Spondyloarthritis & psoriatic arthritis
Efficacy of upadacitinib in subgroups of patients with axial spondyloarthritis with early versus established disease
Authors' conclusion
Regarding short-term outcomes, both subgroups of patients (shorter axSpA symptom duration (≤2 years) and longer symptom duration (>2 years)) achieved comparable results when treated with upadacitinib.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with r-axSpA and nr-axSpA, bDMARD-naïve or with intolerance or inadequate response to bDMARD; stratified by symptom duration (nr-axSpA: early ≤2 vs established >2 years, and ≤5 vs >5 years; r-axSpA: ≤5 vs >5 years)
- Comparison
- Upadacitinib vs placebo in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with shorter vs longer symptom duration
- Primary endpoint
- Efficacy endpoints including proportion achieving ASDAS and ASAS40 responses; upadacitinib vs placebo by RR, shorter vs longer symptom duration by RR ratio
- Follow-up
- Week 14
Methodological detailsplacebo-controlled, stratified by symptom duration
- Placebo-controlled
- Stratified by symptom duration
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Efficacy endpoints by symptom duration
- Better responses with upadacitinib vs placebo in all endpoints assessed, regardless of symptom duration
- Early/shorter vs established/longer symptom duration: no statistically significant differences for all measures, except change in high-sensitivity CRP in nr-axSpA (better response in early disease)
Further findings
| Outcome | Difference (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Change from baseline in high-sensitivity CRP, nr-axSpA, earlyvs established disease · week 14Better response in early disease | −8.2 (−14.9 to −1.6) | |
| −20−10010Difference (linear scale) |
Original publication
Efficacy of upadacitinib in subgroups of patients with axial spondyloarthritis with early versus established disease. RMD Open. Published 4 March 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →