Advertisement

Drugs & Aging

, Volume 22, Issue 6, pp 451–469 | Cite as

Late-Onset Ankylosing Spondylitis and Related Spondylarthropathies

Clinical and Radiological Characteristics and Pharmacological Treatment Options
  • Éric ToussirotEmail author
  • Daniel Wendling
Leading Article

Abstract

Ankylosing spondylitis is the prototype of related diseases commonly called spondylarthropathies which include reactive arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, arthritis associated with inflammatory bowel diseases (enteropathic arthritis) and undifferentiated spondylarthropathies. Ankylosing spondylitis and spondylarthropathies are generally observed in young patients but can be observed later in life or in persons >50 years of age. All the spondylarthropathy subgroups are represented in the elderly with some features particular to this age group. Indeed, radiological aspects of ankylosing spondylitis may be difficult to interpret because of the radiological changes induced by aging. Late-onset peripheral spondylarthropathies are characterised by severe disease, marked elevation of laboratory parameters of inflammation, oligoarthritis involving the lower limbs and oedema of the extremities. Psoriatic arthritis is more severe in the elderly and is associated with worse outcomes than in young patients. The clinical presentation of undifferentiated spondylarthropathy is as varied in the elderly as in young and middle-aged adults. Reactive arthritis and enteropathic arthritis are observed in the elderly more rarely.

The effects of aging on drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics, together with the existence of co-morbidities and polypharmacy, are responsible for difficulties in the therapeutic management of late-onset ankylosing spondylitis or spondylarthropathies. Indeed, NSAIDs should be used with caution in older patients because of the high risk of serious gastrointestinal complications. Sulfasalazine and methotrexate have been used as disease-controlling drugs but did not prove very effective. Pamidronate and tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonists offer a therapeutic alternative but have not been specifically tested in the elderly. Pamidronate has been tested in young-onset ankylosing spondylitis and spondylarthropathies with conflicting results but can be used in older patients without risk of major adverse effects. TNFα antagonists have been adequately evaluated in ankylosing spondylitis and spondylarthropathies and are associated with dramatic improvement in clinical and biological parameters of disease activity. However, the safety profile of these agents in the elderly is not currently known and careful surveillance, in particular for the risk of infection such as tuberculosis, and/or exacerbation of chronic heart failure, is thus required when using these drugs in this age group.

Keywords

Infliximab Ankylose Spondylitis Etanercept Celecoxib Spondylitis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.

