Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31990352›Full record

ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2020

Predicting response to anti-TNFα therapy among patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA): results from BSRBR-AS.

Gary J Macfarlane, Ejaz Pathan, Gareth T Jones, Linda E Dean

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Fibroblast activation protein-targeted PET/CT withEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Treatment of axial spondyloarthritis: an update.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gary J MacfarlaneEpidemiology Group, School of Medicine, Medical Science and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Ejaz PathanSpondylitis Program, Department of Rheumatology, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
Gareth T JonesEpidemiology Group, School of Medicine, Medical Science and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Linda E DeanEpidemiology Group, School of Medicine, Medical Science and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
University of Aberdeen · GBToronto Western Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWhile many axSpA patients, eligible to receive anti-TNFα therapy, derive benefit when prescribed them, some patients do not. The current study aims to identify modifiable targets to improve outcome as well as non-modifiable targets that identify groups less likely to derive benefit.

methodsThe BSRBR-AS is a prospective cohort study of axSpA patients who, at recruitment, were naïve to biologic therapy. Those in the 'biologic' sub-cohort commenced their first anti-TNFα therapy at recruitment or during follow-up. Prior to commencement, information was collected on socio-economic, clinical and patient-reported factors. Outcome was assessed according to ASAS20, ASAS40, ASDAS reduction and achieving a moderate/inactive ASDAS disease state.

results335 participants commenced their first anti-TNFα therapy and were followed up at a median of 14 (inter-quartile range 12-17) weeks. Response varied between 33% and 52% according to criteria used. Adverse socio-economic factors, fewer years in education predicted lower likelihood of response across outcome measures as did not working full-time. Co-morbidities and poor mental health were clinical and patient-reported factors, respectively, associated with lack of response. The models, particularly those using ASDAS, were good at predicting those who did not respond (negative predictive value (NPV) 77%).

conclusionSome factors predicting non-response (such as mental health) are modifiable but many (such as social/economic factors) are not modifiable in clinic. They do, however, identify patients who are unlikely to benefit from biologic therapy alone. Priority should focus on how these patients receive the benefits that many derive from such therapies.

Indexed as

Biological TherapySpondylitis, AnkylosingTumor Necrosis Factor InhibitorsAdultCohort StudiesComorbidityEffect Modifier, EpidemiologicFemaleHumansMaleMental HealthPatient AcuityPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPatient SelectionRisk AssessmentSocioeconomic FactorsTumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitorsankylosing spondylitisanti-TNF-alphaaxial spondyloarthritisbiologic therapyresponsetreatment

Identifiers

PMID31990352
PMCPMC7449799
OpenAlexW2995645577

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.