Objective: Anti-TNF-α agents are remarkably effective in the treatment of SpAs. However, 30% of patients withdraw from anti-TNF-α agents yearly because of inadequate efficacy or side effects. The objective of this study was to assess in current practice the response to a second and a third anti-TNF-α.
Methods: Retrospectively, all records of patients who had received at least two anti-TNF-α agents have been studied. For axial forms, treatment was considered effective if 3 months after switching the patient had a favourable expert opinion or showed an improvement in BASDAI of at least 2 on a scale of 0-10 or an improvement of 50% (BASDAI 50). For peripheral forms, the treatment was considered effective if the patient had a favourable expert opinion or if a clinical improvement of >30% of the swollen and tender joint counts was established. The reasons for switching were: (i) primary non-responder; (ii) loss of efficacy; and (iii) occurrence of side effects. To identify response predictor factors bivariate analysis was performed.
Results: Three hundred and seventy-seven patients under anti-TNF-α agents were treated and 99 patients had received at least two anti-TNF-α agents. Twenty-eight of these 99 patients had been treated with three anti-TNF-α agents. Following the failure of a first anti-TNF-α, the response to a second agent was satisfactory in 80.8%. Patients who had received a third anti-TNF-α following failure of the first two also showed a satisfactory response in 82.1%. The reason for switching from the first or second agent was not predictive of the response.
Conclusion: In the event of failure or intolerance to anti-TNF-α in the treatment of SpAs, performing a first or second switch produces a satisfactory therapeutic response.