The paper gives the definition of remission in axial spondyloarthritides (axSpA), which has been developed by the Spondyloarthritis Study Group of Experts. The work used the Delphi technique. At stage 1, based on the analysis of the data available in the literature and on their own clinical experiences, the experts proposed some variants of the definition of remission and ways of its evaluation in patients with axSpA. At Stage 2, the definitions that had received at least 80% of the votes via anonymous voting were selected and adopted without further discussion. Those that had received an equal number of votes were reconsidered and additionally discussed; then there was repeat voting, by choosing the final definition. As a result of their discussion, the experts formulated the definitions of clinical laboratory and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) remissions. They proposed the following remissions in axSpA: drug and drug-free, clinical laboratory, and MRI remissions, as well as a remission in the presence and absence of structural changes in the locomotor system, as evidenced by imaging techniques. Criteria for clinical laboratory remission and basic tools for its evaluation that can be used in real clinical practice and researches have been elaborated.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are most popular medications for the treatment of pain in common musculoskeletal diseases such as osteoarthritis (OA) and non-specific low back pain (LBP). However, the factors affecting the effectiveness of these drugs have not been determined fully. Aim: to identify factors affecting the effectiveness of NSAIDs in patients with OA and LBP. Materials and methods. An observational study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a 2-week course of NSAIDs in OA and LBP in real clinical practice. The study group consisted of 3604 patients with OA and LBP (60.6% women and 39.4% men, mean age 55.0±13.4 years). According to the study design, aceclofenac (Airtal) and other NSAIDs used in the ratio 1:1. The main criterion of effectiveness was the frequency of complete pain relief after 2 weeks of therapy. In addition, the decrease of pain and general health were determined on a 10-point numerical rating scale (NRS). We compared the frequency of complete pain relief in patients who had and did not have the studied factors. The value of the studied factors was determined using OR (95% CI). Results and discussion. Most patients received aceclofenac (54.9%), as well as diclofenac (2.0%), ketoprofen (1.9%), lornoxicam (2.2%), meloxicam (13.7%), naproxen (2.1%), nimesulide (5.8%), celecoxib (5.9%), ethicoxib (7.1%) and other NSAIDs (4.4%); 56.2% of patients received muscle relaxants, mainly tolperisone (74.7%), vitamin B (10.4%), and proton pump inhibitors (42.8%). Complete pain relief was achieved in 54.8% of patients. The pain decrease and general health improvement were (for NRS) 63.9±13.4% and 61.7±14.8%, respectively. The efficacy of aceclofenac was slightly higher than in the whole group: complete pain relief was in 59.9% of patients. Adverse events in aceclofenac use were observed in 2.3% of patients, other NSAIDs-from 2.4 to 14.1%. The frequency of complete pain relief was higher in men: OR 1,239 (95% CI 1.08-1.418; p=0.002), who had the first episode of pain - OR 3.341 (95% CI 2.873-3.875; p=0.000), a good" response " to NSAIDs in history - OR 1.656 (95% CI 1.385-1.980; p=0.000) and received NSAIDs in combination with muscle relaxants - OR 1.218 (95% CI 1.067-1.390; p=0.004). The effect of therapy is lower in patients 65 years and older-OR 0,378 (95% CI 0.324-0.442; p=0,000), with body mass index >30 kg/m² - OR 0.619 (95% CI 0.529-0.723; p=0.000), with severe pain (≥7 points NRS) - OR 0.662 (95% CI 0.580-0.756; p=0.002), with pain at rest, - OR 0.515 (95% CI 0.450-0,589; p=0.000), pain at night - OR 0.581 (95% CI 0.501-0.672; p=0.000) and the presence of stiffness - OR 0.501 (95% CI 0.438-0,573; p=0.000). Treatment results are significantly worse in the cases of combination of LBP and joint pain, as well as pain in the trochanter major and pes anserinus area (p

Objective. To assess the efficacy and safety of amtolmetin guacil (AMG) in patients with knee joint osteoarthritis (KJOA) and associated dyspepsia in real clinical practice.Methods. 220 patients with KJOA with severe pain syndrome in KJ ≥ 40 mm in VAS and dyspepsia were included in the observation study. AMG was administered at a dose of 600 mg twice daily for 28 days. Patients had three visits: before starting treatment, on Day 14 ± 3 (visit 2), on Day 28 ± 3 (final visit) to assess the pain dynamics (according to VAS), stiffness and functional activity according to WOMAC index, general health assessment (according to VAS) and a quantitative assessment of dyspepsia (SODA index).Results. Of 219 patients, about 72.5% reported pain reduction from 65 to 27 mm at the end of the study. All indicators of three scales of the WOMAC index decreased statistically significant (р<0,001). There was also a significant decrease of non-pain and pain signs of dyspepsia and an increase in the “treatment satisfaction” index (р<0,001). The patients showed better tolerability of AMG than that of previously taken NSAIDs.Conclusion. AMG proved to be an effective drug with good tolerability and positive effect on associated dyspepsia.

The paper gives recommendations for the drug therapy of axial spondyloarthritides, which have been developed by the Spondyloarthritis Study Group of Experts. The recommendations describe the patient management tactic in the most common clinical situations, which is aimed at maximizing the efficacy and safety of treatment.

Objective: to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of amtolmetin guacil (AMG; Niselat®, Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd, India) versus previous therapy with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and signs of dyspepsia.Subjects and methods. The open-label observational study included 220 patients aged 30–65 years who suffered from knee OA and intense pain during NSAID intake and had symptoms of dyspepsia in the absence of contraindications to the use of AMG. Among the comorbidities that generally occurred in 68% of the patients, there was a preponderance of hypertension (42%), lower extremity varicose veins (6.4%), and diabetes mellitus (6%). Treatment efficacy was evaluated using three domains of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), by also taking into account pain intensity and general health assessment on the visual analogue scale. A Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (SODA) scale was used to rate dyspepsia.Results and discussion. AMG had a marked analgesic effect confirmed by 40% or more pain reduction that occurred in 72.5% of the patients. The high analgesic effect of AMG was confirmed by a statistically significant (p <0.001) reduction in the WOMAC index (pain and stiffness) and by an increase in functional activity. There was a significant decrease in painless and painful signs of dyspepsia, as well as positive changes in the measures “overall assessment of dyspepsia severity” (p < 0.001) and “satisfaction with treatment”. Overall assessment of AMG tolerability was only positive: excellent (33%), good (56%), and satisfactory (11%). There were no serious adverse events (AE). AE were graded as moderate and mild in 8 and 82% of cases, respectively. AE were recorded in 7.7% of the patients. Conclusion. The findings suggest that AMG offers good prospects for knee OA treatment.

Tofacitinib (TOFA), a representative of a new class of targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (s-DMARD), is a promising drug for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other immune inflammatory diseases. Objective: to evaluate the efficiency and safety of therapy with TOFA in combination with methotrexate (MTX) and other s-DMARDs in real clinical practice in patients with active RA and previous ineffective therapy. Patients and methods. A 6-month Russian multicenter study of function and quality of life enrolled 101 patients with resistant RA: 18 men and 83 women; mean age, 51.03±11.28 years; mean disease duration, 105.4±81.43 months; rheumatoid factor-positive individuals (89.1%); and anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibody-positive ones (74.7%). 93 (92,1%) of these patients completed a 24-week study. TOFA was used as both second-line drug (after failure of therapy with s-DMARD) (n=74) and as a third-line drug (after failure of therapy with s-DMARDs and biological agents (BAs) (n=74). The tools RAPID3, HAQ, and EQ-5D were used to determine disease outcomes from a patient's assessment. Results. All the three tools demonstrated significant positive changes at 3–6 months following therapy initiation. RAPID3 scores for the status of a patient achieving a low disease activity or remission coincided with the mean DAS28-ESR and SDAI scores in 60% and 68% of cases, respectively. The achievement rates of the minimally clinically significant improvement (ΔHAQ≥0.22) and functional remission (HAQ≤0.5) at 6 months of TOFA therapy were 79.6 and 30.1%, respectively. The mean change value in EQ-5D scores over 6 months was -0.162±0.21. There were no significant between the groups of patients who used TOFA as a second- or third-line agent in the majority of indicators, except EQ-5D scores at 6 months. Conclusions. The results of our multicenter study using considerable Russian material confirmed the pronounced positive effect of TOFA used as a second-line agent (after s-DMARD failure) and a third-line agent (after s-DMARD and BA failure) on patients' assessment of disease activity, functional ability in daily life, and quality of life.

