Ankilosys 1

Page 1 of 22
Below is a topic taken from UpToDate that I thought you might find interesting.
UpToDate is an online clinical decision support resource featuring over 10,000 clinical topics designed to give
immediate answers to clinical questions at the point of care. Visit us on the web at www.uptodate.com.
2014 UpToDate

Official Topic from UpToDate, the clinical decision support resource accessed by 700,000+ clinicians
worldwide. Available via the web and mobile devices, subscribe to UpToDate at www.uptodate.com/store.
Assessment and treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in adults
Author Deputy Editor

David T Yu, MD Paul L Romain, MD
All topics are updated as new evidence becomes available and our peer review process is complete.
Literature review current through: Feb 2014. | This topic last updated: Feb 10, 2014.
INTRODUCTION Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic inflammatory disease manifested by back pain
and progressive spinal stiffness. It belongs to the axial group of the spondyloarthritis (SpA) family. AS
characteristically affects young adults with a peak age of onset between 20 and 30 years. Although classically
thought of as a spinal disease, transient acute arthritis of peripheral joints occurs in up to 50 percent of
patients. In addition, other organs such as the eyes, lungs, heart, and kidneys can be affected.
The assessment, monitoring, prognosis, and treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in adults are presented here.
The clinical manifestations and diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis in adults, and a detailed discussion of the
clinical manifestations, approach to diagnosis, pathogenesis, and treatment of SpA in children, are presented
separately. (See "Clinical manifestations of ankylosing spondylitis in adults" and "Diagnosis and differential
diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis in adults" and "Pathogenesis of spondyloarthritis" and
"Spondyloarthropathy in children".)
GOALS OF MANAGEMENT The primary goal of management for patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS)
is to maximize long-term health-related quality of life through the following:
Relief of symptoms To eliminate symptoms such as pain, stiffness, and fatigue or to reduce them to the
minimal possible level
Maintenance of function To maintain the best possible functional capacity
Prevention of complications of spinal disease To prevent flexion contractures, especially dorsal kyphosis
Minimization of extraspinal and extraarticular manifestations and comorbidities To reduce the impact of
AS-associated disorders such as uveitis and aortic valve insufficiency
Our approach to achieving these goals is outlined in the following discussion. Our recommendations are
generally consistent with those jointly developed by the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society
(ASAS) and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), and also with those proposed by an
international task force [1-3]. This task force advocates a treat to target approach to spondyloarthritis
management, with an ideal goal of disease remission, and an alternative goal, appropriate particularly for
some patients with more longstanding disease, of minimal disease activity (see 'Acute phase reactants' below)
[3]. Management of AS is lifelong for each patient, and shared decision-making by patients and their clinicians
is important in management.
The symptoms of AS and the rate of progression fluctuate with time and can vary substantially between
patients. Functional limitations can result directly from disease activity but also indirectly from the feelings of
helplessness and depression, which may be associated with disease activity and which also require recognition
and appropriate treatment intervention [4]. (See "Psychosocial factors and rheumatic disease".)
ASSESSMENT AND MONITORING Treatment decisions depend upon an accurate assessment of disease
impact (table 1). In general, four approaches are required:
mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

Page 2 of 22
Information is elicited in the medical history to assess the degree of disease activity, functional disability,
and health-related quality of life.
Physical examination is used to detect inflammation, contractures, and limitations in range of motion.
Blood tests are used to assist in assessing disease activity.
Imaging is used to assess skeletal damage and, in some patients, disease activity.
Patient history The medical history is used to assess disease activity, functional disability, and health-
related status. The following parameters are recommended:
The patient global assessment on a scale of 0 to 10 or (1 to 10).
The physician global assessment on a scale of 1 (mild) to 4 (severe).
The Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) disease activity questionnaire (See
'BASDAI' below.)
Functional disability and psychological status In clinical practice, the particular daily activities and quality-
of-life parameters to be assessed depend upon the judgment of clinician. In clinical research on ankylosing
spondylitis (AS), functional disability and health-related quality of life are numerically scored using the Bath
Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) and the AS Quality of Life instrument (ASQoL),
respectively [5-8]. The BASFI focuses on functional ability, while the ASQoL also addresses social and
psychological domains.
Disease activity scores
BASDAI The BASDAI disease activity questionnaire (table 2) consists of six questions concerning overall
symptoms during the week immediately prior to answering the questions, including [9]:
1. How would you describe the overall level of fatigue/tiredness you have experienced?
2. How would you describe the overall level of AS neck, back, or hip pain you have had?
3. How would you describe the overall level of pain/swelling in joints other than neck, back, hips you have
had?
4. How would you describe the level of discomfort you have had from an area tender to touch or pressure?
5. How would you describe the level of morning stiffness you have had from the time you wake up?
6. How long does your morning stiffness last from the time you wake up?
Each question is scored on a scale of 0 to 10. Except for the last question, 0 indicates none and 10 indicate
very severe. For the last question, 0 is 0 hours, 5 is one hour, and 10 is two or more hours.
To calculate the BASDAI score, the sum of the scores for questions one through four is added to the mean
of the sum of the scores for questions five and six; the total is divided by five to calculate the disease
activity score. A BASDAI score of at least 4.0 (out of a maximum of 10) indicates severe disease activity.
An interactive webpage is available at http://basdai.com/BASDAI.php.
ASDAS The Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) is a composite measure of disease
activity. It incorporates information from the level of acute phase reactants and various clinical parameters (a
patient global score and several questions also used for the BASDAI) (see 'BASDAI' above) [10]. An ASDAS
calculator is available from the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS), together with
information regarding its use and interpretation [11,12]. The ASDAS has the advantage of categorizing the

Page 3 of 22
disease activity as inactive, moderate, high, or very high. It also defines the degree of change in the score
that would classify the response to treatment as a clinically important improvement or major improvement.
Physical examination In addition to the general physical examination, the physical examination in AS
focuses on three areas: axial joints, including the hips; peripheral joints; and entheses. Details of the
assessment used in research are available (http://www.asas-group.org/ and [13-15]).The parameters below
are those used in clinical practice. There is considerable variation among healthy individuals in the ranges of
motion of the cervical, thoracic and lower spine. Thus, the threshold values given should be considered as
estimates, rather than precise cut-off points between normal and abnormal [16].
Cervical spine AS may cause forward stooping of the thoracic and cervical spine. The degree of flexion
deformity is measured by asking the patient to stand erect with heels and buttocks against a wall and to
extend his or her neck, while keeping the chin (mandible) horizontal in an attempt to touch the wall. Almost
all normal individuals can touch the wall with the occiput. The distance between the occiput and the wall in
a patient with AS reflects the degree of cervical deformity (figure 1). In addition, the range of flexion,
extension, lateral flexion, and rotation are also recorded.
Thoracic spine The range of motion of the costovertebral joints is measured by the degree of chest
expansion. Chest expansion is measured at the level of the fourth intercostal space or just below the
breasts in females. The patients are instructed to raise their arms above their heads and to exert a maximal
forced expiration followed by a maximal inspiration. Normal expansion is usually >2.5 cm.
Lower spine Range of motion of the lower spine is tested in the sagittal plane by the Schober test, and in
the coronal plane by the extent of lateral spinal flexion.
Schober test The Schober test measures the forward flexion of the lumbar spine (figure 2). The patient
stands erect; a mark is placed at the midpoint of a line joining the posterior superior iliac spines (dimples
of Venus); another mark is made 10 cm above it in the midline. The patient then bends forward
maximally without bending the knees and the distance is measured again. In normal individuals, the
difference between the two measurements should exceed 4 cm.
Lateral spinal flexion With the patient standing erect with heel and back against a wall and knees and
hands extended, the distance between the tip of the middle finger and the floor is measured. The patient
is then instructed to bend sideways without bending the knees or lifting the heels. A second
measurement is made and the difference between the two is recorded. The final result is the averaged
measurements of right and left flexion. Normal is greater than 10 cm.
Hip joint Hip involvement should be suspected when a patient shows an abnormal gait. It is verified by
testing whether there is limitation of flexion, internal and external rotation, or pain at the extremes of these
joint motions. Destructive disease at the hip joints in AS can lead to flexion deformities. However, a
unilateral flexion deformity is frequently masked by compensatory motion in the spine. To eliminate this
problem during physical examination, the patient is asked to lie supine and maximally flex one hip. If there
is a flexion deformity of the contralateral hip, the knee of the contralateral limb will be raised and the
degree of flexion deformity can be measured by the angle of the contralateral thigh (figure 3A-B).
Peripheral joint count This involves a 44-joint count of the number of tender and/or swollen joints,
including those of the ankles, feet and the sternoclavicular joints (page II40 in handbook in
http://www.asas-group.org/) [17].
Sausage digit (dactylitis) The number of digits that have sausage appearance should be determined.
Enthesitis count At least 18 entheseal sites are assessed during clinical trials (http://www.asas-
group.org/). In practice, the minimum should be at the heel, at the sites where the Achilles tendon and the
plantar fascia are each attached to the calcaneus.
Imaging In research, radiographic damage of the spine is assessed using lateral views of the cervical and
lumbar spine, graded vertebra by vertebra, and scored, for example, using the Modified Stokes Ankylosing
Spondylitis Spine Score (mSASSS) [18]. In clinical practice, it is useful to examine the anterosuperior and
anteroinferior margins of the lumbar vertebrae on a lateral spine radiograph, and to record those with

Page 4 of 22
syndesmophytes. In advanced disease, plain radiographs of the spine will reveal "bamboo spine" with virtually
complete fusion of the vertebral column. At that stage there is usually fusion of the sacroiliac joints (image
1A-B). Because disease progression is slow, unless changes are suspected, it is not necessary to repeat
radiographs of the vertebrae more than once every two years.
Acute phase reactants The erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and/or C-reactive protein (CRP) are
useful for monitoring disease activity, if they are elevated at baseline of treatment.
Extraarticular comorbidities The methods of monitoring extraarticular involvement, such as uveitis, are
based upon standards used for the organs being involved. AS is associated with increased risk of both
osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease.
Recommendations for office practice The following are a suggested set of indicators for minimum
evaluation in initial visits and for monitoring disease progression:
Patient self-assessment of pain (1 to 10)
BASDAI and/or ASDAS, depending upon the availability of information on acute phase reactants, as the CRP
or ESR value is required for calculating the ASDAS
BASFI or those daily activities that are limited by disease
Physician's global assessment on a scale of 1 (mild) to 4 (severe)
ESR or CRP
The frequency of monitoring depends on the course of symptoms, severity of disease and the therapies being
used.
NONPHARMACOLOGICAL TREATMENT Patient education, exercise, and medications are all very
important in the management of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) [3].
Patient education and support, in addition to that provided by the patients clinician, is frequently available
from support groups such as:
Spondylitis Association of America
14827 Ventura Blvd. # 222
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
Phone: 1-800-777-8189 or 1-818-981-1616
Email: info@spondylitis.org or website www.spondylitis.org/
Smoking cessation is recommended for everyone who smokes. It is a modifiable risk factor for poor functional
outcome in AS [19]. (See "Patterns of tobacco use" and "Overview of smoking cessation management in
adults".)
Home exercises are effective, but supervised exercise programs or formal physical therapy can be of greater
benefit [20]. Optimally, an initial evaluation and training by a physical therapist should be part of the
therapeutic regimen. Exercises include postural training, range of motion stretching, recreational activities,
and perhaps hydrotherapy. In addition, pain relief measures such as local heat or cold can be given a trial. At
a minimum, patients with AS should participate in an unsupervised home exercise program [21]. Inpatient
rehabilitation is rarely needed [22]. Many patients, however, do not exercise on a frequent basis, despite
widespread appreciation of the benefits of exercise [23].

