Observational studyRMD open2024
Effectiveness of secukinumab in radiographic and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: a European routine-care observational study.
Observational study in RMD open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- Year in Review: Axial Spondyloarthritis.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2026Review
- Long-term comparative analysis of secukinumab versus TNFα inhibitors in patients with spondyloarthritis: treatment persistence is differentially affected by disease phenotype, obesity and sex.Arthritis research & therapy · 2025Article
- Predictive Factors for COVID-19 Severity in Patients with Axial Spondyloarthritis: Real-World Data from the Romanian Registry of Rheumatic Diseases.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
39 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the treatment effectiveness of secukinumab in radiographic (r) versus non-radiographic (nr) axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) patients treated in routine care across Europe.
methodsProspectively collected data on secukinumab-treated axSpA patients with known radiographic status were pooled from nine countries.Remission rates based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs; Numeric Rating Scale (0-10), for example, pain ≤2/Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) ≤2 and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) inactive disease (ID) <1.3 after 6/12/24 months of secukinumab treatment were calculated.Remission and drug retention rates in r-axSpA versus nr-axSpA patients were compared by logistic and Cox regression models (unadjusted/adjusted for age+sex/adjusted for multiple confounders).
resultsOverall, 1161 secukinumab-treated patients were included (r-axSpA/nr-axSpA: 922/239). At baseline, r-axSpA patients had longer disease duration and higher C reactive protein, were more often male and HLA-B27 positive and had received fewer prior biological or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs compared with nr-axSpA patients, whereas PROs were largely similar.During follow-up, crude PRO remission rates were significantly higher in r-axSpA compared with nr-axSpA patients (6 months: pain≤2: 40%/28%, OR=1.7; BASDAI≤2: 37%/25%, OR=1.8), as were drug retention rates (24 months: 66%/58%, HR 0.73 (ref: r-axSpA)). Proportions of patients achieving ASDAS ID were low for both groups, particularly nr-axSpA (6 months: 11%/8%).However, when adjusting for age+sex, these differences diminished, and after adjusting for multiple confounders, no significant between-group differences remained for either remission or drug retention rates.
conclusionCrude remission/drug retention rates in European secukinumab-treated patients were higher in r-axSpA compared with nr-axSpA patients. In adjusted analyses, secukinumab effectiveness was similar in both groups, suggesting that observed differences were related to factors other than radiographic status.
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.