The paper gives the recommendations for the assessment of disease activity and functional status in patients with ankylosing spondylitis in clinical practice, which have been developed by experts, by taking into account international and Russian experience in managing these patients.

The paper gives recommendations for the drug therapy of axial spondyloarthritides, which have been developed by the Spondyloarthritis Study Group of Experts. The recommendations describe the patient management tactic in the most common clinical situations, which is aimed at maximizing the efficacy and safety of treatment.

Tofacitinib (TOFA), a member of a new class of targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), is a promising medication for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other immunoinflammatory diseases. The paper describes the Russian experi-ence with TOFA used to treat severe RA.Patients and methods. 101 RA patients (18 men and 83 women; mean age, 51.03±11.28 years; mean disease duration, 105.4±81.43 months) who were positive for rheumatoid factor (89.1%) and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies (74.7%) and resistant to therapy with synthetic DMARDs (sDMARDs) (80.2%) and biological agents (19.8%) were given TOFA at a dose of 5 mg twice daily, which could be doubled if necessary. TOFA was used alone (n=9) or in combination with methotrexate (MT) (n=75) or other sDMARDs (n=17). The achievement of low disease activity (LDA) and clinical remission at 3 and 6 months of treatment by DAS28-ESR SDAI, and CDAI scores, and the indices of safety and tolerability were assessed.Results. A total of 93 (92.1%) of the 101 patients completed a 24-week period of the investigation. 8 (7.9%) patients prematurely discontinued TOFA after an average of 2.75±0.71 months. At the end of the study, the patients achieved the primary endpoint (LDA including remission) in terms of DAS28-ESR ≤3.2 (34.7%), SDAI ≤11 (47.5%), and CDAI ≤10 (48.5%) and the secondary endpoints (clinical remission) in terms of DAS28-ESR ≤2.6 (17.8%), SDAI ≤3.3 (8.9%), and CDAI ≤2.8 (6.9%). When TOFA was combined with MT, the discontinuation rate for the former was significantly lower (2.7%) than when TOFA was used in combination with other sDMARDs (29.4%) or alone (11.1%; p<0.01). At 3 and 6 months of follow-up, LDA was achieved more frequently when TOFA was combined with MT than when other treatment regimens were used. Fatal outcomes and serious adverse events (AEs), as AEs previously undescribed in the literature, were not seen during a follow-up within the framework of the clinical trial. Only 2 patients discontinued TOFA because of AEs.Conclusion. The use of TOFA in RA is effective in achieving LDA in patients unresponsive to sDMARDs and biological DMARDs. The prescription of the drug makes it possible to monitor the activity of the inflammatory process and, with its sufficient safety and good tolerability, to achieve LDA in half of the patients, including those with multidrug resistance.

