How do different drug classes work in treating Axial Spondyloarthritis?

Introduction to Axial Spondyloarthritis

Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is a chronic, inflammatory rheumatic disorder that predominantly affects the spine and sacroiliac joints. Its clinical spectrum includes both patients with overt radiographic changes (commonly referred to as ankylosing spondylitis or radiographic axSpA) and patients with early disease who do not yet show definitive radiographic structural damage (non‐radiographic axSpA).

Definition and Symptoms

Axial spondyloarthritis is characterized by inflammatory back pain that often begins at a young age and is associated with stiffness, particularly in the morning or after periods of inactivity. Other features may include peripheral joint involvement, enthesitis (inflammation at the insertion of ligaments and tendons), dactylitis (sausage digits), and extra-articular manifestations such as uveitis, psoriasis, and inflammatory bowel disease. Because the inflammation initially localizes in the sacroiliac joints before potentially extending to the entire spine, patients may notice chronic low back pain, decreased mobility, and, when advanced, structural changes such as ankylosis of the spine leading to a loss of flexibility.

Epidemiology and Risk Factors

Axial spondyloarthritis generally manifests in young individuals—often before the age of 45—and tends to affect males more frequently, although non-radiographic forms are now seen with a more balanced sex distribution. The strong association with the human leukocyte antigen B27 (HLA-B27) marker is well established, with individuals positive for this antigen being at heightened risk. Epidemiological studies show a prevalence ranging from 0.1% up to 1.4% in various populations. The epidemiology is influenced by genetic predisposition as well as environmental factors such as mechanical stress and possibly microbial triggers that may initiate or exacerbate the inflammatory cascade.

Drug Classes for Axial Spondyloarthritis

Management of axSpA is multifaceted, incorporating both non-pharmacological and pharmacological modalities. Here we focus on the principal drug classes – Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs), Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (DMARDs), and the more recent class of Biologics (and their biosimilars) that have substantially changed the treatment paradigm.

Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs)

NSAIDs are the cornerstone of initial treatment for patients with axSpA. Clinicians prescribe NSAIDs not only for their analgesic effects but also for their potent anti-inflammatory properties. They work by inhibiting cyclooxygenase (COX) enzymes needed for the biosynthesis of prostaglandins, thus reducing inflammation, pain, and stiffness. NSAIDs are often the first-line selection for axSpA patients and are integral in alleviating symptoms to enable patients to participate in physiotherapy and maintain better joint mobility.

Multiple studies have shown that a significant percentage (around 70–80%) of patients experience substantial symptomatic relief with NSAIDs therapy. However, to not only mask the pain but also possibly retard the progression of structural damage in the spine, patients sometimes need continuous long-term treatment. This requirement brings about challenges related to safety and tolerance, as long-term NSAID use is known to potentially cause gastrointestinal, renal, and cardiovascular adverse effects.

Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (DMARDs)

DMARDs are a heterogeneous group of medications used in various inflammatory arthritides to slow or modify the course of joint damage. In axial spondyloarthritis, conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) like methotrexate and sulfasalazine have been extensively studied, although their utility is mostly recognized for peripheral arthritis rather than axial involvement. 

The limited efficacy of csDMARDs in treating the axial symptoms of axSpA is likely due to their inability to adequately penetrate the axial skeleton and influence the underlying inflammatory and osteoproliferative processes. Nonetheless, in patients with pronounced peripheral arthritis manifestations, these drugs provide some benefits and may be combined with other treatments.

Beyond csDMARDs, targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) such as Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (e.g., tofacitinib, upadacitinib, and filgotinib) have emerged as novel therapeutic options. Their role is evolving in axSpA because they modulate intracellular signaling pathways central to inflammation, particularly the JAK/STAT pathway that feeds into cytokine signaling via IL-23/IL-17 axis.

Biologics and Biosimilars

Biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) have revolutionized the treatment of axSpA, especially in patients who have failed NSAIDs or in whom NSAIDs are contraindicated. The first such agents were TNF inhibitors (TNFis) – including adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, certolizumab pegol, and golimumab – which target the pro-inflammatory cytokine tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α). TNFis have dramatic effects on reducing systemic inflammation, improving clinical symptoms, and even modulating radiographic progression if used early and continuously.

