ArticleRheumatology and therapy2023
Clinical and Economic Benefit of Advanced Therapies for the Treatment of Active Ankylosing Spondylitis.
Article in Rheumatology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Efficacy and Safety of BCD-180, an Anti-TRBV9+ T cell Monoclonal Antibody, in Patients with Active Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis: 36-week Results from the Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase 2 Clinical Study ELEFTA.Doklady. Biochemistry and biophysics · 2025Trial
- Beyond pharmacotherapy: a narrative review of patient, social, and healthcare system factors influencing treatment adherence in ankylosing spondylitis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Upadacitinib for the treatment of radiographic axial spondyloarthritis - case series and review of the literature.Drugs in context · 2025Article
- Case Report: The combination of upadacitinib and adalimumab in the treatment of refractory ankylosing spondylitis.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Comparative Efficacy of Advanced Therapies in the Treatment of Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis or Ankylosing Spondylitis as Evaluated by the ASDAS Low Disease Activity Criteria.Rheumatology and therapy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRecent changes to treatment guidelines for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have listed first-line advanced therapies as tumor necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin (IL)-17, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. This study sought to assess the comparative clinical and economic benefit of advanced therapies approved for AS.
methodsA systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials for JAK inhibitors (upadacitinib [UPA], tofacitinib [TOF]), anti-IL-17 therapies (secukinumab [SEC], ixekizumab [IXE]), and TNF inhibitors (adalimumab [ADA], etanercept [ETN], golimumab [GOL]) used for the treatment of active AS. Clinical efficacy was evaluated by Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society 40 (ASAS40) criteria and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs) was used to generate response rates synthesized via a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Number needed to treat (NNT) was calculated as the reciprocal of incremental response rate of each treatment versus placebo. Cost per ASAS40 responder (CPR) was calculated as the 12-week treatment costs divided by ASAS40 response rates. Data were stratified by biologic treatment status (i.e., biologic naïve [bio-naïve] or inadequate response or intolerance to biologics [bio-IR]) for efficacy and CPR analyses.
resultsAmong bio-naïve patients, the response rate for ASAS40 was 53.6% for UPA-treated patients, whereas most other treatments had response rates between 41% and 49%. NNTs were lowest for UPA-treated patients at 2.8 (other therapies 3.2-4.8). Estimated CPR among UPA-treated patients was lowest (UPA $39.5k vs others $44.2k-102.5k). Efficacy and CPR trends were similar among bio-IR and TNF-IR patients. Among bio-naïve and bio-IR patients, the rate of AEs leading to discontinuation was lowest among UPA and SEC-treated patients (0.0, others 0.6-3.7%).
conclusionsRelative to other treatments assessed in this study, UPA demonstrated numerically greater clinical and economic benefit for the treatment of AS. Head-to-head or real-world comparisons of these therapies are warranted and may inform clinical decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.