ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1545

Better Performance of the Leeds and Sparcc Enthesitis Indices Compared to the Mases in Patients with Peripheral Spondyloarthritis during Treatment with Adalimumab

Philip J. Mease1, Filip van Den Bosch2, Joachim Sieper3, Aileen L. Pangan4, Nupun A. Varothai4 and In-Ho Song5, 1Swedish Medical Center and University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 2Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium, 3Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 4AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, 5AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Ludwigshafen, Germany

Meeting: 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Adalimumab and spondylarthritis, Enthesitis

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Title: Spondyloarthropathies and Psoriatic Arthritis - Clinical Aspects and Treatment II

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose:

Peripheral spondyloarthritis (pSpA) is characterized by arthritis, enthesitis, and/or dactylitis. Enthesitis is considered a core outcome domain for SpA; however, there is no clear recommendation which of the available enthesitis tools should be used. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the validity of different enthesitis indices in patients (pts) with non-psoriatic pSpA during treatment with adalimumab (ADA).

Methods:

ABILITY-2 is a multicenter phase 3 study. Eligible pts were age ≥18 yrs, fulfilled ASAS pSpA criteria, and had active disease. Pts were randomized to ADA 40 mg every other week (wk) or placebo (PBO) for 12 wks followed by 144 wks of open-label ADA. 29 enthesitis sites based on Leeds (range 0–6) and SPARCC (Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada, 0–16) enthesitis indices, and the MASES (Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score, 0–13) were assessed during the study. Discriminatory capacity and sensitivity to change of enthesitis indices at wk 12 were calculated: mean differences from BL to wk 12 in ADA vs PBO-treated pts with corresponding 95% confidence limits, standardized mean differences, and Guyatt’s effect sizes. Presence of enthesitis at each anatomical enthesitis site at BL and proportion of sites that show resolution or new onset enthesitis from BL to wk 12, ADA vs PBO, were analyzed.

Results:

165 pts (ADA 84/PBO 81) were randomized. At BL 143 (87%) had ≥1 enthesitis site. The Leeds and SPARCC enthesitis scores showed higher discriminatory ability and sensitivity to change compared to the MASES (Table). Individual enthesitis site analysis suggests that in the overall population the percent change from BL to wk 12 at the following sites may have higher discriminatory capacity to other more axial sites: Achilles tendon (ADA 52.8% vs PBO 13.5%), greater trochanter (42.6% vs 6.8%), lateral epicondyle humerus (63.9% vs 0%), and medial epicondyle humerus (51.2% vs 0%). Among enthesitis sites positive at BL, a greater proportion showed resolution at wk 12 among pts on ADA in the Achilles tendon (ADA 60.4% vs PBO 36.5%, P=0.019), medial epicondyle (73.2% vs 48.7%, P=0.038), and lateral epicondyle (80.6% vs 52.8%, P=0.023). Among sites negative at BL less new onset enthesitis was observed with ADA at the following sites: Achilles tendon (ADA 3.6% vs PBO 10.9%, P=0.041), lateral epicondyle (4.7% vs 15.1%, P=0.006), greater trochanter (3.4% vs 14.4%, P=0.005), quadriceps insertion patella (1.5% vs 7.0%, P=0.034), and medial condyle femoral (1.6% vs 9.2%, P=0.009). 

 Table. Enthesitis Index Mean Change (±SD) [95% CL] from Baseline to Week 12, SMD, and Guyatt’s Effect Size*

 

ADA

PBO

Mean Difference

(ADA-PBO)

SMD

Guyatt’s

Effect Size

Leeds

-1.35 (±1.20)

[-1.69, -1.02]

n=51

-0.45 (±1.27)

[-0.81, -0.09]

n=51

-0.90

[-1.39, -0.42]

0.73

 

-1.07

SPARCC

-2.35 (±2.46)

[-2.97, -1.73]

n=63

-1.00 (±2.37)

 [-1.59, -0.41]

n=65

-1.35

[-2.19, -0.51]

0.56

 

-0.99

MASES

-2.02 (±2.78)

[-2.76, -1.28]

n=57

-1.17 (±2.50)

[-1.79, -0.55]

n=65

-0.85

[-1.80, 0.10]

 

0.32

 

-0.81

*Among patients who had score ≥1 for that index. CL, confidence limit; MASES, Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score; SD, standard deviation; SMD, standardized mean difference; SPARCC, Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada.

Conclusion:

In ABILITY-2, the LEEDS and SPARCC enthesitis indices showed better discriminatory capacity and sensitivity to change compared to the MASES during treatment with ADA in pSpA patients. Enthesitis sites showing higher discriminatory capacity are peripheral sites predominantly in the Leeds and SPARCC indices which may explain their better performance compared to the MASES, which has fewer peripheral sites.


Disclosure:

P. J. Mease,

AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, and Vertex,

2,

AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, and Vertex,

5,

AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, and Vertex,

8;

F. van Den Bosch,

AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB,

2,

AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB,

5,

AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB,

8;

J. Sieper,

AbbVie, Merck, Pfizer and UCB,

2,

AbbVie, Merck, Pfizer and UCB,

5,

AbbVie, Merck, Pfizer and UCB,

8;

A. L. Pangan,

AbbVie,

1,

AbbVie,

3;

N. A. Varothai,

AbbVie,

3,

AbbVie,

1;

I. H. Song,

AbbVie,

1,

AbbVie,

3.

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/better-performance-of-the-leeds-and-sparcc-enthesitis-indices-compared-to-the-mases-in-patients-with-peripheral-spondyloarthritis-during-treatment-with-adalimumab/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology