Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40682631›Full record

ArticleRheumatology and therapy2025

A Real-World Comparison of Clinical Effectiveness of Upadacitinib, Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors or Interleukin-17 Inhibitors in Patients with Axial Spondyloarthritis After Switching from an Initial Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Treatment.

Xenofon Baraliakos, Christopher D Saffore, Xiaolan Ye, Jamie Urbanik, Jayne Stigler, Molly Edwards, Isabel Truman, Sophie Barlow, Atul Deodhar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Rheumatology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Year in Review: Axial Spondyloarthritis.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2026
    Review
  2. Cycling or Swapping in Spondyloarthritis? Current Knowledge.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
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

9 authors.

Xenofon BaraliakosRheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet Herne, Ruhr-University Bochum, Herne, Germany.
Christopher D SafforeAbbVie Inc, North Chicago, IL, USA. Christopher.Saffore@abbVie.com.
Xiaolan YeAbbVie Inc, North Chicago, IL, USA.
Jamie UrbanikAbbVie Inc, North Chicago, IL, USA.
Jayne StiglerAbbVie Inc, North Chicago, IL, USA.
Molly EdwardsAdelphi Real World, Bollington, UK.
Isabel TrumanAdelphi Real World, Bollington, UK.
Sophie BarlowAdelphi Real World, Bollington, UK.
Atul DeodharDivision of Arthritis and Rheumatic Diseases, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) may have insufficient efficacy in 40% of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), leading to continued pain. We aimed to compare real-world effectiveness of switching from an initial TNFi to upadacitinib (TNFi-UPA), another TNFi (TNFi-TNFi), or an interleukin-17 inhibitor (TNFi-IL-17i) in patients with axSpA.

methodsData were drawn from the Adelphi Real World Spondyloarthritis Disease Specific Programme™, a cross-sectional survey of physicians and their patients with axSpA in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the UK, and the USA from March-November 2021 and June 2023-June 2024. Patients who switched treatment from an initial TNFi were stratified by subsequent therapy: TNFi-UPA, TNFi-TNFi, or TNFi-IL-17i. Physician-reported clinical outcomes including pain (rated 0-10) and number of joints affected by inflammation or stiffness (from 0 to 68) were evaluated ≥ 3 months from treatment switch. Differences in characteristics were adjusted at the point of switch via inverse-probability-weighted regression adjustment to compare outcomes in separate analyses by subsequent class of therapy: TNFi-UPA versus TNFi-TNFi or TNFi-UPA versus TNFi-IL-17i.

resultsOverall, 310 physicians provided data for 557 patients; 108 were TNFi-UPA, 271 TNFi-TNFi, and 178 TNFi-IL-17i. A higher proportion of patients in the TNFi-UPA group achieved a ≥ 2 point and ≥ 33% reduction in pain than those in the TNFi-IL-17i (97.6% vs 86.4%; p = 0.002) or TNFi-TNFi (100.0% vs 80.1%; p < 0.001) groups. More patients achieved ≥ 50% reduction in pain in the TNFi-UPA group compared to TNFi-IL-17i (90.9% vs 74.0%; p = 0.004) or TNFi-TNFi (96.3% vs 72.3%; p = 0.024). More patients in the TNFi-UPA group had no affected joints than TNFi-IL-17i (93.1% vs 72.6%; p = 0.002) or TNFi-TNFi patients (100.0% vs 79.2%; p < 0.001).

conclusionThis real-world study demonstrated that more patients who switched from TNFi to UPA had improvements in pain and affected joints compared to those who switched to a second TNFi or IL-17i.

Indexed as

Axial spondyloarthritisComparative effectivenessReal-world evidenceUpadacitinib

Identifiers

PMID40682631
PMCPMC12450128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.