Page 5 of 22
Video demonstrations of exercises tailored for ankylosing spondylitis are available for viewing through the
National Ankylosing Spondylitis Society in the UK [24].
Guide books and audio and video aids on compact disc and digital video disc are available from the Spondylitis
Association of America.
Even those patients who are doing well clinically with pharmacologic treatment will also benefit from education
and exercise [25-28]. A randomized trial involving 62 patients clinically stable on anti-tumor necrosis factor
therapy showed statistically significant benefit in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index and in
spinal range of motion after two and six months from the combination of an intensive rehabilitation exercise
treatment program with an educational-behavioral program, compared with the educational-behavioral
treatment alone or the results of a control group [25].
PHARMACOLOGIC THERAPY Pharmacotherapy includes one or more of the following: nonsteroidal

antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), analgesics, sulfasalazine, and anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents.
Systemic glucocorticoids have a limited role, but intraarticular injections may be helpful to some patients.
Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs NSAIDs should be the first line of treatment for all symptomatic
ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients, unless contraindicated. In many patients, NSAIDs are the only
medications required. About 70 to 80 percent of AS patients report substantial relief of their symptoms,
including back pain and stiffness, with NSAIDs [29]. This is significantly more than the 15 percent observed in
mechanical low back pain. NSAID use also results in decreased pain in peripheral joints [30]. There are two
issues related to NSAID therapy in AS:
The choice of NSAID, including the possible role of selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors Initial
anecdotal evidence suggested that indomethacin is the most effective NSAID [31]. However, multiple
studies support the view that other NSAIDs are also effective [32]. Regardless of the NSAID used, the
maximum dose is usually required. To assess the usefulness of a particular NSAID, it should be given at a
sustained dose on a regular basis for at least four weeks. A table of recommended doses is available [29].
(See "Nonselective NSAIDs: Overview of adverse effects".)
Short-term studies indicate that selective COX-2 inhibitors, such as celecoxib and etoricoxib, are as
effective as nonselective NSAIDs [33-36]. (See "Overview of selective COX-2 inhibitors" and "COX-2
selective inhibitors: Adverse cardiovascular effects" and "COX-2 inhibitors and gastroduodenal toxicity
major clinical trials".)
Continuous versus on-demand therapy AS patients who have persistent, active, symptomatic disease
should use continuous NSAIDs to control symptoms. This approach is in agreement with the 2010
Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS)/European League Against Rheumatism
(EULAR) recommendations [1,2]. In addition, a randomized trial and several additional studies have shown
that patients who use either continuous daily NSAIDs or high-dose NSAIDs regardless of symptoms may
have a lower rate of radiographic progression in the spine [37-40].
As an example, in one trial involving 215 patients, which suggested that continuous daily use of NSAIDs
may suppress radiographic progression, patients were randomly assigned to receive either continuous or
on-demand NSAID therapy [37]. At two years, the degree of radiographic progression was statistically
significantly less (by 73 percent) in the patients who were treated continuously with NSAIDs. Patients with
more active inflammation seem to particularly benefit from continuous NSAID therapy. In one study,
continuous NSAID therapy was especially effective in patients with an elevated erythrocyte sedimentation
rate (ESR) [39]. In another study, continuous NSAIDs were most effective in patients with high C-reactive
protein (CRP) and with the presence of syndesmophytes at baseline [40]. However, the exact clinical
meaning of these findings remains to be determined.
Analgesics Analgesics and opioids, when used alone, are seldom effective during active AS. However, they
can be considered for residual pain, or when NSAIDs are contraindicated.
Tumor necrosis factor alpha antagonists The anti-TNF-alpha agents available in the United States and
Europe for use in AS are infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, and golimumab. Concomitant use of an
immunomodulatory drug, such as methotrexate (MTX), is not required, as this provides no additional benefit
but may increase the cost and the risk of adverse effects [41].

Page 6 of 22
Overall efficacy A 2007 meta-analysis indicated that all three of the anti-TNF alpha agents then available
(adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab) were similar in efficacy in patients with AS [42]. These medications
have not been compared directly with each other, but indirect comparisons were unable to distinguish
significant differences. At week 12 of trials, patients treated with the anti-TNF agents were 3.6-fold more
likely, compared with those treated with placebo, to achieve 50 percent improvement (using a composite
measure, the ASAS50). Approximately 80 percent of patients with AS respond to treatment with one of these
agents and approximately one half get at least 50 percent improvement in a composite index, modified from
the one adopted by the Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Group that includes [43]:
Patient global assessment

Patient assessment of pain
A functional assessment, such as ability to carry out certain activities with which the patient had difficulty
prior to treatment
Degree of inflammation as assessed by morning stiffness
The clinical responses are typically rapid. Eighty percent of patients who experienced a >50 percent response
according to BASDAI by 12 weeks did so within the first six weeks of treatment. The long-term effects of anti-
TNF therapy appear to be durable, with continued efficacy for at least two years in two observational studies,
and for five years in a third study [44-46]. Patients who do not respond to or do not tolerate one anti-TNF
agent may respond to an alternate anti-TNF agent [47]. Why some patients but not others respond to these
interventions is unknown.
Use of anti-TNF therapy may also decrease the frequency of recurrences of uveitis in patients with AS [48].
Despite their efficacy, the indiscriminate use of anti-TNF-alpha drugs is discouraged because of cost concerns
and a lack of long-term safety data [49]. A guideline for selecting patients for whom anti-TNF therapy is
indicated, dosing (amount and frequency), and monitoring for efficacy and adverse effects has been
developed and updated by an international panel of clinicians with expertise in the treatment of AS [50-52]. A
summary of guidelines is presented separately. (See "General guidelines for use of anti-tumor necrosis factor
alpha agents in ankylosing spondylitis and in peripheral and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis".)
Effect on radiographic progression Whether long-term use of anti-TNF agents can halt the radiographic
progression of the disease has been uncertain; such effects may not be evident until patients have been
followed for several years. In a prospectively followed cohort of 334 patients treated with standard therapies
for AS, in whom TNF inhibitors were administered to 201 patients, treatment with a TNF inhibitor was
associated with a 50 percent reduction in the odds of radiographic progression (odds ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.30-
0.88) [53]. Such benefit was more evident in patients in whom these agents were begun earlier in the disease
course and in whom the follow-up was at least four years. This finding was confirmed in a separate study in
which patients with AS who were treated with the TNF inhibitor infliximab showed a similar rate of
radiographic progression, during the first four years of follow-up, compared with a historical control group that
did not receive a TNF inhibitor, but significantly less progression, compared with the historical controls, from
years four to eight [54].
In contrast, analyses of imaging data in patients treated for only two years, comparing patients who received
these drugs in several clinical trials with a historical cohort of patients who did not receive TNF inhibitors,
failed to demonstrate that treatment with infliximab, adalimumab, etanercept, or golimumab [55] could halt
radiologic progression of AS, despite evidence of clinical improvement and reduced spinal inflammation [56-
58].
Use of TNF antagonists in early and advanced axial spondyloarthritis Most studies of anti-tumor
necrosis factor (TNF) therapy have recruited patients whose states of disease are neither very early nor very
advanced. However, in trials that have evaluated these populations, the highest remission rates are observed
with patients with very early disease [59], and patients with advanced disease have also benefited from anti-
TNF therapy [60].
Predictors of response The following parameters are possible predictors of a good response to TNF
antagonists [61,62]:
Shorter disease duration, which is the best predictor

