Selective JAK-Inhibitors in Spondyloarthritis.

As our research interest and knowledge increases in the field of Spondyloarthritis, new aspects also emerge as regards to their therapeutic approach. JAK inhibitors (JAKi) are a relatively new treatment option, aiming molecules in the JAK-STAT pathway, which has a leading role in the pathophysiology of both Psoriatic Arthritis and Axial Spondyloarthritis. JAKi exhibit different selectivity towards the four different members of the JAK family (namely JAK1, JAK2, JAK3, and TYK2), possibly reflecting different efficacy and safety profile. Although knowledge is more consolidated for rheumatoid arthritis in which JAKi are being used for more than 10 years, data are still accumulating for PsA/SpA. In this review we aim to present and assess current knowledge about the efficacy of JAKi (with a focus on selective JAKi) in the treatment of patients with SpA and evaluate their safety profile as some concerns may arise around this therapeutic option.

Higher frequency but similar recurrence rate of uveitis episodes in axial spondylarthritis compared to psoriatic arthritis. A multicentre retrospective study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Data on risk factors predicting uveitis development in spondyloarthritis (SpA) is scarce. Our aim was to examine associations between demographic, clinical and/or laboratory characteristics of SpA with the occurrence and the course of uveitis, including ocular damage and recurrence rate. METHODS: Characteristics (at disease diagnosis and ever-present) from axSpA and Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients followed in 3 tertiary rheumatology-clinics were retrospectively recorded. Comparisons were made between patients with and without uveitis, as well as between those with uveitis-rate [episodes/year] above the median uveitis-rate in the whole cohort ("recurrent"-uveitis) and the remaining uveitis patients ("non-recurrent uveitis"). In multivariable models, age, gender and variables significantly different in univariate analyses were included. RESULTS: 264 axSpA and 369 PsA patients were enrolled. In axSpA, uveitis occurred in 11.7% and was associated with HLA-B27 (OR = 4.15, 95%CI 1.16-14.80, p = 0.028) and ever-present peripheral arthritis (OR = 3.05 (1.10-8.41, p = 0.031). In contrast, uveitis in PsA occurred only in 2.7% of patients and was associated with SpA family-history (OR = 6.35 (1.29-31.27), p = 0.023) axial disease at diagnosis (OR = 5.61 [1.01-28.69], p = 0.038) and disease duration (OR = 1.12 [1.04-1.21], p = 0.004). Median uveitis recurrence rate was comparable between axSpA and PsA (0.205 and 0.285 episodes/year, respectively). No associations were found between recurrent uveitis and demographic/clinical/laboratory characteristics. Ocular damage (e.g. synechiae) was seen in 16.1% of axSpA and 30% of PsA patients, all of them with recurrent uveitis. CONCLUSION: Uveitis occurred more commonly in axSpA than in PsA patients, while uveitis recurrence rate was similar. Permanent ocular damage may occur more often in PsA than axSpA.

Impact of biologic therapies on risk of adverse cardiovascular events in patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis or Psoriatic Arthritis: A systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence highlights increased mortality and morbidity due to cardiovascular disease (CVD), especially within the two major forms of Spondyloarthropathies (SpAs), Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) and Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA). Healthcare professionals and patients in these populations should be alerted regarding the high risk of cardiovascular (CV) events and thus, customize the treatment strategy accordingly. OBJECTIVE: This systematic literature review aimed to determine the effects of biological therapies on serious CV events in AS and PsA. METHODS: Screening for the study was carried out using PubMed and Scopus databases from the database's inception to the 17th of July 2021. The literature search strategy for this review is based on the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes (PICOs) framework. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of biologic therapies for the treatment of AS and/or PsA were included. The primary outcome measure was the number of serious CV events reported during the placebo-controlled phase. RESULTS: 4,422 articles were generated from keywords, eligibility criteria, and databases. Following the screening, we retained 13 studies for analysis: 3 in AS and 10 in PsA. Meta-analysis of results was not feasible due to the small number of the identified studies, the heterogeneity of the biologic treatment and the included populations, as well as the infrequently reported requested endpoint. According to our review, biologic treatments are safe options as for CV risk in patients with PsA or AS. CONCLUSION: Further and more extensive trials in AS/PsA patients at high risk of CV events are needed before firm conclusions can be drawn.