4.7 Article

Population-based prevalence and incidence estimates of mixed connective tissue disease from the Manhattan Lupus Surveillance Program

Journal

RHEUMATOLOGY
Volume 62, Issue 8, Pages 2845-2849

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac703

Keywords

MCTD; epidemiology; prevalence; incidence

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Using data from the MLSP, we estimated the prevalence and incidence of MCTD. The variation in estimates using different case definitions highlights the challenges in defining MCTD in epidemiological studies.
Objective: Epidemiological data for MCTD are limited. Leveraging data from the Manhattan Lupus Surveillance Program (MLSP), a racially/ethnically diverse population-based registry of cases with SLE and related diseases including MCTD, we provide estimates of the prevalence and incidence of MCTD. Methods: MLSP cases were identified from rheumatologists, hospitals and population databases using a variety of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes. MCTD was defined as one of the following: fulfilment of our modified Alarcon-Segovia and Kahn criteria, which required a positive RNP antibody and the presence of synovitis, myositis and RP; a diagnosis of MCTD and no other diagnosis of another CTD; and a diagnosis of MCTD regardless of another CTD diagnosis. Results: Overall, 258 (7.7%) cases met a definition of MCTD. Using our modified Alarcon-Segovia and Kahn criteria for MCTD, the age-adjusted prevalence was 1.28 (95% CI 0.72, 2.09) per 100 000. Using our definition of a diagnosis of MCTD and no other diagnosis of another CTD yielded an age-adjusted prevalence and incidence of MCTD of 2.98 (95% CI 2.10, 4.11) per 100 000 and 0.39 (95% CI 0.22, 0.64) per 100 000, respectively. The age-adjusted prevalence and incidence were highest using a diagnosis of MCTD regardless of other CTD diagnoses and were 16.22 (95% CI 14.00, 18.43) per 100 000 and 1.90 (95% CI 1.49, 2.39) per 100 000, respectively. Conclusions: The MLSP provided estimates for the prevalence and incidence of MCTD in a diverse population. The variation in estimates using different case definitions is reflective of the challenge of defining MCTD in epidemiologic studies.

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