ArticleRheumatology international2025
Which ASDAS cut-off corresponds best to treatment intensification in patients with axial spondyloarthritis in daily practice? A prospective study from a clinical registry.
Article in Rheumatology international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To investigate which Axial Spondyloarthritis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) cut-off corresponds best with treatment intensification (TI) in daily practice in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Patients from the prospective SpA-Net registry with axSpA and ≥ 1 ASDAS measurement in 2016–2022 were included. TI was defined as (1) increasing dose/frequency of current drug, (2) switching drug(s) or (3) adding drug(s); all due to inefficacy of current treatment and only considering anti-inflammatory drugs. Patients could contribute multiple observations. Receiver operating characteristic analyses assessed the ability of ASDAS to discriminate between TI/non-TI (Area Under the Curve [AUC]), and identify the ASDAS cut-off that discriminated best. In a random subsample, the rationale for treatment decisions was retrospectively analyzed using patient records. In total, 350 patients with 2,191 ASDAS measurements (243 TI events, 11.1%) were included. Median follow-up was 2.8 years. At inclusion, mean age was 48.2 (SD 14.3) years, 152 (43.4%) were female, and mean ASDAS was 2.4 (SD 1.0). The mean ASDAS was 3.0 (SD 1.0) at TI versus 2.3 (SD 1.0) at non-TI timepoints. TI occurred infrequently at ASDAS ≥ 2.1 observations (203/1,266 [16.0%]). Using all observations, the AUC was 0.71 (95%CI 0.68–0.74) with an optimal ASDAS cut-off of 2.7 (sensitivity 69%, specificity 66%). When stratifying by drug exposure or extra-musculoskeletal manifestations, results were similar (ASDAS cut-off 2.6–3.2). The patient record analysis supported the findings. In daily practice, TI is associated with a higher ASDAS cut-off than the recommended one (≥ 2.1). Rheumatologists consider factors beyond disease activity when making treatment decisions.
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.