References

  1. 1.
    Wollheim FA. Ankylosing spondylitis. In: Kelley WN, Harris ED, Ruddy S, editors. Textbook of rheumatology. Philadelphia (PA): Saunders 1993: 943–55Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Van Der Linden S, Van Der Heijde D. Ankylosing spondylitis: clinical features. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 1998; 24: 663–76PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown MA, Kennedy LG, MacGregor AJ, et al. Susceptibility to ankylosing spondylitis in twins: the role of genes, HLA, and the environment. Arthritis Rheum 1997; 40: 1823–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Calin A. Terminology, introduction, diagnostic criteria and overview. In: Calin A, Taurog JD, editors. The spondylarthritides. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998: 1–15Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Saraux A, Guedes C, Allain J, et al. Prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthropathy in Brittany, France. J Rheumatol 1999; 26: 2622–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guillemin F, Saraux A, Guggenbuhl P, et al. Prévalence de la polyarthrite rhumatoïde et des spondylarthropathies en France en 2001. Rev Rhum [Ed Fr] 2002; 69: 1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gran JT, Skomsvoll JF. The outcome of ankylosing spondylitis: a study of 100 patients. Br J Rheumatol 1997; 36: 766–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boonen A. Socioeconomic consequences of ankylosing spondylitis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2002; 20Suppl. 28: S23–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Amor B, Santos RS, Nahal R, et al. Predictive factors for the longterm outcome of spondylarthropathies. J Rheumatol 1994; 21: 1883–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Braun J, Pincus T. Mortality, course of the disease and prognosis of patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2002; 20Suppl. 28: S16–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gran JT, Husby G. Ankylosing spondylitis: current drug treatment. Drugs 1992; 44: 585–603PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Creemers MCW, Van Riel PCLM, Franssen MJAM. Second-line treatment in seronegative spondylarthropathies. Semin Arthritis Rheum 1994; 24: 71–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Toussirot E, Wendling D. Current guidelines for the drug treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. Drugs 1998; 56: 225–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wendling, Toussirot E. Anti-TNFα therapy in ankylosing spondylitis. Exp Opin Pharmacother 2004; 5: 1497–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dubost JJ, Sauvezie B. Actualités des rhumatismes inflammatoires du sujet âgé. Rev Rhum 1992; 59 (6 bis): 38S–42SGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Amor B, Bouchet H, Delrieu F. Enquête nationale sur les arthrites réactionnelles de la Société Française de Rhumatologie. Rev Rhum 1983; 50: 733–43PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Carbone LD, Cooper C, Michet CJ, et al. Ankylosing spondylitis in Rochester, Minnesota 1935–1989: is the epidemiology changing? Arthritis Rheum 1992; 35: 1476–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Feldtkeller E, Bruckel J, Khan MA. Scientific contributions of ankylosing spondylitis patient advocacy groups. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2000; 12: 239–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dubost JJ, Ristori JM, Zmantar C, et al. Rhumatismes séronégatifs à début Tardif: fréquence et atypie des spondylarthropathies. Rev Rhum 1991; 58: 577–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Van der Linden SM, Valkenburg HA, Cats A. Evaluation of diagnostic criteria for ankylosing spondylitis: a proposal for modification of the New York criteria. Arthritis Rheum 1984; 27: 361–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dubost JJ, Sauvezie B. Late onset peripheral spondylarthropathy. J Rheumatol 1989; 16: 1214–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Caplanne D, Tubach F, Le Parc JM. Late onset spondylarthropathy: clinical and biological comparison with early onset patients. Ann Rheum Dis 1997; 56: 176–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Olivieri I, Padula A, Pierro A, et al. Late onset seronegative spondylarthropathy. J Rheumatol 1995; 22: 899–903PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kay LJ, Walker DJ. Late onset spondylarthropathy: comparison with early onset patient [letter]. Ann Rheum Dis 1997; 57: 572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Amor B, Dougados M, Mijiyama M. Critères de classification des spondylarthropathies. Rev Rhum 1990; 57: 85–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Garrett S, Jenkinson T, Whitelock H, et al. A new approach to defining disease status in AS: the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI). J Rheumatol 1994; 21: 2286–91PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    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 (BASFI). J Rheumatol 1994; 21: 2281–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Brophy S, Calin A. Ankylosing spondylitis: interaction between genes, joints, age at onset and disease expression. J Rheumatol 2001; 28: 2283–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kaipiainen-Seppanen O. Incidence of psoriatic arthritis in Finland. Br J Rheumatol 1996; 35: 1289–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Punzi L, Pianon M, Rossini P, et al. Clinical and laboratory manifestations of elderly onset psoriatic arthritis: a comparison with younger onset disease. Ann Rheum Dis 1999; 58: 226–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dougados M, Van Der Linden S, Juhlin R, et al. The European Spondylarthropathy Study Group: the European Spondylarthropathy Study Group preliminary criteria for the classification of spondylarthropathy. Arthritis Rheum 1991; 34: 1218–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    McCarty DJ, O’Duffy JD, Pearson L, et al. Remitting synovitis seronegative symmetric synovitis with pitting edema (RS3PE) syndrome. JAMA 1985; 254: 2763–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cantini F, Salvanari C, Olivieri I, et al. Remitting seronegative symmetrical synovitis with pitting edema (RS3PE) syndrome: a prospective follow-up and magnetic resonance imaging study. Ann Rheum Dis 1999; 58: 230–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ponce A, Sanmarti R, Orellana C, et al. Spondylarthropathy presenting as polymyalgia rheumatica-like syndrome. Clin Rheumatol 1997; 16: 614–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Olivieri I, Salvanari C, Cantini F, et al. Ankylosing spondylitis and undifferentiated spondylarthropathies: a clinical review and description of a disease subset with older age at onset. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2001; 13: 280–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Koeger AC, Karmochkine M, Chaïbi P. RS3PE syndrome associated with advanced ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 1995; 22(2): 375–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Anderson JJ, Baron G, Van Der Heijde D, et al. Ankylosing spondylitis assessment group preliminary definition of short-term improvement in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44: 1876–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wanders A, Van Der Heijde D, Landewé R, et al. Inhibition of radiographic progression in ankylosing spondylitis by continuous use of NSAIDs. Arthritis Rheum 2003; 48Suppl. 1: S233Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Buffum M, Buffum JC. Non steroidal antiinflammatory drugs in the elderly. Pain Manag Nurs 2000; 1: 40–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Greenwald DA. Aging, the gastrointestinal tract, and the risk of acid related disease. Am J Med 2004; 117(5A): 8S–13SPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nikolaus T, Zeyfang A. Pharmacological treatments for persistent non-malignant pain in older persons. Drugs Aging 2004; 21: 19–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Montamat SC, Cusack BJ, Vestal RE. Management of drug therapy in the elderly. N Engl J Med 1989; 321: 303–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lee M, Feldman M. The aging stomach: implications for NSAID gastropathy. Gut 1997; 41: 425–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Davis MP, Srivastava M. Demographics, assessment and management of pain in the elderly. Drugs Aging 2003; 20: 23–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Beyth R, Shorr RI. Epidemiology of adverse drug reactions in the elderly by drug class. Drugs Aging 1999; 14: 231–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Singh G, Triadafilopoulos G. Epidemiology of NSAID induced gastrointestinal complications. J Rheumatol Suppl 1999; 56: 18–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Silverstein FE, Faich G, Goldstein JL, et al. Gastrointestinal toxicity with celecoxib vs nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: the CLASS study. Celecoxib Long-term Arthritis Safety Study. JAMA 2000; 294: 1247–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Bombardier C, Laine L, Reicin A, et al. Comparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: VIGOR study group. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 1520–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Dougados M, Behier J, Jolchine I, et al. Efficacy of celecoxib, a COX-2 specific inhibitor in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a six-week controlled study with comparison against placebo and against conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44: 180–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Emery P, Baraf HS, Schiff M, et al. Etoricoxib, a COX-2 selective inhibitor in ankylosing spondylitis patients with poor response to non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63Suppl. 1: 99Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bennett WM. Drug-related renal dysfunction. Geriatr Nephrol Urol 1999; 9: 21–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Marzo-Ortega H, Emery P, McGonagle D. The concept of disease modification in spondylarthropathy. J Rheumatol 2002; 29: 959–65Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Dougados M, Van Der Linden S, Leirisalo-Repo M, et al. Sulfasalazine in the treatment of spondylarthropathy: a randomized, multicenter, double blind, placebo-controlled study. Arthritis Rheum 1995; 38: 618–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Clegg DO, Reda DJ, Abdellatif M. Comparison of sulfasalazine and placebo for the treatment of axial and peripheral articular manifestations of seronegative spondylarthropathies: a Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study. Arthritis Rheum 1999; 42: 2325–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Bosi-Ferraz M, Tugwell P, Goldsmith C, et al. Meta-analysis of sulfasalazine in ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 1990; 17: 1782–6Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Gardner G, Furst DE. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: potential effects in older patients. Drugs Aging 1995; 7: 420–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Creemers MCW, Franssen MJ, Van De Putte LBA, et al. Methotrexate in severe ankylosing spondylitis: an open study. J Rheumatol 1995; 22: 1104–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Biasi D, Carletto A, Carmaschi P, et al. Efficacy of methotrexate in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a three-year open study. Clin Rheumatol 2000; 19: 114–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sampaio-Barros PD, Costallat LTL, Bertolo M, et al. Methotrexate in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. Scand J Rheumatol 2000; 29: 160–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Altan L, Bingol U, Karakoc Y, et al. Clinical investigation of methotrexate in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. Scand J Rheumatol 2001; 30: 255–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Chepeleva SN, Sigidin YA, Loukina GV. The results of the comparative study of sulphasalazine and methotrexate in ankylosing spondylitis [abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis 2002; 61Suppl. 1: 299–300Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Gonzalez-Lopez L, Garcia-Gonzalez A, Vasquez-Del-Mercado M, et al. Efficacy of methotrexate in ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trial. J Rheumatol 2004; 31: 1568–74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Tett SE, Triggs EJ. Use of methotrexate in older patients: a risk benefit assessment. Drugs Aging 1996; 9: 458–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trial Archive Group. The effect of age and renal function on the efficacy and toxicity of methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 1995; 22: 218–23Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Nash P, Clegg DO. Psoriatic arthritis therapy: NSAIDs and traditional DMARDs. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64Suppl. 