More recently, agents targeting interleukin-17 (IL-17) such as secukinumab and ixekizumab have shown promise in clinical trials and are being used as alternative or second-line bDMARDs, especially for patients who do not achieve adequate responses with TNFis. The introduction of biosimilars – agents that are highly similar and have no clinically meaningful differences from the reference TNFis – has also expanded treatment options and improved cost-effectiveness.

In summary, the drug classes used range from symptomatic, anti-inflammatory NSAIDs to csDMARDs and tsDMARDs used mainly for peripheral manifestations, and potent, targeted bDMARDs that address the core inflammatory cytokines involved in axSpA pathology.

Mechanisms of Action

Understanding the mechanisms by which these different drug classes act is critical for selecting appropriate therapeutic strategies and managing potential adverse effects.

NSAIDs Mechanism

NSAIDs primarily exert their effects by inhibiting the cyclooxygenase (COX) enzymes involved in converting arachidonic acid into prostaglandins. Two main isoforms exist: COX-1, which is constitutively expressed and plays a role in protecting the gastric mucosa and regulating platelet function, and COX-2, which is upregulated in inflammation. 

By blocking these enzymes, NSAIDs reduce the overall production of prostaglandins, thereby decreasing inflammation, pain, and fever. Although traditional NSAIDs block both COX isoforms, selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (coxibs) aim to reduce inflammatory prostaglandins while minimizing gastric side effects because they spare COX-1 activity. The effects of NSAIDs in axSpA are not limited only to symptomatic relief; there is evidence that continuous NSAIDs use may retard radiographic progression by inhibiting prostaglandin-mediated new bone formation in the spine, a theory that remains somewhat controversial.

DMARDs Mechanism

Conventional synthetic DMARDs like methotrexate and sulfasalazine work via multiple immunomodulatory mechanisms that reduce the inflammatory cascade in peripheral joints. Methotrexate, for instance, interferes with folate metabolism and leads to the accumulation of adenosine, which has potent anti-inflammatory properties. Sulfasalazine, on the other hand, is thought to be metabolized into sulfapyridine and 5-aminosalicylic acid and to exert immunomodulatory effects that decrease cytokine release. 

However, the mechanisms by which csDMARDs work appear to be more effective in inhibiting synovitis in peripheral joints compared with the axial skeleton. Their pharmacokinetic properties, tissue penetration, and the nature of axial inflammation do not support strong efficacy against spinal inflammatory processes. 

Targeted synthetic DMARDs like JAK inhibitors work by blocking the Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK/STAT) signaling pathway. This pathway transmits signals from several cytokine receptors, including those for interleukin-23 (IL-23) and interleukin-17 (IL-17), which are central to the inflammatory process in axSpA. By inhibiting JAKs, these drugs can reduce multiple downstream inflammatory mediators, leading to decreased immune cell activation and subsequent inflammation.

Biologics Mechanism

Biologic agents, which include TNF inhibitors and IL-17 inhibitors, work by selectively targeting specific pro-inflammatory cytokines. TNF inhibitors bind to TNF-α, neutralizing its biological activity and thus halting the cascade that leads to leukocyte recruitment, synovial inflammation, and subsequent structural damage in the spine and joints. TNF-α is a key cytokine in the pathogenesis of axSpA, and its inhibition has been associated with clinical improvement in pain, function, and inflammation as measured by biomarkers such as C-reactive protein (CRP).

IL-17 inhibitors (e.g., secukinumab) block the activity of interleukin-17A, a cytokine that plays a significant role in both inflammation and the pathological new bone formation process seen in axSpA. There is growing evidence that IL-17 is a driving force not only in joint inflammation but also in the osteoproliferative changes observed in ankylosing spondylitis. By blocking IL-17 signaling, these agents reduce spine inflammation and help improve patient-reported outcomes. 