Page 7 of 22
Elevated CRP
Young age
Improvement of greater than 50 percent may be seen in up to 80 percent of such patients [63].
Switching to a second TNF antagonist A large open-label study addressed the effectiveness of switching
to adalimumab when patients failed etanercept or infliximab because of either an inadequate response or
adverse effect. Such patients were compared with those begun on adalimumab who had never received
etanercept or infliximab. After 12 weeks, a Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) 50
response was observed in 63 percent of patients who had never received TNF antagonists, and 40.8 percent of
patients who had been treated with prior TNF antagonists [64]. In general, switching to another TNF
antagonist is more useful for patients who have loss of response to the first one.
Stopping TNF antagonists when patients have obtained a major clinical response The majority of
patients will relapse soon after discontinuing the TNF antagonists [63]. It is possible that the dose or interval
of treatment can be modified, but this has not been systematically studied.
Improvement in bone density Some data suggest that use of anti-TNF biologic agents may be
associated with improved bone density. Three studies utilizing anti-TNF biologic agents in the treatment of 75
patients with various forms of spondyloarthritis were reviewed [65]; when the changes in bone density from
baseline to the end of observation were compared, patients receiving anti-TNF agents had increases in bone
mineral density of 3.2 to 3.6 percent at the lumbar spine and 1.8 to 2.0 percent at the hip.
General side effects The side effects of these agents when used to treat rheumatic disease are discussed
separately. Potential adverse effects such as an increased risk of reactivation of latent tuberculosis and the
exacerbation or development of demyelinating disease must be considered when using these agents. (See
"Overview of biologic agents in the rheumatic diseases", section on 'TNF inhibition' and "Tumor necrosis
factor-alpha inhibitors and mycobacterial infections".)
Infliximab, etanercept, and adalimumab, when used in patients with AS, have been temporally associated with
the development of psoriasis, including the palmoplantar pustulosis type [66,67] (see "Neutrophilic
dermatoses", section on 'Palmoplantar pustulosis'). Three cases of retropharyngeal abscess were also noted
among 107 patients with a variety of spondyloarthritis (incidence of 1.6 per 100 patient years).
Infliximab Significant benefit has been noted in patients with axial as well as peripheral spondyloarthritis
using the chimeric mouse-human monoclonal anti-TNF alpha antibody infliximab [66,68-72]. Infliximab use
also resulted in improvement in the synovial histopathology [73]. Decreases in vascularity, thickness of the
lining layer, and the degree of infiltration of synovium by neutrophils, macrophages, and T cells were seen;
these findings have been confirmed in a subsequent study in two additional cohorts [74].
The largest study of this anti-TNF agent randomly assigned 357 North American and European patients to
receive infliximab (5 mg/kg at week 0, 2, 6, 12, and 16) or placebo (The ASSERT trial) [75]. Patients with
complete spinal ankylosis were excluded from this study, as were those with a recent infection, active or
latent tuberculosis, or immunosuppression due to HIV/AIDS or solid organ transplantation. Patients with other
diseases that could be exacerbated by infliximab, including demyelinating disorders and heart failure, were
also excluded. MTX and other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were prohibited. The primary
outcome assessed at 24 weeks was a change that met ASAS criteria for a 20 percent improvement (ASAS20).
This and other controlled trials of infliximab utilized a 5 mg/kg dose [76,77], which is higher than the usual
dose of 3 mg/kg for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The 5 mg/kg dose appears to remain effective when
used for periods of at least three years [46,78,79]. Whether a lower dose would be equally effective is
uncertain. When 21 patients were given the 3 mg/kg dose in one of the observational studies cited above
[71], infliximab appeared to be effective; however, three patients were given the 5 mg/kg dose after three
months of therapy because of inadequate control of symptoms on the lower dose. Some patients who are not
controlled with infusions every eight weeks may benefit from a reduced interval between treatments (eg, six
weeks) [80].
The time to maximal response may be as long as six weeks, though some patients experience pain relief
shortly after the first infusion. Our experience suggests that patients with longstanding disease are less likely

Page 8 of 22
to respond to infliximab therapy.
Most initial studies with infliximab in AS were carried out with patients who had definite sacroiliitis by plain
radiography. A placebo-controlled randomized trial was carried out in a group of patients in whom the
majority did not have plain radiographic sacroiliitis. These were inflammatory back pain patients with positive
magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) changes of sacroiliitis and positive testing for HLA-B27. Infliximab was also
effective in these patients [81].
In one case report, infliximab was effective in reversing symptoms of cauda equina syndrome [82]. No other
interventions have previously been of benefit, but the utility of this approach in other patients has not yet
been demonstrated.
MTX, although routinely used in combination with infliximab to treat rheumatoid arthritis, has not been found
to be necessary or provide additional beneficial when infliximab is being used to treat AS [83]. The importance
of coadministration of MTX on efficacy has not been studied with other TNF-alpha antagonists in AS.
Biosimilar for infliximab The immunoglobulin (Ig)G1 chimeric humanmurine monoclonal antibody, CT-
P13 [84,85], was developed as an anti-TNF alpha monoclonal antibody biosimilar to the original (termed
innovator) infliximab, which had first became commercially available in 1999. A biosimilar is defined by the
World Health Organization (WHO) as a biotherapeutic product which is similar in terms of quality, safety and
efficacy to an already licensed reference biotherapeutic product [86]; similarity is defined as the absence
of a relevant difference in the parameter of interest. CT-P13 has an identical amino acid sequence to
infliximab and is produced in the same type of cell line; it exhibits highly similar in vitro and in vivo
pharmacodynamics, binding specificities and affinities, and other biologic and pharmacologic characteristics
[84,85].
CT-P13 has shown equivalent clinical efficacy to the innovator infliximab in a small number of clinical trials,
including the PLANETAS (Programme evaluating the autoimmune disease investigational drug CT-P13 in AS
patients) trial, a randomized phase 1 trial in patients with AS, which also showed equivalent pharmacokinetic
profiles of CT-P13 and infliximab [85]. In this trial, which involved 250 patients with active AS, treatment with
CT-P13 demonstrated equivalent efficacy to infliximab up to week 30 (ASAS20 of 71 and 72 percent, odds
ratio [OR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.51-1.62; ASAS40 of 52 and 47 percent, OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.70-2.00). Multiple
other response measures were also comparable, and there were no differences detected in immunogenicity or
safety. The initial trials of CT-P13 were the first clinical trials comparing a biosimilar to an innovator biologic
agent for a rheumatic disease [87]. The worldwide availability of this agent is limited and will depend upon
regulatory requirements in different regions and local patent laws and patent expiration dates [87].
Etanercept Several open studies and randomized trials have demonstrated the efficacy of etanercept in AS
[88-93]. Limited data suggest that the symptomatic benefits of etanercept are quickly lost after cessation of
therapy [94]. As with infliximab, etanercept use also resulted in improvement in synovial pathology in the
peripheral joints [95].
The largest trial confirmed the efficacy of etanercept; it was a well-designed, international trial that randomly
assigned 277 patients to receive etanercept (25 mg sc twice weekly) or placebo [91]. After 12 weeks of
treatment, the proportion of patients achieving improvements of 20, 50, or 70 percent were about 60, 45, and
25 percent, respectively. Seventeen percent of patients achieved partial remission. These were significantly
higher than the corresponding placebo values. In a subset of 40 subjects who had serial MRI examinations of
the spine, there was a mean 54 percent decrease in T2-weighted signal in those treated with etanercept,
suggesting decreased spinal inflammation, while the placebo group had a slight worsening (increase of 13
percent) [96]. Significant improvement was also noted in spinal and chest wall mobility. Hence, these are also
useful follow-up parameters for patients receiving anti-TNF therapies. Only injection site reactions were more
frequent in the etanercept group. In an unblinded extension of this study, beneficial effects were sustained
during nearly two years of continued etanercept treatment [97].
Further support for the efficacy of etanercept in AS was provided by a multicenter randomized trial carried out
at 14 European sites; 84 ankylosing spondylitis patients were randomly assigned to etanercept (25 mg SC
twice a week) or placebo for 12 weeks [92]. Significant improvement was observed in the etanercept group by
week 2, and significantly more patients achieved an ASAS50 at week 12 (48.9 versus 10.3 percent).
The results of the multiple randomized trials summarized above show convincingly that etanercept is effective

Page 9 of 22
for patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Weekly dosing with 50 mg appears to result in similar efficacy to 25
mg twice weekly [98,99].
Adalimumab Adalimumab, a humanized anti-TNF monoclonal antibody, is also far more efficacious than
placebo [59,100,101]. This was illustrated in a study that randomly assigned 315 patients in a 2:1 ratio to
adalimumab (40 mg every other week by subcutaneous injection) or placebo injections [100]. The study
population was predominantly Caucasian, male, and HLA-B27 positive with a mean duration of disease of 10
years. A significantly greater proportion of adalimumab-treated patients achieved the primary efficacy
endpoint, an ASAS20 response at the end of 12 weeks (58 versus 21 percent). Patients who did not achieve
an ASAS20 after 12 weeks were eligible to receive 40 mg weekly. At week 24 all patients were switched to or
continued adalimumab 40 mg every other week in an open-label extension of the trial [45]. Of 61 patients
treated weekly, ASAS20 responses were achieved after six weeks and after one year by 23 and 34 percent,
respectively. At week 24 patients were switched to or continued adalimumab 40 mg every other week in an
open-label extension of the trial [45]. At two years, for patients who were still receiving adalimumab, an
ASAS20 was achieved by 64.5 percent. The proportion of these patients who experienced over 50 percent
improvement in the BASDAI was 71 percent [45].
Thus, the advantage of adalimumab treatment was maintained for up to 24 weeks in the randomized phase of
the study, and subsequently maintained for up to two years of follow-up in the open-label phase of the study.
Adalimumab has also been tested in randomized trials using patients with axial SpA who do not have
radiographic signs of sacroiliitis (nr-axSpA). There is a significantly higher ASAS40 response at week 12 using
adalimumab compared with placebo [102]. At two years, the frequency of patients with serious adverse
events that were possibly drug-related was 5.5 percent. No cases of tuberculosis, heart failure, lupus-like
symptoms, or demyelinating disease were reported. (See "Non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis,
undifferentiated spondyloarthritis, and peripheral spondyloarthritis", section on 'Treatment of nr-axSpA
resistant to NSAIDs'.)
Golimumab Golimumab is a human anti-TNF alpha monoclonal antibody that is administered by

subcutaneous injections once every four weeks. Efficacy for patients with AS appears similar to that of other
anti-TNF agents. This was illustrated in a study that randomly assigned 356 patients to golimumab 50 mg,
golimumab 100 mg, or placebo injections every four weeks [103]. After 14 weeks ASAS20 responses occurred
in 59, 60, and 22 percent of patients in the three groups, respectively. These responses appear to be
comparable to those of other TNF antagonists. The recommended dose is 50 mg subcutaneously every four
weeks. The precautions and possible side effects are the same as those for the other FDA-approved TNF
antagonists.
Certolizumab An additional TNF inhibitor that is available for use in patients with active axial
spondyloarthritis (SpA), including AS, is certolizumab pegol (CZP), a pegylated Fab fragment of a humanized
monoclonal antibody directed against TNF-alpha that is administered by subcutaneous injection. In a
randomized trial involving 325 patients with active axial SpA, including patients with AS and non-radiographic
axial SpA, the patients who received CZP (200 mg every two weeks or 400 mg every four weeks) were
significantly more likely to achieve improvement in disease activity compared with patients receiving placebo
(ASAS20 58 and 64 versus 38 percent, ASAS40 43 and 49 versus 18 percent) [104]. Benefit was sustained at
week 24. The response was similar to that seen with other TNF inhibitors, and no additional safety concerns
were identified.
Disease modifying agents (DMARDs) The only traditional DMARD regarded as potentially useful in AS is
sulfasalazine.
Sulfasalazine We typically use sulfasalazine in patients with peripheral arthritis, such as those with
oligoarthritis of the knees and/or ankles, for whom a drug other than an anti-TNF agent is desirable, and
prefer it to MTX in this setting. We discontinue sulfasalazine if there is no improvement after a four- to six-
month trial at maximum dose. We also consider stopping the agent after a remission has been obtained, with
its reinstitution in those who relapse. We do not recommend using sulfasalazine in those with only symptoms
or signs of axial disease.
A 2006 meta-analysis that included data from 11 randomized clinical trials of sulfasalazine (SSZ) concluded
that it was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing spinal stiffness and in lowering the ESR [105].
However, most of the clinical trials of SSZ have been relatively small. Two of the larger trials involved 89 and