The article considers the results of an international multicenter randomized clinical trial of the efficacy and safety of the brand-name drug rituximab (MabThera), a monoclonal antibody against CD20 antigen of B cells, and its biosimi-lar drug (Acellbia®) (the BIORA study) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) refractory to therapy with tumor necrosis factor-а inhibitors.Objective: to provide evidence for the therapeutic equivalence of Acellbia® and MabThera® and also to assess their interchangeability.Subjects and methods. The trial enrolled adult patients with active seropositive RA, who were randomized into two groups (1:1): 1) the patients who received Acellbia® 1000 mg intravenously on days 1 and 15; 2) those who had MabThera® in a similar way. When RA activity persisted at 24 weeks, there was re-randomization (1:1) with a partial overlap: Group 1 patients were randomized into group AA (the drug of the second therapy cycle was Acellbia®) or Group AM (that was MabThera®), the similar methodology was followed in Group 2 (Groups MM and MA). Throughout the study, the patients received methotrexate at a stable dose of 7.5—25 mg/week and folic acid at a dose of 5 mg/week. The follow-up lasted 48 weeks.Results and discussion. 24 weeks after treatment initiation, the ACR20 response was observed in 84.1% of the patients in the Acellbia® group (95% CI, 74.75—90.50) and in 87% in the MabThera® group (95% CI, 77.71—92.79%; p = 0.773), which suggests that the drugs are therapeutically equivalent. In the second phase of the study, the efficiency of therapy remained high; there were no differences in Groups AA/MM, AA/AM and MM/MA. In both phases, the safety profile of the drugs was comparable; the immunogenicity of treatment remained low. The findings suggest that the brand-name MabThera® and its biosimilar drug Acellbia® are equivalent. Switching from the biosimilar drug to the brand-name one and vice versa has no negative impact on treatment outcomes.

The paper provides guidelines for the use of tumor necrosis factor- α (TNF- α ) inhibitors in the treatment of patients with axial spondyloarthritis  (axSpA), including ankylosing spondylitis. It gives data on the efficacy of TNF- α inhibitors in patients with non-radiographic axSpA. By using international and Russian guidelines, the authors lay down indications for this therapy and criteria for evaluation of its efficiency and safety.

The paper provides guidelines for the use of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) inhibitors in the treatment of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), including ankylosing spondylitis. It gives data on the efficacy of TNF-α inhibitors in patients with non-radiographic axSpA. By using international and Russian guidelines, the authors lay down indications for this therapy and criteria for evaluation of its efficiency and safety.

The article considers the results of an international multicenter randomized clinical trial of the efficacy and safety of the brand-name drug rituximab (MabThera), a monoclonal antibody against CD20 antigen of B cells, and its biosimi-lar drug (Acellbia®) (the BIORA study) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) refractory to therapy with tumor necrosis factor- а inhibitors. Objective: to provide evidence for the therapeutic equivalence of Acellbia® and MabThera® and also to assess their interchangeability. Subjects and methods. The trial enrolled adult patients with active seropositive RA, who were randomized into two groups (1:1): 1) the patients who received Acellbia® 1000 mg intravenously on days 1 and 15; 2) those who had MabThera® in a similar way. When RA activity persisted at 24 weeks, there was re-randomization (1:1) with a partial overlap: Group 1 patients were randomized into group AA (the drug of the second therapy cycle was Acellbia®) or Group AM (that was MabThera®), the similar methodology was followed in Group 2 (Groups MM and MA). Throughout the study, the patients received methotrexate at a stable dose of 7.5—25 mg/week and folic acid at a dose of 5 mg/week. The follow-up lasted 48 weeks. Results and discussion. 24 weeks after treatment initiation, the ACR20 response was observed in 84.1% of the patients in the Acellbia® group (95% CI, 74.75—90.50) and in 87% in the MabThera® group (95% CI, 77.71—92.79%; p = 0.773), which suggests that the drugs are therapeutically equivalent. In the second phase of the study, the efficiency of therapy remained high; there were no differences in Groups AA/MM, AA/AM and MM/MA. In both phases, the safety profile of the drugs was comparable; the immunogenicity of treatment remained low. The findings suggest that the brand-name MabThera® and its biosimilar drug Acellbia® are equivalent. Switching from the biosimilar drug to the brand-name one and vice versa has no negative impact on treatment outcomes.

The paper gives the draft guidelines elaborated by the Expert Spondyloarthritis Diagnosis and Treatment Group by order of the Association of Rheumatologists of Russia. The guidelines include the essentials of how to use nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in axial spondyloarthrititides, including ankylosing spondylitis, contain instructions for how long they should be administered, and describe possible patient management tactics in the most common clinical situations and a preferential algorithm for evaluating the efficiency and safety of treatment.