Biosimilars of these biological agents, while having an almost identical mechanism of action to the original biologics, provide a cost-effective alternative that may allow broader access to effective treatments without compromising quality.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety

A detailed understanding of the clinical trial results, along with safety and tolerability profiles, is essential for individualized drug selection in axSpA.

Clinical Trial Results

Clinical trials have consistently shown that NSAIDs are effective as first-line treatments in managing the symptoms of axSpA. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported that NSAIDs can improve pain, stiffness, and overall patient functional status, in many cases leading to a clinical response in 70–80% of patients. However, in several studies where NSAIDs were evaluated for their ability to prevent radiographic progression, results have been mixed; some trials suggest a potential retardation in new bone formation while others show limited effect.

In contrast, TNF inhibitors have demonstrated more robust efficacy in terms of both symptomatic relief and control of systemic inflammation. Large-scale RCTs and observational studies have shown that TNFis yield significant improvements in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS), with many patients achieving low disease activity or remission. For example, studies such as SELECT-AXIS and other phase 3 trials have documented significant ASAS40 response rates with TNFis. 

IL-17 inhibitors have emerged as another effective class. In comparative clinical studies, IL-17 inhibitors have demonstrated similar efficacy to TNFis in reducing clinical signs, symptoms, and MRI-documented inflammation. They are also effective even in patients with an inadequate response to TNF inhibitors. 

Furthermore, targeted synthetic DMARDs like JAK inhibitors are now being assessed in phase II and phase III trials for axSpA with promising early signals of efficacy similar to that observed in rheumatoid arthritis and other inflammatory conditions.

Side Effects and Safety Profiles

While efficacy is paramount, safety profiles differ notably across these drug classes. NSAIDs, though effective, are accompanied by a relatively predictable risk of gastrointestinal complications (such as gastritis, ulcers, and bleeding), as well as potential renal impairment and cardiovascular risks, particularly with long-term use or in older patient populations. Patients’ baseline risk factors, including age and comorbidities, must be taken into consideration when prescribing NSAIDs, and in many cases, gastroprotective strategies may be warranted.

Conventional DMARDs generally have a long-known safety profile that includes potential liver toxicity (as seen with methotrexate), gastrointestinal upset, and hematologic abnormalities. However, their limited role in treating axial symptoms means that for axSpA these risks are weighed against often modest benefits in the axial skeleton.

Biologics, including TNF inhibitors and IL-17 inhibitors, have been extensively studied in terms of safety. TNF inhibitors are associated with an increased risk of infections, particularly tuberculosis reactivation, and may also have a rare risk of demyelinating diseases and congestive heart failure. Regular monitoring for adverse effects is therefore necessary. IL-17 inhibitors can cause mucocutaneous candidiasis and potential exacerbation of inflammatory bowel disease in susceptible individuals; however, the overall safety profile appears favorable when compared with TNFis, with rapid onset of action and sustained effectiveness over long-term treatment.

Biosimilars offer comparable safety and efficacy to their reference products but are subject to stringent regulatory oversight to ensure quality and equivalence. Their cost-effectiveness and broader patient access have been a positive development in the management of axSpA.

Future Directions and Research

Ongoing research continues to refine and expand treatment options for axSpA. This includes emerging therapies as well as innovative clinical trial designs intended to optimize therapeutic outcomes and minimize adverse effects.

Emerging Therapies

Among the most promising emerging therapies are the next-generation biologics targeting alternative inflammatory pathways such as the IL-23/IL-17 axis. As our understanding of the molecular basis of new bone formation evolves, researchers are investigating agents that directly counter osteoproliferative signals. Some emerging molecules under investigation include dual inhibitors of IL-17A and IL-17F, as well as agents targeting granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). Additionally, small molecules such as JAK inhibitors which have already shown promise in rheumatoid arthritis are now being evaluated in axial spondyloarthritis, and early phase clinical trials have suggested that they may not only reduce inflammation but potentially also have an effect on structural progression.

There is also growing interest in combination therapies. Some research points towards the possibility of using NSAIDs in combination with biologics to achieve synergistic effects, especially in early disease where reducing both inflammation and new bone formation is critical. Alternative treatment strategies are also being subject to investigation with an emphasis on treat-to-target protocols and personalized medicine, which can optimize therapy based on specific patient profiles and biomarker responses.

