4.7 Article

Predicting arthritis outcomes-what can be learned from the Leiden Early Arthritis Clinic?

Journal

RHEUMATOLOGY
Volume 50, Issue 1, Pages 93-100

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keq230

Keywords

Radiological damage; Erosions; Early arthritis; Undifferentiated arthritis; Rheumatoid arthritis; Prediction; Outcome; Risk factors; Disease persistency; Remission

Categories

Funding

  1. Dutch Arthritis Foundation
  2. Netherlands Organization for Health Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Methods. A total of 570 UA patients and 676 RA patients included in the Leiden Early Arthritis Clinic cohort were studied for baseline characteristics. The disease outcomes studied were fulfilment of the 1987 ACR-RA criteria and arthritis persistence in UA patients and the rate of radiological joint destruction and achieving sustained DMARD-free remission in RA patients. Results. Predictive factors for fulfilment of the 1987 ACR-RA criteria and for persistent arthritis in UA were largely similar. Risk factors for a severe rate of joint destruction were: older age (P < 0.001); male gender (P < 0.001); longer symptom duration at first visit (P = 0.048), involvement of lower extremities (P < 0.001); BMI (P < 0.001); high acute phase reactants, presence of IgM-RF (P < 0.001); anti-CCP2 antibodies (P < 0.001); anti-modified citrullinated vimentin antibodies (P < 0.001) and HLA-DRB1 shared epitope alleles (P = 0.001). A high BMI was associated with a lower rate of joint destruction but with a higher risk of disease persistence. The proportion of variance in joint destruction explained was 32% Conclusion. Predictors for RA development, previously used to develop a prediction rule in UA patients, are largely similar to predictors for arthritis persistency. Only part of the joint destruction level in RA is explained by the currently known risk factors. New factors need to be identified in order to guide pharmaceutical intervention at the level of individual RA patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available