4.7 Article

Improving outcome prediction of systemic sclerosis from isolated Raynaud's phenomenon: role of autoantibodies and nail-fold capillaroscopy

期刊

RHEUMATOLOGY
卷 49, 期 4, 页码 797-805

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kep447

关键词

Capillaroscopy; Raynaud's phenomenon; Systemic sclerosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. A simple weighted prognostic algorithm, based on capillaroscopy and autoantibodies, is developed to classify patients at different risk of transition from isolated RP to SSc within 5 years from the screening visit. Methods. Two hundred and eighty-eight of 768 patients with isolated RP who underwent capillaroscopy were recruited. The prognostic contributions of capillaroscopic findings (giant loops, haemorrhages and the number of capillaries) and SSc-associated autoantibodies (ACAs, anti-topo I and ANAs) were assessed in a semi-parametric regression models suitable for competing risks. A prognostic index was built by a bagging technique. A structured tree approach was used to extract simple classificatory rules that can be directly interpreted. Results. Thirty-four transitions from isolated RP to SSc and 42 to other CTDs were observed. All of the chosen variables had a substantial prognostic impact. A complex non-linear prognostic pattern was observed for capillaries, with the risk of developing SSc increasing as the number of loops decreased. The presence of ANAs had a strong impact on prognosis [ hazard ratio (HR) = 9.70], which was increased by the presence of ACA (HR = 3.94; P< 0.001). A weighted prognostic classification for the development of SSc was constructed using capillary number, giant loops and ANAs. The prognostic discrimination was satisfactory (Harrell's C-index = 0.86). Conclusion. Our prognostic model is based on easy-to-obtain features (i.e. the number of capillaries, giant loops and ANAs) and could be used to facilitate clinical decision making in the screening phase, and may also have important implications for stratifying patients into risk groups for future clinical assessment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据