By the end of the first decade of the 21st century, spondyloarthritis studies have accumulated a certain number of terms that are obsolete, but used by physicians in their everyday speech, on the one hand, and a great variety of different definitions, on the other hand. In January 2014, the first organizational meeting of the Expert Group on Spondyloarthritis, Association of Rheumatologists of Russia, decided that its primary task should be to order the terminology used in this area. The authors primarily collected the terms, which had been already used in medical vocabulary, and then divided them into two categories: obsolete definitions and terms to be finalized and unified. This publication gives guidelines for using the medical terms relevant to spondyloarthritis and separately discusses how to correctly write the term sacroiliitis.

Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness and tolerance of Etanercept (ETN) therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Material and Methods. 188 adult patients with severe and moderate RA (average DAS28 score of 6.26±0.89) subcutaneously received 50 mg/wk ETC during 24 wk along with therapy using disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). The effectiveness was assessed using the EULAR and ACR20/50/70 criteria, dynamics of HAQ, SDAI, CDAI, ESR, and the C-reactive protein level.Results. By the end of the study, low activity of the disease according to EULAR (DAS28 score ≤ 3.2) was achieved in 31.9% of patients; remission (DAS28 score ≤ 2.6) was achieved in 17% of patients. ACR20/50/70 response was achieved in 72.3; 47.8 and 20.2% of patients, respectively. A decrease in the HAQ index by at least 0.25 points was achieved in 67.5% of patients. The overall EULAR response (moderate and good) was observed in 79.3% of patients; SDAI and CDAI remission/low activity was observed in 52.3 and 52.7% of patients, respectively. Some patients achieved clinical response only by the 25th week of treatment. The originally moderate RA activity and administration of methotrexate are the factors determining higher ETN effectivity in RA patients. The general tolerance of ETN was satisfactory; no uncommon adverse effects were observed.Conclusions. Analysis of the results of ETN therapy for 6 months attests to high effectiveness of this drug. Its advantages include the rapid clinical effect in most patients and good tolerance. ETN can be recommended for treatment of patients with moderate and severe RA when the conventional DMARDs therapy turns out to be insufficiently effective.

Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of Rceclofenac (200mg/day) versus Diclofenac (100mg/day) therapy during three month in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods 200 outpatients (each group consists of 100 patients) with knee OA (mean age 62,6±7,1), with Kelgren and Lawrence radiograhic grade II-III, pain >40mm at a 100mm visual analog scale (VAS) were studied. WOMAC and EQ-5D questionnairies, and “stand up and go” test were served as criteria of treatment efficacy. Results There was no difference between groups regarding baseline characteristics. The significant decrease of pain and joint function improvement was observed in both groups after the first month of each treatment. This was maintained during the whole period of the follow-up. Significant decrease in stiffness was observed after one month of Aceclofenac and after two months of Diclofenac treatments. Significant improvement of general health and EQ-5D questionnaire results as well as decreased “stand up and go” test accomplishment time were observed in both groups after one month of treatment. After the first month significant “improvement” was observed in 86.3% in Aceclofenac patients and in 66% patients from Diclofenac group and after three month of treatment, in 95.8% and 76.2% patients, respectively (p<0.05). Therapy tolerance was satisfactory. Adverse effects were noted in 3% of Aceclofenac treated OA patients and in 12% subjects treated with Diclofenac. Conclusions Our results show that both drugs were effective in the treatment of OA. Rceclofenac is capable of decreasing pain faster than Diclofenac. In addition Rceclofenac use is associated with a decreased risk of gastroenterological side effects. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

Results of treatment of 76 pts with knee osteoarthritis with native drug Adgelon (glycoprotein possessing biological activity at super low doses) are presented. WOMAC index, Lequesne functional index and SF-36 questionnaire show analgesic effect and quality of life improvement after 6 intra-articular adgelon injections during 3 weeks. Subsequent follow up for 2 months revealed aftereffect of the drug.