Search

Objectives: To develop and replicate, using data-driven methods, a novel classification system in Takayasu's arteritis based on distribution of arterial lesions., Methods: Patients were included from four international cohorts at major academic centres: India (Christian Medical College Vellore); North America (National Institutes of Health, Vasculitis Clinical Research Consortium and Cleveland Clinic Foundation). All patients underwent whole-body angiography of the aorta and branch vessels, with categorization of arterial damage (stenosis, occlusion or aneurysm) in 13 territories. K-means cluster analysis was performed to identify subgroups of patients based on pattern of angiographic involvement. Cluster groups were identified in the Indian cohort and independently replicated in the North American cohorts., Results: A total of 806 patients with Takayasu's arteritis from India (n = 581) and North America (n = 225) were included. Three distinct clusters defined by arterial damage were identified in the Indian cohort and replicated in each of the North American cohorts. Patients in cluster one had significantly more disease in the abdominal aorta, renal and mesenteric arteries (P < 0.01). Patients in cluster two had significantly more bilateral disease in the carotid and subclavian arteries (P < 0.01). Compared with clusters one and two, patients in cluster three had asymmetric disease with fewer involved territories (P < 0.01). Demographics, clinical symptoms and clinical outcomes differed by cluster., Conclusion: This large study in Takayasu's arteritis identified and replicated three novel subsets of patients based on patterns of arterial damage. Angiographic-based disease classification requires validation by demonstrating potential aetiological or prognostic implications., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology 2019. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.)

Objective: The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly, the American Rheumatism Association) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticized for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for RA., Methods: A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in 3 phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated inflammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/or erosive disease--this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct "rheumatoid arthritis.", Results: In the new criteria set, classification as "definite RA" is based on the confirmed presence of synovitis in at least 1 joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis that better explains the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in 4 domains: number and site of involved joints (score range 0-5), serologic abnormality (score range 0-3), elevated acute-phase response (score range 0-1), and symptom duration (2 levels; range 0-1)., Conclusion: This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimize the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct "rheumatoid arthritis."

Objective: The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly the American Rheumatism Association) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticised for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for RA., Methods: A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in three phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated inflammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/or erosive disease--this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct 'RA'., Results: In the new criteria set, classification as 'definite RA' is based on the confirmed presence of synovitis in at least one joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis better explaining the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in four domains: number and site of involved joints (range 0-5), serological abnormality (range 0-3), elevated acute-phase response (range 0-1) and symptom duration (two levels; range 0-1)., Conclusion: This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimise the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct 'RA'.

Objective: The American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism have developed new classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of Phase 2 of the development process was to achieve expert consensus on the clinical and laboratory variables that should contribute to the final criteria set., Methods: Twenty-four expert RA clinicians (12 from Europe and 12 from North America) participated in Phase 2. A consensus-based decision analysis approach was used to identify factors (and their relative weights) that influence the probability of "developing RA," complemented by data from the Phase 1 study. Patient case scenarios were used to identify and reach consensus on factors important in determining the probability of RA development. Decision analytic software was used to derive the relative weights for each of the factors and their categories, using choice-based conjoint analysis., Results: The expert panel agreed that the new classification criteria should be applied to individuals with undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis in whom at least 1 joint is deemed by an expert assessor to be swollen, indicating definite synovitis. In this clinical setting, they identified 4 additional criteria as being important: number of joints involved and site of involvement, serologic abnormality, acute-phase response, and duration of symptoms in the involved joints. These criteria were consistent with those identified in the Phase 1 data-driven approach., Conclusion: The consensus-based, decision analysis approach used in Phase 2 complemented the Phase 1 efforts. The 4 criteria and their relative weights form the basis of the final criteria set.