Page 10 of 22
264 patients with AS, respectively [106,107]. In both of these trials, SSZ was more effective for the treatment
of peripheral arthritis than for axial disease.
The use of SSZ has declined very considerably since the introduction of the TNF antagonists, which are more
effective for both axial and peripheral disease [108,109]. Most experts in the care of patients with
spondyloarthropathy recommend SSZ only for AS patients with peripheral arthritis, and many experts do not
recommend its use if TNF antagonists are available [52]. In one study, SSZ was less effective in reducing
disease activity compared with etanercept, whether or not peripheral joint involvement was present [110].
A typical dose of SSZ used in clinical trials was one 500 mg tablet daily for the first week, increasing by one
tablet per day each subsequent week to a total of four to six tablets daily, divided and given twice a day. For
those on the higher daily dose, the dose was reduced to four tablets if the higher dose was not tolerated.
Approximately 60 percent of the SSZ-treated patients reported side effects, all reversible on withdrawal of the
drug. The most common side effects were nausea, dizziness, headache, and rash.
There is no guideline as to how patients on SSZ should be monitored for side effects. Leukopenia and
neutropenia can develop quite suddenly, with an incidence varying from 1 to 5 percent. We recommend that
blood counts be monitored at least every three months, and more frequently in the initial period. (See
"Sulfasalazine in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis".)
Other DMARDs
Methotrexate Some studies have suggested that MTX may be effective in some patients with AS
[111,112]. However, a 2006 meta-analysis of the efficacy of MTX in AS found no evidence of benefit in this
disease [113]. Additionally, the combination of MTX and infliximab did not increase the efficacy or decrease
the risk of adverse effects compared with infliximab alone [83,114,115]. Thus, there is currently a lack of
evidence to support the use of MTX in the treatment of AS. Nevertheless, some rheumatologists do
prescribe methotrexate for AS patients with peripheral arthritis.
Leflunomide Limited data suggest that leflunomide is of little or no benefit for patients with AS [116,117].
Glucocorticoids We suggest not using systemic glucocorticoids on a long-term basis for patients with AS,
although very limited data suggest that relatively high doses of prednisolone may have some benefit for very
short-term therapy. There is only one small randomized trial of oral glucocorticoid therapy in AS, involving a
total of 39 patients [118]. This two-week trial compared the responses of NSAID-resistant patients who were
randomly allocated to receive prednisolone (either 50 or 20 mg daily) or placebo. The proportion of patients
achieving a 50 percent reduction in the BASDAI did not differ significantly between the groups, although there
was a statistically significant greater improvement in the BASDAI score in the patients receiving prednisolone
50 mg but not 20 mg, compared with placebo. Similarly, pain scores in the patients receiving prednisolone 50
mg daily differed significantly from the controls, but not in the patients receiving 20 mg daily. Additional trials
would be required to establish whether glucocorticoid therapy has a role in the treatment of AS, especially
given the high dose of glucocorticoids required to achieve a significant effect, the small number of patients
studied, and the short duration of therapy.
In addition, patients with AS generally already have significant loss of bone density, which can be exacerbated
by glucocorticoid therapy. (See "Pathogenesis, clinical features, and evaluation of glucocorticoid-induced
osteoporosis".)
Intraarticular injections, although never evaluated in a well-designed clinical trial to our knowledge, and local
injections into painful plantar fasciae can be helpful for peripheral arthritis and plantar fasciitis, respectively.
Local injections into the area of Achilles tendon are not recommended as rupture of the tendon may follow
glucocorticoid infiltration at this site.
Injection of long-acting glucocorticoids into the sacroiliac joints may be beneficial in patients who complain of
marked pain at the sacroiliac joints that is unresponsive to systemic medications. Benefit of injection of long-
acting glucocorticoid has been found in some but not all studies [119,120]. A double-blind study reported
more than 70 percent relief in over 80 percent of injected sacroiliac joints [120]. Relief persisted for as long as
six months or more after the injection and no complications were seen.

Page 11 of 22
Other therapies
Possibly beneficial Several agents have shown evidence of potential benefit for AS but require further
study. These include:
Biologics blocking the IL23-IL17 axis The IL-23/IL17 axis is being studied as a major axis in the
pathogenesis of SpA [121]. (See "Treatment of psoriatic arthritis", section on 'IL-17 blockade' and
"Pathogenesis of spondyloarthritis".) The results of two small proof-of-concept investigations suggest that
blocking these mediators may be of benefit:
Secukinumab Secukinumab is an anti-interleukin (IL)-17A monoclonal antibody that has shown benefit
in a randomized proof-of-concept trial in which 24 patients with moderate to severe AS (mean disease
duration of 10 years) were assigned to receive secukinumab (10 mg/kg administered intravenously
twice, three weeks apart) and 6 patients were assigned to receive placebo [122]. ASAS20 response rates
at week six were significantly greater in patients allocated to receive secukinumab (59 versus 24
percent). Much larger trials of a substantially greater duration are required to assess the potential benefit
of this approach. Secukinumab and other IL-17 inhibitors are of particular interest in AS because of the
potential importance of IL-17 in the pathogenesis of the disease and possible benefit of IL-17 inhibition
in patients with psoriatic arthritis.
Ustekinumab - The other biologic against tested in AS that is directed against the IL23/IL17 axis is
ustekinumab. It is an antibody directed against the p40 protein subunit shared by IL12 and IL23. In a
24-week open-label study the drug was administered to 20 patients with active AS, with substantial
improvement in disease activity measures at 24 weeks; an ASAS40 was achieved in 65 percent of the
patients, and greater than 50 percent improvement in the BASDAI was reported in 55 percent of the
patients. Randomized trials are needed [123].
Pamidronate Pamidronate, a bisphosphonate, has been evaluated in the treatment of AS, because of
some evidence of antiinflammatory activity and its effect on bone turnover [124-127]. Dose-dependent
benefit of pamidronate treatment was demonstrated in a trial involving 84 patients with AS with a
suboptimal response to NSAID therapy who were randomly assigned to one of two doses of pamidronate
(60 mg/month or 10 mg/month), administered intravenously for six months [125]. Other observational
studies have reported, at the most, only modest clinical benefit with pamidronate (60 mg/month), and
several patients have experienced serious adverse effects with this regimen [126-128]. Additional data
from randomized trials would be required before pamidronate could be considered for use in routine clinical
practice for the treatment of AS.
Thalidomide The potential benefit of thalidomide has been examined in AS because of its
immunomodulatory properties, including its effects on TNF [129-131]. A 2002 review of observational
studies reported that among more than 50 patients treated with thalidomide, 68 percent improved and 19
percent withdrew from treatment due to lack of efficacy or adverse effects [131]. Randomized trials are
needed to better define the role of thalidomide in the treatment of AS, and the seriousness of the potential
side effects will need to be considered in determining whether it has a role in therapy.
Rituximab Rituximab, a monoclonal antibody that depletes B cells, has undergone preliminary study in 20
patients with active AS, based in part upon previous findings of dense B cell infiltration in subchondral bone
of inflamed sacroiliac joints of patients with AS [132]. Significant efficacy at week 24 following initial
intravenous administration of rituximab was observed in patients who were naive to TNF inhibitor therapy,
but not in those who had already failed to respond to a TNF inhibitor (ASAS20 response 50 versus 30
percent, BASDAI50 response 50 versus 0 percent). Further study, including randomized trials, will be
required to determine whether there is a role for rituximab in the treatment of AS.
Apremilast Apremilast, an oral phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE4) inhibitor with antiinflammatory and

immunomodulatory effects, has shown some evidence of benefit in a randomized trial involving 38 patients
with symptomatic AS and active disease on MRI [133]. There were trends suggesting greater improvement
with apremilast, compared with placebo, in several clinical measures at 12 weeks, but these differences did
not achieve statistical significance. The improved measures returned to their baseline values by four weeks
following discontinuation of the trial medications. Larger trials of greater duration would be required to
determine if this medication will be of benefit to patients with AS.

