Role of Metrology in Axial Spondyloarthritis: Does It Provide Unique Information in Assessing Patients and Predicting Outcome? Results From the British Society for Rheumatology Biologic Register for Ankylosing Spondylitis

To determine among patients with axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) the factors associated with decreased spinal mobility and to determine whether poor mobility is a predictor of response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy.This was a prospective UK cohort study of persons meeting Assessment of Spondylarthritis international Society (ASAS) criteria for axial SpA. At recruitment, clinical and patient-reported factors independently associated with spinal mobility (measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index [BASMI]) were determined. Among those commencing anti-TNF therapy, factors that were independent predictors of response were determined using ASAS criteria, quality of life, and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) response criteria.A total of 1,960 participants were eligible; 70% were male, the median age was 48 years (interquartile range [IQR] 37, 59), and the median BASMI score 3.6 (IQR 2.2, 5.3). Factors independently associated with poor spinal mobility were poorer function, meeting radiographic criteria for AS, longer symptom duration, higher levels of inflammation (measured by C-reactive protein level), older age, male sex, not being currently employed, and lower levels of education. For 51% of participants, the measured BASMI score was within 1 of that estimated. Poorer mobility (higher BASMI score) was an independent predictor of not meeting response criteria for ASAS 20% improvement (odds ratio [OR] per increasing score 0.80 [IQR 0.66, 0.98]), ASAS 40% improvement (OR 0.69 [IQR 0.50, 0.95]), and quality of life (measured by the Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life Questionnaire) (β = 0.64 [IQR 0.26, 1.02]), but was not related to meeting ASDAS response criteria.The BASMI score was estimated moderately well by other routinely measured factors in patients with axial SpA and was an independent predictor of response to biologic therapy for some, but not all, commonly used measures. Consensus around its role in disease monitoring and clinical decisions, particularly in the likely context of face-to-face consultations becoming less frequent, remains to be established.