Search

Objective: To update the recommendations for the treatment of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with biological therapies, endorsed by the Portuguese Society of Rheumatology. Methods: These treatment recommendations were formulated by Portuguese rheumatologists based on lite - rature evidence and consensus opinion. At a national meeting, the recommendations included in this document were discussed and updated. A draft of the full text of the recommendations was then circulated and suggestions were incorporated. A final version was again circulated before publication and the level of agreement among Portuguese Rheumatologists was anonymously assessed using an online survey. Results: A consensus was achieved regarding the initiation, assessment of response and switching of biological therapies in patients with axSpA. In total, se ven recommendations were produced. The first recommendation is a general statement indicating that biological therapy is not a first-line drug treatment option and should only be used after conventional treatment has failed. The second recommendation is also a ge - neral statement about the broad concept of axSpA adopted by these recommendations that includes both non-radiographic and radiographic axSpA. Recommendations 3 to 7 deal with the definition of active di - sease (including the recommended threshold of 2.1 for the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score [ASDAS] or the threshold of 4 [0-10 scale] for the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI]), conventional treatment failure (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs being the first-line drug treatment), assessment of response to treatment (based on an ASDAS improvement of at least 1.1 units or a BASDAI improvement of at least 2 units [0-10 scale] or at least 50%), and strategy in the presence of an ina -dequate response (where switching is recommended) or in the presence of long-term remission (where a process of biological therapy optimization can be consi - dered, either a gradual increase in the interval between doses or a decrease of each dose of the biological the - rapy). Conclusion: These recommendations may be used for guidance in deciding which patients with axSpA should be treated with biological therapies. They co - ver a rapidly evolving area of therapeutic intervention. As more evidence becomes available and more biological therapies are licensed, these recommendations will have to be updated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To update the recommendations for the treatment of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with biological therapies, endorsed by the Portuguese Society of Rheumatology. Methods: These treatment recommendations were formulated by Portuguese rheumatologists based on literature evidence and consensus opinion. At a national meeting, the recommendations included in this document were discussed and updated. A draft of the full text of the recommendations was then circulated and suggestions were incorporated. A final version was again circulated before publication and the level of agreement among Portuguese Rheumatologists was anonymously assessed using an online survey. Results: A consensus was achieved regarding the initiation, assessment of response and switching of biological therapies in patients with axSpA. In total, se ven recommendations were produced. The first recommendation is a general statement indicating that biological therapy is not a first-line drug treatment option and should only be used after conventional treatment has failed. The second recommendation is also a general statement about the broad concept of axSpA adopted by these recommendations that includes both non-radiographic and radiographic axSpA. Recommendations 3 to 7 deal with the definition of active disease (including the recommended threshold of 2.1 for the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score [ASDAS] or the threshold of 4 [0-10 scale] for the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI]), conventional treatment failure (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs being the first-line drug treatment), assessment of response to treatment (based on an ASDAS improvement of at least 1.1 units or a BASDAI improvement of at least 2 units [0-10 scale] or at least 50%), and strategy in the presence of an inadequate response (where switching is recommended) or in the presence of long-term remission (where a process of biological therapy optimization can be considered, either a gradual increase in the interval between doses or a decrease of each dose of the biological therapy). Conclusion: These recommendations may be used for guidance in deciding which patients with axSpA should be treated with biological therapies. They cover a rapidly evolving area of therapeutic intervention. As more evidence becomes available and more biological therapies are licensed, these recommendations will have to be updated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To develop recommendations for the treatment of axial spondyloarthritis with biological therapies, endorsed by the Portuguese Society of Rheumatology., Methods: These treatment recommendations were formulated by Portuguese rheumatologists based on literature evidence and consensus opinion. A draft of the recommendations and supporting evidence was first circulated to all Portuguese rheumatologists and their suggestions were incorporated in the draft. Secondly, at a national meeting the recommendations were presented, discussed and revised. Finally, the document resulting from this meeting was again circulated to all Portuguese rheumatologists, who anonymously voted online on the level of agreement with the recommendations., Results: A consensus was achieved regarding the initiation, assessment of response and switching biological therapies in patients with axial spondyloarthritis., Conclusion: These recommendations may be used for guidance in deciding which patients with axial spondyloarthritis should be treated with biological therapies. They cover a rapidly evolving area of therapeutic intervention. As more evidence becomes available and more biological therapies are licensed, these recommendations will have to be updated.

Objective: To develop recommendations for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) with biological therapies, endorsed by the Portuguese Society of Rheumatology., Methods: These treatment recommendations were formulated by Portuguese rheumatologists based on literature evidence and consensus opinion. A draft of the recommendations was first circulated to all Portuguese rheumatologists and their suggestions were incorporated in the draft. At a national meeting the recommendations were discussed and all attending rheumatologists voted on the level of agreement for each recommendation. A second draft was again circulated before publication., Results: A consensus was achieved regarding the initiation, assessment of response and switching biological therapies in patients with PsA. Specific recommendations were developed for several disease domains: peripheral arthritis, axial disease, enthesitis and dactylitis., Conclusion: These recommendations may be used for guidance in deciding which patients with PsA should be treated with biological therapies. They cover a rapidly evolving area of therapeutic intervention. As more evidence becomes available and more biological therapies are licensed, these recommendations will have to be updated.

The authors review the practical aspects of biological therapy use for rheumatoid arthritis patients, commenting safety issues before and after treatment initiation and the best treatment strategies to optimize efficacy.

The authors present the revised version of the Portuguese Society of Rheumatology (SPR) guidelines for the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) with biological therapies. In these guidelines the criteria for introduction and maintenance of biological agents are discussed as well as the contraindications and procedures in the case of nonresponders. Biological treatment (with a tumour necrosis factor antagonist, abatacept or tocilizumab) should be considered in RA patients with a disease activity score 28 (DAS 28) equal to or greater than 3.2 despite treatment with at least 20mg-weekly-dose of methotrexate (MTX) for at least 3 months or, if such treatment is not possible, after 3 months of other conventional disease modifying drug or combination therapy. A DAS 28 score between 2.6 and 3.2 with a significant functional or radiological deterioration under treatment with conventional regimens could also constitute an indication for biological treatment. The treatment goal should be remission or, if that is not achievable, at least a low disease activity, defined by a DAS28 lower than 3.2, without significative functional or radiological worsening. The response criteria, at the end of the first 3 months of treatment, are a decrease of at least 0.6 in the DAS28 score. After 6 months of treatment res­ponse criteria is defined as a decrease greater than 1.2 in the DAS28 score. Non-responders, in accordance to the Rheumatologist’s clinical opinion, should try a switch to another biological agent (tumour necrosis factor antagonist, abatacept, rituximab or tocilizumab).

A 52-year-old man, with the diagnosis of Ankylosing Spondylitis, since the age of 22, was admitted due to progressive neurological symptoms that had started two years before: paresthesias, impaired sensation and muscle weakness of the lower limbs; burning abdominal and lumbar pain; together with bladder, bowel and sexual dysfunction. Imaging investigations revealed severe lesions from D1 to L5: epidural calcification; spinal cord compression and syringomyelia. Based on this case, the authors review the neurological complications of Ankylosing Spondylitis.