Page 12 of 22
Other biologic agents Inhibitors of interleukin IL-12/23 and other agents have been the subject of
investigation, but there is presently a lack of sufficient evidence for the use in AS of any biologics other
than the TNF antagonists [1,134,135].
Probably not beneficial Several agents that have been shown to be effective in patients with rheumatoid
arthritis or other forms of inflammatory arthritis have not been found effective in patients with ankylosing
spondylitis. These include:
Abatacept Abatacept, a biologic agent which blocks T-cell costimulation, has not been found to be useful
in AS in a 24-week open-label study involving 30 patients [136].
Tocilizumab Tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against IL-6 receptors, showed no benefit in
composite clinical outcomes compared with placebo in a 12-week randomized trial involving 102 patients
with AS, despite a decrease in C-reactive protein in the patients receiving tocilizumab [137].
SURGERY Hip and spine surgery may be beneficial in selected patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS).
Clinicians and anesthetists should be cautioned that such patients may have reduced chest expansion and
more rigid cervical spines.
Total hip arthroplasty Total hip arthroplasty (THA, total hip replacement) is indicated in AS whenever
there is severe, persistent pain or severe limitation in mobility and quality of life due to hip involvement. THA
is more common in patients with early onset of disease, axial, and entheseal involvement [138]. (See "Total
hip arthroplasty".)
Although there has been concern that patients with AS undergoing THA at a young, active age will experience
a higher incidence of replacement failure compared with older, less active patients, excellent long-term results
were found in a group of 340 patients with AS who had undergone initial THA at a mean age of 40 years
[139]. The proportions of such hips that did not require revision at 10, 15, and 20 years following operation
were 90, 78, and 64 percent, respectively. In another analysis of 181 hips, the survival of the prosthetic joint
was 71 percent at 27 years [140]. Currently, the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society
(ASAS)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations are that age not be a factor in
decisions regarding THA.
Patients with AS may be at higher risk of developing heterotopic ossification following joint replacement, but
this remains an unusual complication [141]. If, however, this complication has occurred following a prior joint
arthroplasty, prophylactic therapy has been recommended, such as a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug
(NSAID) beginning on the day of surgery or radiation therapy (pre- or postoperative). (See "Complications of
total hip arthroplasty", section on 'Heterotopic ossification'.)
Spinal surgery Cervical fusion is indicated for the very small number of patients who develop atlantoaxial
subluxation with impairment in neurologic function. This problem is managed in a fashion similar to that in
rheumatoid arthritis. (See "Cervical subluxation in rheumatoid arthritis".)
Wedge osteotomy is indicated in those patients who develop flexion deformities severe enough to impair the
ability to look in a forward direction.
Spinal surgeons should be consulted in the event of acute vertebral fractures, which should be suspected in
patients who develop unusual neck or back pain, even in the absence of trauma. (See "Clinical manifestations
of ankylosing spondylitis in adults".)
PROGNOSIS Most ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients with mild disease that is restricted to a small area
of involvement are able to maintain almost full functional and employment capacity. However, a minority of
patients develop severe skeletal restrictions or life-threatening extra-musculoskeletal complications. A
questionnaire survey found that employment is affected in approximately 30 percent of the males with AS.
However, the majority of patients can work well into their fifties [142].
Disease activity usually fluctuates in the individual patient, with symptoms usually persisting over decades.
Approximately 1 percent of patients develop a stage of "burn-out" of disease activity and enter long-term
remission [143].

Page 13 of 22
Prognostic indicators A number of prognostic indicators were identified before the use of biologics in
patients with AS. One study, for example, evaluated 328 patients with spondyloarthritis; seven variables at
entry correlated with increased disease severity [144]:
Hip arthritis odds ratio (OR) 23

Sausage-like finger or toe OR 8
Poor efficacy of NSAIDs OR 8
High erythrocyte sedimentation rate (>30 mm/h) OR 7
Limitation in range of motion of the lumbar spine OR 7
Oligoarthritis OR 4
Onset less than 16 years of age OR 3
A mild outcome was likely if none of these factors was present at entry (sensitivity 93 percent, specificity 78
percent). However, a severe outcome was predictable if the hip were involved or if three factors were present
(sensitivity 50 percent), and mild disease could be virtually excluded (specificity 98 percent). Patients with
these features should therefore be followed at more frequent intervals.
A number of other factors have been associated with a poor outcome in patients with AS [19,145,146]. These
include cigarette smoking, increasing severity of radiographic changes, active disease as assessed by a
disease activity index, functional impairment as assessed by a self report, lower educational attainment,
presence of other diseases related to spondyloarthritis (eg, psoriasis, inflammatory bowel disease), male sex,
a history of uveitis, and occupational activities involving either dynamic flexibility (ability to quickly and
repeatedly bend, twist, and stretch) or exposure to whole-body vibration (such as driving a truck or operating
heavy equipment). Other predictors of poor outcome are HLA-B27, age, the presence of enthesitis, poor
functional ability, and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) [147].
Elevated CRP levels are associated with increased risk of radiographic progression both in the sacroiliac joints
and in the spine [148,149]. Other factors associated with an increased degree of radiographic progression
include the baseline severity of radiographic change and cigarette smoking [53,150].
Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors might be more effective in controlling inflammation when used early in the
disease course, prior to the development of changes on plain radiographs [63]. Some evidence also suggests
that such therapy may prevent or reduce radiographic progression. (See 'Effect on radiographic progression'
above.).
Spinal cord injury Patients with AS suffer an increased rate of spinal fractures. In Finland, the incidence of
spinal cord injury among those with AS has been estimated to be increased more than 10-fold, compared with
the general population [151]. In those with AS, a majority of spinal cord injuries resulted from slips and falls,
an event that was rarely the cause of cord damage in those without AS (53 versus 7 percent, respectively).
Cardiovascular risk and mortality It is uncertain whether patients with AS have significantly higher
cardiovascular risk compared with the general population. One longitudinal, population-based study found a
significant increase in the risk of ischemic heart disease among young patients (ages 18 to 45) with newly
diagnosed AS, compared with controls without AS, during three years of follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio of
1.47, 95% CI 1.13-1.92) [152].
Mortality among patients with AS admitted to the hospital for medical care is about 1.5 times higher than that
of the general population [153]. Overall, mortality may be modestly increased. This was illustrated in a review
of eight studies on mortality in AS that concluded that there was an increase in mortality rates compared with
the general population (standardized mortality ratios ranging from 1.32 to 2.62) [154]. The major causes of
death in patients with AS were infections, cancer, and diseases of the respiratory and cardiovascular systems
[155].
In contrast to some other chronic rheumatic diseases (eg, rheumatoid arthritis and Sjgren's syndrome) the
risk of developing lymphoma does not appear to be significantly increased in patients with AS [156].
INFORMATION FOR PATIENTS UpToDate offers two types of patient education materials, The Basics
and Beyond the Basics. The Basics patient education pieces are written in plain language, at the 5th to 6th

Page 14 of 22
grade reading level, and they answer the four or five key questions a patient might have about a given
condition. These articles are best for patients who want a general overview and who prefer short, easy-to-
read materials. Beyond the Basics patient education pieces are longer, more sophisticated, and more detailed.
These articles are written at the 10th to 12th grade reading level and are best for patients who want in-depth
information and are comfortable with some medical jargon.
Here are the patient education articles that are relevant to this topic. We encourage you to print or e-mail
these topics to your patients. (You can also locate patient education articles on a variety of subjects by
searching on patient info and the keyword(s) of interest.)
Basics topic (see "Patient information: Ankylosing spondylitis (The Basics)")
Beyond the Basics topic (see "Patient information: Ankylosing spondylitis and other spondyloarthritis
(Beyond the Basics)")
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Treatment of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) must be individualized. The level of disease activity,
presence of poor prognostic factors or concomitant illnesses, degree of functional impairment, patient's
tolerance of the risk of adverse effects, expectations of treatment, and other psychosocial factors must be
considered. The level of disease activity and the extent of improvement can be scored by using the Bath
Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) questionnaire and/or the Ankylosing Spondylitis
Disease Activity Score (ASDAS). (See 'Assessment and monitoring' above.)
We recommend use of a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) as initial therapy (Grade 1A). Any
NSAID may be effective. Regular use for a period of four weeks allows the maximal effect of a given NSAID
to be assessed. If some but not satisfactory improvement is noted, the NSAID may be continued
indefinitely while other interventions are initiated. (See 'Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs' above.)
The NSAID can be supplemented by use of an analgesic; occasionally, low-potency opioids may be used.
(See "NSAIDs (including aspirin): Primary prevention of gastroduodenal toxicity".)
We recommend an exercise program for all patients (Grade 1B). Individual physical therapy may be
needed by some. (See 'Nonpharmacological treatment' above.)
We suggest NOT using systemic glucocorticoids (Grade 2C). We suggest intraarticular glucocorticoids for
persistent peripheral joint involvement, enthesitis at sites other than the Achilles tendon, and for pain of
sacroiliitis (Grade 2B). (See 'Glucocorticoids' above.)
Traditional nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (eg, sulfasalazine, methotrexate,

leflunomide, or penicillamine) are ineffective for those with axial disease. (See 'Tumor necrosis factor alpha
antagonists' above.)
For patients with axial disease who do not respond to NSAIDs we recommend an anti-tumor necrosis factor
(TNF) agent (Grade 1A). If there is failure to one anti-TNF agent, it is possible that an alternate anti-TNF
agent can be effective. Prior to initiating anti-TNF therapy, active infection and latent tuberculosis should be
excluded. (See 'Tumor necrosis factor alpha antagonists' above and "Diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in
HIV-negative patients" and "Treatment of latent tuberculosis infection in HIV-negative adults".)
In patients with predominantly peripheral arthritis who do not respond adequately to NSAIDs and for whom
a TNF inhibitor is unavailable or is contraindicated, we recommend sulfasalazine, unless there are
contraindications (eg, allergy to sulfonamide antibiotics) to this drug (Grade 1A). (See 'Sulfasalazine'
above.) Methotrexate is being used by some clinicians as an alternative. (See 'Other DMARDs' above.)
There is a paucity of data to guide therapy if the treatments recommended above are ineffective or
contraindicated. (See 'Other therapies' above.)
Surgical interventions are used selectively. Total joint replacement may be necessary for those whose joints

