Braun J et al (2003) International ASAS consensus statement for the use of anti-tumuor necrosis factor agents in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 62:817–824PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Braun J et al (2006) First update of the international ASAS consensus statement for the use of anti-TNF agents in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 65:316–320PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heijde D van der (2011) 2010 Update of the international ASAS recommendations for the use of anti-TNF agents in patients with axial spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 70:905–908PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berg van den, Baraliakos X, Braun J et al (2012) First update of the current evidence for the management of ankylosing spondylitis with non-pharmacological treatment and non-biologic drugs: a systematic literature review for the ASAS/EULAR management recommendations in ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol [ahead of print]Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    The AGREE Collaboration (2001) Appraisal and Guidelines for Research and Evaluation. (AGREE) Instrument. http://www.agreecollaboration.org. Zugegriffen: 10. Juni 2012Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rudwaleit M et al (2009) The development of Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society classification for axial spondyloarthritis (part II): validation and final selection. Ann Rheum Dis 68:777–783PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Braun J et al (2011) 2010 update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Ann Rheum Dis 70:896–904PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Van der Linden S et al (1984) Evaluation of diagnostic criteria for ankylosing spondylitis. A proposal for modification of the New York criteria. Arthritis Rheum 27:361–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gossec L, Dougados M, Phillip C et al (2008) Dissemination and evaluation of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis: results of a study among 1507 rheumatologists. Ann Rheum Dis 67:782–788PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rudwaleit M et al (2009) The early disease stage in axial spondyloarthritis: results from the German Spondyloarthritis Inception Cohort. Arthritis Rheum 60:717–727PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kiltz U, Baraliakos X, Karaklostas P et al (2012) Patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis differ from patients with ankylosing spondylitis in several aspects. Arthritis Care Res. doi:10.1002/acr.21688. [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haibel H et al (2008) Efficacy of adalimumab in the treatment of axial spondyloarthritis 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 58:1981–1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barkham N et al (2009) Clinical and images efficacy of infliximab in HLA-B27-Positive patients with magnetic resonance imaging-determined early sacroiliitis. Arthritis Rheum 60:946–954PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rudwaleit M, Jurik AG, Hermann KG et al (2009) Defining active sacroiliitis on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for classification of axial spondyloarthritis: a consensual approach by the ASAS/OMERACT MRI group. Ann Rheum Dis 68(10):1520–1527PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hermann KG, Baraliakos X, Heijde DM van der et al (2012) Descriptions of spinal MRI lesions and definition of a positive MRI of the spine in axial spondyloarthritis: a consensual approach by the ASAS/OMERACT MRI study group. Ann Rheum Dis [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van der Heijde D et al (2005) Evaluation of the efficacy of etoricoxib in ankylosing spondylitis: results of a fifty-two-week, randomized, controlled study. Arthritis Rheum 52:1205–1215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sieper J et al (2008) Comparison of two different dosages of celecoxib with diclofenac for the treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis: results of a 12-week randomized, double-blind, controlled study. Ann Rheum Dis 67:323–329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Garrett S et al (1994) A new approach to defining disease status in ankylosing spondylitis: the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index. J Rheumatol 21:2286–2291PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Heijde D van der, Bellamy N, Calin A et al (1997) Preliminary core sets for endpoints in ankylosing spondylitis. Assessments in Ankylosing Spondylitis Working Group. J Rheumatol 24:2225–2229PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Baraliakos X, Lisitng J, Fritz C et al (2011) Persistent clinical efficacy and safety of infliximab in ankylosing spondylitis after 8 years–early clinical response predicts long-term outcome. Rheumatology 50:1690–1696PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Furst DE et al (2010) Updated consensus statement on biologoical agents for the treatment of rheumatic diseases, 2009. Ann Rheum Dis 69(Suppl 1):i2–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Van der Heijde D et al (2008) Radiographic progression of ankylosing spondylitis after up tot wo years of treatment with etanercept. Arthritis Rheum 58:1324–1331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Van der Heijde D et al (2008) Radiographic findings following two years of infliximab therapy in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 58:3063–3070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van der Heijde D et al (2009) Assessment of radiographic progression in the spines of patients with ankylosing spondylitis treated with adalimumab for up to 2 years. Arthritis Res Ther 11:R127CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rheumazentrum RuhrgebietHerneDeutschland

Personalised recommendations