2: ii4–7Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Fleisch H. Bisphosphonates: preclinical. In: Fleisch III H, editor. Bisphosphonates in bone disease: from the laboratory to the patient. New York: Parthenon Publishing Group, 1997: 32–57Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Dunn CJ, Galinet LA, Wu H, et al. Demonstration of novel antiarthritic and anti-inflammatory effects of diphosphonates. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1993; 266: 1691–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Maksymowych WP. Bisphosphonates: anti-inflammatory properties. Curr Med Chem Antiinflammatory Anti Allergic Agents 2002; 1: 15–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Redlich K, Hayer S, Maier A, et al. Tumor necrosis factor alpha mediated joint destruction is inhibited by targeting osteoclasts with osteoprotegerin. Arthritis Rheum 2002; 46: 785–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Hasegawa J, Nagashima M, Yamamoto M, et al. Bone resorption and inflammatory inhibition efficacy of intermittent cyclical etidronate therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2003; 30: 474–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Haibel H, Braun J, Maksymowych WP. Bisphosphonates: targeting bone in the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2002; 20Suppl. 28: S162–S66PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Maksymowych WP. Bisphosphonates for arthritis: a confusing rationale. J Rheumatol 2003; 30: 430–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Maksymowych WP, Jhangri GS, Leclercq S, et al. An open study of pamidronate in the treatment of refractory ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 1998; 25: 714–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Maksymowych WP, Lambert R, Jhangri GS, et al. Clinical and radiological amelioration of refractory peripheral spondyloarthritis by pulse intravenous pamidronate therapy. J Rheumatol 2001; 28: 144–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Maksymowych WP, Jhangri GS, Fitzgerald AA, et al. A six-month randomized, controlled, double-blind, dose response comparison of intravenous pamidronate (60mg versus 10mg) in the treatment of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug-refractory ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2002; 46: 766–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Haibel H, Brandt J, Rudwaleit M, et al. Treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis with pamidronate. Rheumatology 2003; 42: 1018–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Toussirot E, Lohse A, Le Huédé G, et al. Treatment of refractory and active spondylarthropathies with pamidronate: an open study [abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63Suppl. 1: 395Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Toussirot E, Wendling D. Bone mass in ankylosing spondylitis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2000; 18Suppl. 21: S16–20Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Cairns AP, Wright SA, Taggart AJ, et al. An open study of pulse pamidronate therapy in severe ankylosing spondylitis and its effects on biochemical marker of bone turnover. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64: 338–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Braun J, Bollow M, Neure L, et al. Use of immunohistologic and in situ hybridization techniques in the examination of sacroiliac joint biopsy specimens from patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 1995; 38: 499–505PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Gratacos J, Collado A, Filella X, et al. Serum cytokines (IL-6, TNFα, IL-1β and IFNγ) in ankylosing spondylitis: a close correlation between serum IL-6 and disease activity and severity. Br J Rheumatol 1994; 33: 927–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Sandborn WJ. Anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy for inflammatory bowel disease: a review of agents, pharmacology, clinical results and safety. Inflamm Bowel Dis 1999; 5: 119–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Toussirot E, Wendling D. The use of TNF-α blocking agents in rheumatoid arthritis: an overview. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2004; 5: 581–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Markham A, Lamb HM. Infliximab. A review of its use in the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Drugs 2000; 59: 1341–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Etanercept: soluble tumour necrosis factor receptor, TNF receptor fusion protein, TNFR-Fc, TNR001, Enbrel. Drugs R D 1999; 1: 258–61Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Machold KP, Smolen JS. Adalimumab: a new TNFα antibody for the treatment of inflammatory joint disease. Expert Opin Biol Ther 2003; 3: 351–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Braun J, De Keyser F, Brandt J, et al. New treatment option in spondylarthropathies: increasing evidence for significant efficacy of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2001; 13: 245–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Sieper J, Braun J. New treatment options in ankylosing spondylitis: a role for anti-TNFα therapy. Ann Rheum Dis 2001; 60Suppl. 3: iii58–61PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Van Den Bosch F, Baeten D, Kruithof E, et al. Treatment of active spondylarthropathy with infliximab, the chimeric monoclonal antibody to tumor necrosis factor alpha. Ann Rheum Dis 2001; 60Suppl. 3: iii33–66PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Brandt J, Haibel H, Comely D, et al. Successful treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis with the anti-tumor necrosis factor α monoclonal antibody infliximab. Arthritis Rheum 2000; 43: 1346–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Van Der Bosch F, Kruithof E, Baeten D, et al. Effects of a loading dose regimen of three infusions of chimeric monoclonal antibody to tumor necrosis factor α (infliximab) in spondylarthropathy: an open pilot study. Ann Rheum Dis 2000; 59: 428–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Stone M, Salonen D, Lax M, et al. Clinical and imaging correlates of response to treatment with infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 2001; 28: 1605–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Kruithof E, Van Den Bosch F, Baeten D, et al. Repeated infusions of infliximab, a chimeric anti-TNFα monoclonal antibody in patients with active spondylarthropathy: one year follow up. Ann Rheum Dis 2002; 61: 207–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Maksymowych W, Jhangri GS, Lambert RG, et al. Infliximab in ankylosing spondylitis: a prospective observational inception cohort analysis of efficacy and safety. J Rheumatol 2002; 29: 959–65PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Breban M, Vignon E, Claudepierre P, et al. Efficacy of infliximab in refractory ankylosing spondylitis: results of a six-month open-label study. Rheumatology 2002; 41: 1280–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Braun J, Brandt J, Listing J, et al. Long-term efficacy and safety of infliximab in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: an open, observational, extension study of a three month, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2003; 48: 2224–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Temekonidis TI, Alamanos Y, Nikas SN, et al. Infliximab therapy in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: an open label 12 month study. Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62: 1218–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Collantes-Estevez E, Munoz-Villanueva MC, Canete-Crespillo JD, et al. Infliximab in refractory spondylarthropathies: a multicentre 38 week open study. Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62: 1239–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Marzo-Ortega H, McGonagle D, O’Connor D, et al. Efficacy of etanercept in the treatment of entheseal pathology in resistant spondylarthropathy: a clinical and magnetic resonance imaging study. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44: 2112–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Brandt J, Khariouzov A, Listing J, et al. Successful short term treatment of patients with severe undifferentiated spondylarthritis with the anti-tumor necrosis factor-α fusion receptor protein etanercept. J Rheumatol 2004; 31: 531–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Van Den Bosch F, Kruithof E, Baeten D, et al. Randomised double blind comparison of chimeric monoclonal antibody to tumor necrosis factor α (infliximab) versus placebo in active spondylarthropathy. Arthritis Rheum 2002; 46: 755–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Braun J, Brandt J, Listing J, et al. Treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis with infliximab: a randomized controlled multicentre trial. Lancet 2002; 359: 1187–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Gorman J, Sack KE, Davis Jr JC. Treatment of ankylosing spondylitis by inhibition of tumor necrosis factor alpha. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1349–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Davis JC, Van Der Heijde D, Braun J, et al. Recombinant human tumor necrosis factor receptor (etanercept) for treating ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2003; 48: 3230–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Rudwaleit M, Listing J, Brandt J, et al. Prediction of a major clinical response (BASDAI) to tumour necrosis factor α blockers in ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63: 665–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Veale DJ, Ritchlin C, Fitzgerald O. Immunopathology of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64Suppl. 2: ii26–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Mease PJ, Goffe BS, Metz J, et al. Etanercept in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis: a randomised trial. Lancet 2000; 356: 385–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Mease PJ, Ruderman EM, Ritchlin CT, et al. Etanercept in psoriatic arthritis: sustained improvement in joint and skin disease and inhibition of radiographic progression at 2 years [abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63Suppl. 1: 99Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Yazici Y, Erkan D, Lockshin MD. A preliminary study of etanercept in the treatment of severe, resistant psoriatic arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2000; 18: 732–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Antoni C, Kavanaugh A, Kirkham B, et al. The one year results of the infliximab multinational psoriatic arthritis controlled trial (IMPACT) [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2003; 48Suppl. 1: 603Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Ellerin T, Rubin RH, Weinblatt ME. Infections and anti-tumor necrosis factor a therapy. Arthritis Rheum 2003; 48: 3013–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Kroesen S, Widmer AF, Tyndall A, et al. Serious bacterial infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis under anti TNFα therapy. Rheumatology 2003; 42: 617–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Keane J, Gershon S, Wise RP, et al. Tuberculosis associated with infliximab, a tumor necrosis factor neutralizing agent. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 1098–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Salmon-Ceron D, on behalf of the Group RATIO and AFSSAPS. Recommendations for the prevention and management of tuberculosis in patients taking infliximab. Ann Med Interne (Paris) 2002; 153: 429–31Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Baeten D, Kruithof E, Van Den Bosch F, et al. Systematic safety follow up in a cohort of 107 patients with spondylarthropathy treated with infliximab: a new perspective on the role of host defence in the pathogenesis of the disease? Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62: 829–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Shibata A, Zhao S, Makuch RW, et al. Lymphoma risk in ankylosing spondylitis patients is greater than that observed in the general population [abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63Suppl. 1: 98Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Kwon HJ, Cote TR, Cuffe MS, et al. Case reports of heart failure after therapy with a tumor necrosis factor antagonist. Ann Intern Med 2003; 20: 807–11Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Hyrich KL, Silman AJ, Watson KD, et al. Anti-tumour necrosis factor α therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: an update on safety. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63: 1538–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Cairns A, Taggart A. Anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy for severe inflammatory arthritis: two years of experience in Northern Ireland. Ulster Med J 2002; 71: 101–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Chevillotte-Maillard H, Ornetti P, Mistrih R, et al. Survival and safety of treatment with infliximab in the elderly population. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2005; 44: 695–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RheumatologyUniversity Hospital Jean MinjozBesançonFrance

Personalised recommendations