Page 15 of 22
are already destroyed. Wedge osteotomy of the spine is reserved for those patients with severe spinal
deformities, as in patients with neck flexion so pronounced that useful forward vision is difficult or
impossible. Fusion of the atlantoaxial joint of the cervical spine is needed if there is significant neck or
occipital pain or evidence of neurologic dysfunction due to C1-C2 (atlantoaxial) subluxation, as occurs in
patients with rheumatoid arthritis. (See 'Surgery' above and "Cervical subluxation in rheumatoid arthritis".)
Use of UpToDate is subject to the Subscription and License Agreement.
REFERENCES
Braun J, van den Berg R, Baraliakos X, et al. 2010 update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the
1
management of ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 70:896.
Zochling J, van der Heijde D, Burgos-Vargas R, et al. ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the
2
management of ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2006; 65:442.
Smolen JS, Braun J, Dougados M, et al. Treating spondyloarthritis, including ankylosing spondylitis and
3
psoriatic arthritis, to target: recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis 2014; 73:6.
Jang JH, Green CE, Assassi S, et al. The contribution of disease activity on functional limitations over
4 time through psychological mediators: a 12-month longitudinal study in patients with ankylosing
spondylitis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2011; 50:2087.
Calin A, Garrett S, Whitelock H, et al. A new approach to defining functional ability in ankylosing
5 spondylitis: the development of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index. J Rheumatol 1994;
21:2281.
Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) http://basdai.com/BASFI.php (Accessed on
6
February 10, 2014).
Doward LC, Spoorenberg A, Cook SA, et al. Development of the ASQoL: a quality of life instrument
7
specific to ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62:20.
Ankylosing spondylitis quality of life instrument (ASQol)
8 http://ard.bmj.com/content/suppl/2002/12/20/62.1.20.DC1/62120Appendices.pdf (Accessed on
February 10, 2014).
Garrett S, Jenkinson T, Kennedy LG, et al. A new approach to defining disease status in ankylosing
9
spondylitis: the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index. J Rheumatol 1994; 21:2286.
van der Heijde D, Lie E, Kvien TK, et al. ASDAS, a highly discriminatory ASAS-endorsed disease activity
10
score in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2009; 68:1811.
Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society. Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score.
11
http://www.asas-group.org/research.php?id=01#null (Accessed on October 15, 2013).
Machado P, van der Heijde D. How to measure disease activity in axial spondyloarthritis? Curr Opin
12
Rheumatol 2011; 23:339.
Spondyloarthritis research and treatment network. www.spartangroup.org (Accessed on August 11,
13
2006).
Gladman DD, Inman RD, Cook RJ, et al. International spondyloarthritis interobserver reliability exercise--
14
the INSPIRE study: I. Assessment of spinal measures. J Rheumatol 2007; 34:1733.
Gladman DD, Inman RD, Cook RJ, et al. International spondyloarthritis interobserver reliability exercise--
15 the INSPIRE study: II. Assessment of peripheral joints, enthesitis, and dactylitis. J Rheumatol 2007;
34:1740.
Chilton-Mitchell L, Martindale J, Hart A, Goodacre L. Normative values for the Bath Ankylosing
16
Spondylitis Metrology Index in a UK population. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2013; 52:2086.
Sieper J, Rudwaleit M, Baraliakos X, et al. The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society
17
(ASAS) handbook: a guide to assess spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2009; 68 Suppl 2:ii1.
Wanders A, Landew R, Spoorenberg A, et al. Scoring of radiographic progression in randomised clinical
18
trials in ankylosing spondylitis: a preference for paired reading order. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63:1601.
Doran MF, Brophy S, MacKay K, et al. Predictors of longterm outcome in ankylosing spondylitis. J
19
Rheumatol 2003; 30:316.
Dagfinrud H, Kvien TK, Hagen KB. Physiotherapy interventions for ankylosing spondylitis. Cochrane
20
Database Syst Rev 2008; :CD002822.
Elyan M, Khan MA. Does physical therapy still have a place in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis?
21
Curr Opin Rheumatol 2008; 20:282.

Page 16 of 22
Lubrano E, D'Angelo S, Parsons WJ, et al. Effectiveness of rehabilitation in active ankylosing spondylitis
22
assessed by the ASAS response criteria. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2007; 46:1672.
Passalent LA, Soever LJ, O'Shea FD, Inman RD. Exercise in ankylosing spondylitis: discrepancies
23
between recommendations and reality. J Rheumatol 2010; 37:835.
National Ankylosing Spondylitis Society. Back to Action online exercise videos.
24 http://www.nass.co.uk/exercise/exercise-for-your-as/watch-exercise-videos/ (Accessed on October 15,
2013).
Masiero S, Bonaldo L, Pigatto M, et al. Rehabilitation treatment in patients with ankylosing spondylitis
25 stabilized with tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy: a randomized controlled trial. J Rheumatol 2011;
38:1335.
Spadaro A, De Luca T, Massimiani MP, et al. Occupational therapy in ankylosing spondylitis: Short-term
26
prospective study in patients treated with anti-TNF-alpha drugs. Joint Bone Spine 2008; 75:29.
Dubey SG, Leeder J, Gaffney K. Physical therapy in anti-TNF treated patients with ankylosing spondylitis.
27
Rheumatology (Oxford) 2008; 47:1100.
Lubrano E, D'Angelo S, Spadaro A, et al. Rehabilitation for ankylosing spondylitis in the era of biologics:
28
any room left for this treatment? J Rheumatol 2011; 38:1228.
Song IH, Poddubnyy DA, Rudwaleit M, Sieper J. Benefits and risks of ankylosing spondylitis treatment
29
with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 58:929.
Zochling J, van der Heijde D, Dougados M, Braun J. Current evidence for the management of ankylosing
30 spondylitis: a systematic literature review for the ASAS/EULAR management recommendations in
ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2006; 65:423.
Calin A, Elswood J. A prospective nationwide cross-sectional study of NSAID usage in 1331 patients with
31
ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 1990; 17:801.
Sidiropoulos PI, Hatemi G, Song IH, et al. Evidence-based recommendations for the management of
32 ankylosing spondylitis: systematic literature search of the 3E Initiative in Rheumatology involving a
broad panel of experts and practising rheumatologists. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2008; 47:355.
van der Heijde D, Baraf HS, Ramos-Remus C, et al. Evaluation of the efficacy of etoricoxib in ankylosing
33
spondylitis: results of a fifty-two-week, randomized, controlled study. Arthritis Rheum 2005; 52:1205.
Barkhuizen A, Steinfeld S, Robbins J, et al. Celecoxib is efficacious and well tolerated in treating signs
34
and symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 2006; 33:1805.
Dougados M, Bhier JM, Jolchine I, et al. Efficacy of celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase 2-specific inhibitor, in
35 the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a six-week controlled study with comparison against placebo
and against a conventional nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44:180.
Sieper J, Klopsch T, Richter M, et al. Comparison of two different dosages of celecoxib with diclofenac for
36 the treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis: results of a 12-week randomised, double-blind, controlled
study. Ann Rheum Dis 2008; 67:323.
Wanders A, Heijde Dv, Landew R, et al. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs reduce radiographic
37 progression in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized clinical trial. Arthritis Rheum 2005;
52:1756.
Haroon N, Kim TH, Inman RD. NSAIDs and radiographic progression in ankylosing spondylitis Bagging
38
big game with small arms? Ann Rheum Dis 2012; 71:1593.
Kroon F, Landew R, Dougados M, van der Heijde D. Continuous NSAID use reverts the effects of
39 inflammation on radiographic progression in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;
71:1623.
Poddubnyy D, Rudwaleit M, Haibel H, et al. Effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on
40 radiographic spinal progression in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: results from the German
Spondyloarthritis Inception Cohort. Ann Rheum Dis 2012; 71:1616.
Sieper J. Developments in the scientific and clinical understanding of the spondyloarthritides. Arthritis
41
Res Ther 2009; 11:208.
McLeod C, Bagust A, Boland A, et al. Adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab for the treatment of
42
ankylosing spondylitis: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2007; 11:1.
Anderson JJ, Baron G, van der Heijde D, et al. Ankylosing spondylitis assessment group preliminary
43
definition of short-term improvement in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44:1876.
Baraliakos X, Brandt J, Listing J, et al. Outcome of patients with active ankylosing spondylitis after two
44 years of therapy with etanercept: clinical and magnetic resonance imaging data. Arthritis Rheum 2005;
53:856.

Page 17 of 22
van der Heijde D, Schiff MH, Sieper J, et al. Adalimumab effectiveness for the treatment of ankylosing
45 spondylitis is maintained for up to 2 years: long-term results from the ATLAS trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;
68:922.
Braun J, Baraliakos X, Listing J, et al. Persistent clinical efficacy and safety of anti-tumour necrosis factor
46 alpha therapy with infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis over 5 years: evidence for different
types of response. Ann Rheum Dis 2008; 67:340.
Cantini F, Niccoli L, Benucci M, et al. Switching from infliximab to once-weekly administration of 50 mg
47 etanercept in resistant or intolerant patients with ankylosing spondylitis: results of a fifty-four-week
study. Arthritis Rheum 2006; 55:812.
Braun J, Baraliakos X, Listing J, Sieper J. Decreased incidence of anterior uveitis in patients with
48 ankylosing spondylitis treated with the anti-tumor necrosis factor agents infliximab and etanercept.
Arthritis Rheum 2005; 52:2447.
Jois RN, Gaffney K, Keat A. Anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy for ankylosing spondylitis--unresolved
49
issues. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2007; 46:899.
Braun J, Pham T, Sieper J, et al. International ASAS consensus statement for the use of anti-tumour
50
necrosis factor agents in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62:817.
Braun J, Davis J, Dougados M, et al. First update of the international ASAS consensus statement for the
51
use of anti-TNF agents in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2006; 65:316.
van der Heijde D, Sieper J, Maksymowych WP, et al. 2010 Update of the international ASAS
52 recommendations for the use of anti-TNF agents in patients with axial spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis
2011; 70:905.
Haroon N, Inman RD, Learch TJ, et al. The impact of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors on radiographic
53
progression in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2013; 65:2645.
Baraliakos X, Haibel H, Listing J, et al. Continuous long-term anti-TNF therapy does not lead to an
54 increase in the rate of new bone formation over 8 years in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann
Rheum Dis 2013.
Braun J, Baraliakos X, Hermann KG, et al. The effect of two golimumab doses on radiographic
55 progression in ankylosing spondylitis: results through 4 years of the GO-RAISE trial. Ann Rheum Dis
2013.
van der Heijde D, Landew R, Baraliakos X, et al. Radiographic findings following two years of infliximab
56
therapy in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 58:3063.
van der Heijde D, Salonen D, Weissman BN, et al. Assessment of radiographic progression in the spines
57 of patients with ankylosing spondylitis treated with adalimumab for up to 2 years. Arthritis Res Ther
2009; 11:R127.
van der Heijde D, Landew R, Einstein S, et al. Radiographic progression of ankylosing spondylitis after
58
up to two years of treatment with etanercept. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 58:1324.
Haibel H, Rudwaleit M, Listing J, et al. Efficacy of adalimumab in the treatment of axial spondylarthritis
59 without radiographically defined sacroiliitis: results of a twelve-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-
controlled trial followed by an open-label extension up to week fifty-two. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 58:1981.
Dougados M, Braun J, Szanto S, et al. Efficacy of etanercept on rheumatic signs and pulmonary function
60 tests in advanced ankylosing spondylitis: results of a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled study
(SPINE). Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 70:799.
Rudwaleit M, Listing J, Brandt J, et al. Prediction of a major clinical response (BASDAI 50) to tumour
61
necrosis factor alpha blockers in ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63:665.
Rudwaleit M, Claudepierre P, Wordsworth P, et al. Effectiveness, safety, and predictors of good clinical
62 response in 1250 patients treated with adalimumab for active ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 2009;
36:801.
Haibel H, Sieper J. Editorial review: how early should ankylosing spondylitis be treated with a tumor
63
necrosis factor-blocker? Curr Opin Rheumatol 2010; 22:388.
Rudwaleit M, Van den Bosch F, Kron M, et al. Effectiveness and safety of adalimumab in patients with
64 ankylosing spondylitis or psoriatic arthritis and history of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. Arthritis Res
Ther 2010; 12:R117.
Barnabe C, Hanley DA. Effect of tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibition on bone density and turnover
65 markers in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthropathy. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2009;
39:116.
Baeten D, Kruithof E, Van den Bosch F, et al. Systematic safety follow up in a cohort of 107 patients with