Ongoing Clinical Trials

Numerous RCTs are currently underway around the world to test the efficacy of emerging biologics, targeted synthetic DMARDs, and combination regimens in axSpA. These trials are designed to not only assess clinical endpoints such as ASAS response criteria and changes in BASDAI/ASDAS scores but also radiographic progression evaluated over extended follow-up periods using scores like the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score (mSASSS). With improvements in imaging techniques such as MRI, future studies are likely to offer more sensitive measurements of inflammatory activity and structural damage, helping to refine our understanding of drug effects over time.

Furthermore, there is an increasing focus on long-term safety data from post-marketing surveillance studies and registries to better understand the real-world risk profile of these medications. Comparative effectiveness research employing network meta-analyses and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) is also being pursued to fill the gap left by the paucity of head-to-head trials. Such efforts are expected to drive informed treatment choices and optimal resource allocation in healthcare settings.

Conclusion

In summary, the treatment of axial spondyloarthritis involves a multifaceted pharmacological approach that ranges from the symptomatic relief provided by NSAIDs, through the limited yet important role of conventional DMARDs (primarily for peripheral manifestations), to the potent, targeted actions of biologics and their biosimilars. 

NSAIDs serve as the bedrock of early treatment by inhibiting cyclooxygenase enzymes and reducing prostaglandin production to control pain and inflammation, with a theoretical benefit on new bone formation if used continuously. However, their long-term use is tempered by safety concerns such as gastrointestinal and renal side effects. 

Conventional synthetic DMARDs, though widely used in rheumatoid arthritis and peripheral arthritis manifestations, have less impact in axial disease due mainly to pharmacokinetic and tissue penetration issues. Targeted synthetic DMARDs like JAK inhibitors are emerging, with their mechanism involving disruption of critical cytokine signaling pathways that drive inflammation in axSpA.

Biologic therapies, notably TNF inhibitors and IL-17 inhibitors, have reshaped the management of axSpA through highly targeted actions that block pro-inflammatory cytokines. These agents have demonstrated superior clinical efficacy, improved patient-reported outcomes, and, in some studies, a potential to slow structural progression when initiated early. Their safety profiles, while generally acceptable, require careful patient selection and monitoring due to risks of infections and other immunologic events. Biosimilars add to the treatment armamentarium by offering comparable efficacy and safety at reduced costs, thereby potentially broadening access to therapy.

Comparative clinical trial data consistently support the effectiveness of biologics over NSAIDs in patients with moderate-to-severe disease activity who fail NSAID therapy. Moreover, ongoing research—encompassing emerging therapies such as dual IL-17 inhibitors, JAK inhibitors, and innovative combination regimens—continues to refine treatment paradigms and improve long-term outcomes for patients. Future clinical trials, enhanced imaging techniques, and real-world safety evaluations will be essential in achieving a more personalized medicine approach and a treat-to-target strategy that optimizes both symptomatic control and structural preservation.

In conclusion, the therapeutic management of axial spondyloarthritis is evolving rapidly. Each drug class works through distinct mechanisms—from enzymatic inhibition by NSAIDs to cytokine blockade by biologics—targeting different aspects of the complex pathophysiology of the disease. This layered approach allows clinicians to tailor treatments based on disease severity, patient risk factors, and treatment response. While NSAIDs remain indispensable as first-line therapy, the advent of targeted biologics and emerging agents is offering hope for improved long-term outcomes and possibly disease modification. Continuous research and comparative analyses will be crucial to further integrate these therapies into personalized treatment algorithms, ultimately enhancing quality of life for patients with axSpA.

Discover Eureka LS: AI Agents Built for Biopharma Efficiency

Stop wasting time on biopharma busywork. Meet Eureka LS - your AI agent squad for drug discovery.

▶ See how 50+ research teams saved 300+ hours/month

From reducing screening time to simplifying Markush drafting, our AI Agents are ready to deliver immediate value. Explore Eureka LS today and unlock powerful capabilities that help you innovate with confidence.