AB0466 RETENTION RATE AND EFFECTIVENESS OF SECUKINUMAB VERSUS TNF INHIBITOR SWITCHING IN ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS PATIENTS WITH A HISTORY OF TNF INHIBITOR TREATMENT: DATA FROM A KOREAN NATIONWIDE REGISTRY

Abstract

Background:The choice of second-line biologics for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients previously treated with a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) remains unclearObjectives:Here, we compared drug retention and clinical efficacy between AS patients who switched biologics to secukinumab and those who switched to a different TNFi.Methods:AS patients enrolled in the Korean College of Rheumatology BIOlogics registry were included. Patients with previous TNFi exposure were divided into the secukinumab group and the TNFi switching group. Drug retention and clinical efficacy (BASDAI50, ASAS20, ASAS40, ASDAS <2.1, ASDAS clinically important improvement, and ASDAS major improvement) were assessed at the 1 year follow-up. Propensity score (PS)-matched and covariate-adjusted logistic regression analyses were performed.Results:246 had available 1 year follow-up data. Secukinumab as third- or later-line biologics was more frequent than alternative TNFi (54% vs. 14%). PS-matched and multiple covariate-adjusted analyses showed that the odds ratio (OR) for drug discontinuation was comparable between the secukinumab and TNFi switching groups (OR=1.136; 95% CI, 0.843–1.531 and OR=1.000; 95% CI, 0.433–2.308, respectively). The proportion of patients who achieved BASDAI50 was also comparable between the two groups (OR=0.833; 95% CI, 0.481–1.441 in PS-matched analysis). Other clinical efficacy parameters were also comparable. In the subgroup analysis of AS patients with previous TNFi discontinuation due to ineffectiveness, all clinical efficacy parameters were comparable between the two groups.Conclusion:In AS patients with previous exposure to a TNFi, switching biologics to secukinumab and switching to an alternative TNFi resulted in comparable drug retention and clinical efficacy.