Page 18 of 22
spondyloarthropathy treated with infliximab: a new perspective on the role of host defence in the
66
pathogenesis of the disease? Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62:829.
Ko JM, Gottlieb AB, Kerbleski JF. Induction and exacerbation of psoriasis with TNF-blockade therapy: a
67
review and analysis of 127 cases. J Dermatolog Treat 2009; 20:100.
Brandt J, Haibel H, Cornely D, et al. Successful treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis with the anti-
68
tumor necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody infliximab. Arthritis Rheum 2000; 43:1346.
Van den Bosch F, Kruithof E, Baeten D, et al. Effects of a loading dose regimen of three infusions of
69 chimeric monoclonal antibody to tumour necrosis factor alpha (infliximab) in spondyloarthropathy: an
open pilot study. Ann Rheum Dis 2000; 59:428.
Stone M, Salonen D, Lax M, et al. Clinical and imaging correlates of response to treatment with
70
infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 2001; 28:1605.
Maksymowych WP, Jhangri GS, Lambert RG, et al. Infliximab in ankylosing spondylitis: a prospective
71
observational inception cohort analysis of efficacy and safety. J Rheumatol 2002; 29:959.
Temekonidis TI, Alamanos Y, Nikas SN, et al. Infliximab therapy in patients with ankylosing spondylitis:
72
an open label 12 month study. Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62:1218.
Baeten D, Kruithof E, Van den Bosch F, et al. Immunomodulatory effects of anti-tumor necrosis factor
73 alpha therapy on synovium in spondylarthropathy: histologic findings in eight patients from an open-
label pilot study. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44:186.
Kruithof E, Baeten D, Van den Bosch F, et al. Histological evidence that infliximab treatment leads to
74 downregulation of inflammation and tissue remodelling of the synovial membrane in
spondyloarthropathy. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64:529.
van der Heijde D, Dijkmans B, Geusens P, et al. Efficacy and safety of infliximab in patients with
75 ankylosing spondylitis: results of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial (ASSERT). Arthritis Rheum 2005;
52:582.
Braun J, Brandt J, Listing J, et al. Treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis with infliximab: a
76
randomised controlled multicentre trial. Lancet 2002; 359:1187.
Van Den Bosch F, Kruithof E, Baeten D, et al. Randomized double-blind comparison of chimeric
77 monoclonal antibody to tumor necrosis factor alpha (infliximab) versus placebo in active
spondylarthropathy. Arthritis Rheum 2002; 46:755.
Braun J, Brandt J, Listing J, et al. Two year maintenance of efficacy and safety of infliximab in the
78
treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64:229.
Sieper J, Baraliakos X, Listing J, et al. Persistent reduction of spinal inflammation as assessed by
79 magnetic resonance imaging in patients with ankylosing spondylitis after 2 yrs of treatment with the
anti-tumour necrosis factor agent infliximab. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2005; 44:1525.
Collantes-Estevez E, Muoz-Villanueva MC, Zarco P, et al. Effectiveness of reducing infliximab dose
80 interval in non-responder patients with refractory spondyloarthropathies. An open extension of a
multicentre study. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2005; 44:1555.
Barkham N, Keen HI, Coates LC, et al. Clinical and imaging efficacy of infliximab in HLA-B27-Positive
81
patients with magnetic resonance imaging-determined early sacroiliitis. Arthritis Rheum 2009; 60:946.
Cornec D, Devauchelle Pensec V, Joulin SJ, Saraux A. Dramatic efficacy of infliximab in cauda equina
82
syndrome complicating ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2009; 60:1657.
Breban M, Ravaud P, Claudepierre P, et al. Maintenance of infliximab treatment in ankylosing spondylitis:
83 results of a one-year randomized controlled trial comparing systematic versus on-demand treatment.
Yoo DH, Hrycaj P, Miranda P, et al. A randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study to demonstrate
equivalence in efficacy and safety of CT-P13 compared with innovator infliximab when coadministered
84
with methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: the PLANETRA study. Ann Rheum Dis
2013; 72:1613.
Park W, Hrycaj P, Jeka S, et al. A randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel-group, prospective
85 study comparing the pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of CT-P13 and innovator infliximab in
patients with ankylosing spondylitis: the PLANETAS study. Ann Rheum Dis 2013; 72:1605.
World Health Organization. Expert Committee on Biological Standardization. Guidelines on evaluation of
86 similar biotherapeutic products. Geneva, 2009. http://www.who.int/biologicals/areas/biological_
(Accessed on September 28, 2013).
Kay J, Smolen JS. Biosimilars to treat inflammatory arthritis: the challenge of proving identity. Ann
87
Rheum Dis 2013; 72:1589.

Page 19 of 22
Barthel HR. Rapid remission of treatment-resistant ankylosing spondylitis with etanercept--a drug for
88
refractory ankylosing spondylitis? Arthritis Rheum 2001; 45:404.
Marzo-Ortega H, McGonagle D, O'Connor P, Emery P. Efficacy of etanercept in the treatment of the
89 entheseal pathology in resistant spondylarthropathy: a clinical and magnetic resonance imaging study.
Gorman JD, Sack KE, Davis JC Jr. Treatment of ankylosing spondylitis by inhibition of tumor necrosis
90
factor alpha. N Engl J Med 2002; 346:1349.
Davis JC Jr, Van Der Heijde D, Braun J, et al. Recombinant human tumor necrosis factor receptor
91 (etanercept) for treating ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2003;
48:3230.
Calin A, Dijkmans BA, Emery P, et al. Outcomes of a multicentre randomised clinical trial of etanercept to
92
treat ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63:1594.
Song IH, Hermann K, Haibel H, et al. Effects of etanercept versus sulfasalazine in early axial
93 spondyloarthritis on active inflammatory lesions as detected by whole-body MRI (ESTHER): a 48-week
randomised controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 70:590.
Brandt J, Khariouzov A, Listing J, et al. Six-month results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of
94
etanercept treatment in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2003; 48:1667.
Kruithof E, De Rycke L, Roth J, et al. Immunomodulatory effects of etanercept on peripheral joint
95
synovitis in the spondylarthropathies. Arthritis Rheum 2005; 52:3898.
Baraliakos X, Davis J, Tsuji W, Braun J. Magnetic resonance imaging examinations of the spine in
96 patients with ankylosing spondylitis before and after therapy with the tumor necrosis factor alpha
receptor fusion protein etanercept. Arthritis Rheum 2005; 52:1216.
Davis JC Jr, van der Heijde DM, Braun J, et al. Efficacy and safety of up to 192 weeks of etanercept
97
therapy in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2008; 67:346.
van der Heijde D, Da Silva JC, Dougados M, et al. Etanercept 50 mg once weekly is as effective as 25 mg
98
twice weekly in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2006; 65:1572.
Braun J, McHugh N, Singh A, et al. Improvement in patient-reported outcomes for patients with
99 ankylosing spondylitis treated with etanercept 50 mg once-weekly and 25 mg twice-weekly.
van der Heijde D, Kivitz A, Schiff MH, et al. Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with ankylosing
100 spondylitis: results of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum
2006; 54:2136.
Lambert RG, Salonen D, Rahman P, et al. Adalimumab significantly reduces both spinal and sacroiliac
101 joint inflammation in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled study. Arthritis Rheum 2007; 56:4005.
Sieper J, van der Heijde D, Dougados M, et al. Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with non-
102 radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: results of a randomised placebo-controlled trial (ABILITY-1). Ann
Rheum Dis 2013; 72:815.
Inman RD, Davis JC Jr, Heijde Dv, et al. Efficacy and safety of golimumab in patients with ankylosing
103 spondylitis: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial. Arthritis Rheum
2008; 58:3402.
Landew R, Braun J, Deodhar A, et al. Efficacy of certolizumab pegol on signs and symptoms of axial
104 spondyloarthritis including ankylosing spondylitis: 24-week results of a double-blind randomised placebo-
controlled Phase 3 study. Ann Rheum Dis 2014; 73:39.
Chen J, Liu C. Is sulfasalazine effective in ankylosing spondylitis? A systematic review of randomized
105
controlled trials. J Rheumatol 2006; 33:722.
Dougados M, vam der Linden S, Leirisalo-Repo M, et al. Sulfasalazine in the treatment of
106 spondylarthropathy. A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Arthritis Rheum
1995; 38:618.
Clegg DO, Reda DJ, Abdellatif M. Comparison of sulfasalazine and placebo for the treatment of axial and
107 peripheral articular manifestations of the seronegative spondylarthropathies: a Department of Veterans
Affairs cooperative study. Arthritis Rheum 1999; 42:2325.
Ward MM. Sulfasalazine for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: relic or niche medication? Arthritis
108
Rheum 2011; 63:1472.
109 Braun J, van der Horst-Bruinsma IE, Huang F, et al. Clinical efficacy and safety of etanercept versus
sulfasalazine in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, double-blind trial. Arthritis Rheum

Page 20 of 22
2011; 63:1543.
Braun J, Pavelka K, Ramos-Remus C, et al. Clinical efficacy of etanercept versus sulfasalazine in
110
ankylosing spondylitis subjects with peripheral joint involvement. J Rheumatol 2012; 39:836.
Sampaio-Barros PD, Costallat LT, Bertolo MB, et al. Methotrexate in the treatment of ankylosing
111
spondylitis. Scand J Rheumatol 2000; 29:160.
Gonzalez-Lopez L, Garcia-Gonzalez A, Vazquez-Del-Mercado M, et al. Efficacy of methotrexate in
112
ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trial. J Rheumatol 2004; 31:1568.
Chen J, Liu C, Lin J. Methotrexate for ankylosing spondylitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;
113
:CD004524.
Marzo-Ortega H, McGonagle D, Jarrett S, et al. Infliximab in combination with methotrexate in active
114
ankylosing spondylitis: a clinical and imaging study. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64:1568.
Li EK, Griffith JF, Lee VW, et al. Short-term efficacy of combination methotrexate and infliximab in
115 patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a clinical and magnetic resonance imaging correlation.
van Denderen JC, van der Paardt M, Nurmohamed MT, et al. Double blind, randomised, placebo
116 controlled study of leflunomide in the treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2005;
64:1761.
Haibel H, Rudwaleit M, Braun J, Sieper J. Six months open label trial of leflunomide in active ankylosing
117
spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64:124.
Haibel H, Fendler C, Listing J, et al. Efficacy of oral prednisolone in active ankylosing spondylitis: results
118
of a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled short-term trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2014; 73:243.
Hanly JG, Mitchell M, MacMillan L, et al. Efficacy of sacroiliac corticosteroid injections in patients with
119
inflammatory spondyloarthropathy: results of a 6 month controlled study. J Rheumatol 2000; 27:719.
Maugars Y, Mathis C, Berthelot JM, et al. Assessment of the efficacy of sacroiliac corticosteroid injections
120
in spondylarthropathies: a double-blind study. Br J Rheumatol 1996; 35:767.
Smith JA, Colbert RA. The IL-23/IL-17 axis in spondyloarthritis pathogenesis: Th17 and beyond. Arthritis
121
Rheum 2013.
Baeten D, Baraliakos X, Braun J, et al. Anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody secukinumab in
122 treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2013;
382:1705.
Poddubnyy D, Hermann KG, Callhoff J, et al. Ustekinumab for the treatment of patients with active
123 ankylosing spondylitis: results of a 28-week, prospective, open-label, proof-of-concept study (TOPAS).
Ann Rheum Dis 2014.
Maksymowych WP, Lambert R, Jhangri GS, et al. Clinical and radiological amelioration of refractory
124
peripheral spondyloarthritis by pulse intravenous pamidronate therapy. J Rheumatol 2001; 28:144.
Maksymowych WP, Jhangri GS, Fitzgerald AA, et al. A six-month randomized, controlled, double-blind,
125 dose-response comparison of intravenous pamidronate (60 mg versus 10 mg) in the treatment of
nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug-refractory ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2002; 46:766.
Cairns AP, Wright SA, Taggart AJ, et al. An open study of pulse pamidronate treatment in severe
126 ankylosing spondylitis, and its effect on biochemical markers of bone turnover. Ann Rheum Dis 2005;
64:338.
Grover R, Shankar S, Aneja R, et al. Treatment of ankylosing spondylitis with pamidronate: an open
127
label study. Ann Rheum Dis 2006; 65:688.
Toussirot E, Wendling D. Antiinflammatory treatment with bisphosphonates in ankylosing spondylitis.
128
Breban M, Gombert B, Amor B, Dougados M. Efficacy of thalidomide in the treatment of refractory
129
ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 1999; 42:580.
Huang F, Gu J, Zhao W, et al. One-year open-label trial of thalidomide in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis
130
Rheum 2002; 47:249.
131 Huang F, Wei JC, Breban M. Thalidomide in ankylosing spondylitis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2002; 20:S158.
Song IH, Heldmann F, Rudwaleit M, et al. Different response to rituximab in tumor necrosis factor
132 blocker-naive patients with active ankylosing spondylitis and in patients in whom tumor necrosis factor
blockers have failed: a twenty-four-week clinical trial. Arthritis Rheum 2010; 62:1290.
Pathan E, Abraham S, Van Rossen E, et al. Efficacy and safety of apremilast, an oral phosphodiesterase
133
4 inhibitor, in ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2013; 72:1475.

Page 21 of 22
Song IH, Poddubnyy D. New treatment targets in ankylosing spondylitis and other spondyloarthritides.
134
Kiltz U, Heldmann F, Baraliakos X, Braun J. Treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in patients refractory to
135
TNF-inhibition: are there alternatives? Curr Opin Rheumatol 2012; 24:252.
Song IH, Heldmann F, Rudwaleit M, et al. Treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis with abatacept: an
136
open-label, 24-week pilot study. Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 70:1108.
Sieper J, Porter-Brown B, Thompson L, et al. Assessment of short-term symptomatic efficacy of
137 tocilizumab in ankylosing spondylitis: results of randomised, placebo-controlled trials. Ann Rheum Dis
2014; 73:95.
Vander Cruyssen B, Muoz-Gomariz E, Font P, et al. Hip involvement in ankylosing spondylitis:
138 epidemiology and risk factors associated with hip replacement surgery. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2010;
49:73.
Sweeney S, Gupta R, Taylor G, Calin A. Total hip arthroplasty in ankylosing spondylitis: outcome in 340
139
patients. J Rheumatol 2001; 28:1862.
Joshi AB, Markovic L, Hardinge K, Murphy JC. Total hip arthroplasty in ankylosing spondylitis: an analysis
140
of 181 hips. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17:427.
Nilsson OS, Persson PE. Heterotopic bone formation after joint replacement. Curr Opin Rheumatol 1999;
141
11:127.
Koh WH, Jones SD, Garrett Sl, et al. Risks and determinants of unemployment in ankylosing spondylitis
142
(abstract). Arthritis Rheum 1994; 37:263.
Kennedy LG, Edmunds L, Calin A. The natural history of ankylosing spondylitis. Does it burn out? J
143
Rheumatol 1993; 20:688.
Amor B, Santos RS, Nahal R, et al. Predictive factors for the longterm outcome of spondyloarthropathies.
144
J Rheumatol 1994; 21:1883.
Pradeep DJ, Keat A, Gaffney K. Predicting outcome in ankylosing spondylitis. Rheumatology (Oxford)
145
2008; 47:942.
Ward MM, Reveille JD, Learch TJ, et al. Occupational physical activities and long-term functional and
146
radiographic outcomes in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 59:822.
Vastesaeger N, van der Heijde D, Inman RD, et al. Predicting the outcome of ankylosing spondylitis
147
therapy. Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 70:973.
Poddubnyy D, Rudwaleit M, Haibel H, et al. Rates and predictors of radiographic sacroiliitis progression
148
over 2 years in patients with axial spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 70:1369.
Poddubnyy D, Haibel H, Listing J, et al. Baseline radiographic damage, elevated acute-phase reactant
149 levels, and cigarette smoking status predict spinal radiographic progression in early axial
spondylarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2012; 64:1388.
Poddubnyy D, Haibel H, Listing J, et al. Cigarette smoking has a dose-dependent impact on progression
150 of structural damage in the spine in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: results from the GErman
SPondyloarthritis Inception Cohort (GESPIC). Ann Rheum Dis 2013; 72:1430.
Alaranta H, Luoto S, Konttinen YT. Traumatic spinal cord injury as a complication to ankylosing
151
spondylitis. An extended report. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2002; 20:66.
Huang YP, Wang YH, Pan SL. Increased risk of ischemic heart disease in young patients with newly
152 diagnosed ankylosing spondylitis--a population-based longitudinal follow-up study. PLoS One 2013;
8:e64155.
Lehtinen K. Mortality and causes of death in 398 patients admitted to hospital with ankylosing
153
spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 1993; 52:174.
154 Zochling J, Braun J. Mortality in ankylosing spondylitis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2008; 26:S80.
Mok CC, Kwok CL, Ho LY, et al. Life expectancy, standardized mortality ratios, and causes of death in six
155
rheumatic diseases in Hong Kong, China. Arthritis Rheum 2011; 63:1182.
Askling J, Klareskog L, Blomqvist P, et al. Risk for malignant lymphoma in ankylosing spondylitis: a
156
nationwide Swedish case-control study. Ann Rheum Dis 2006; 65:1184.
Topic 7790 Version 21.0 All rights reserved. 2014 UpToDate, Inc.
UpToDate Customer Service
Wolters Kluwer Health

Page 22 of 22
95 Sawyer Rd
Waltham, MA 02453-3471
1.800.998.6374 (US & Canada) tel.

+1.781.392.2000 (all other countries) tel.
customerservice@uptodate.com
www.uptodate.com

Ankilosys 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ankilosys 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Page 1 of 22

Assessment and treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in adults

Author Deputy Editor

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

Blood tests are used to assist in assessing disease activity.

The patient global assessment on a scale of 0 to 10 or (1 to 10).

The physician global assessment on a scale of 1 (mild) to 4 (severe).

Disease activity scores

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

Patient self-assessment of pain (1 to 10)

BASFI or those daily activities that are limited by disease

Physician's global assessment on a scale of 1 (mild) to 4 (severe)

Spondylitis Association of America

14827 Ventura Blvd. # 222

Sherman Oaks, CA 91403

Phone: 1-800-777-8189 or 1-818-981-1616

Email: info@spondylitis.org or website www.spondylitis.org/

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

PHARMACOLOGIC THERAPY Pharmacotherapy includes one or more of the following: nonsteroidal

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

Patient global assessment

Shorter disease duration, which is the best predictor

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

to respond to infliximab therapy.

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

Golimumab Golimumab is a human anti-TNF alpha monoclonal antibody that is administered by

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

Apremilast Apremilast, an oral phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE4) inhibitor with antiinflammatory and

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

Hip arthritis odds ratio (OR) 23

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

Basics topic (see "Patient information: Ankylosing spondylitis (The Basics)")

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Traditional nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (eg, sulfasalazine, methotrexate,

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

UpToDate Customer Service

Wolters Kluwer Health

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

1.800.998.6374 (US & Canada) tel.

mhtml:file://C:\Users\Dayron\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet File... 20/3/2014

You might also like