ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Home
  • Meetings Archive
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting
    • 2017-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • Meeting Resource Center

Abstract Number: 2111

Diagnostic Performance of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Classification Criteria for Rheumatoid Arthritis: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Garifallia Sakellariou1, Carlo Alberto Scirè2, Roberto Caporali1 and Carlomaurizio Montecucco1, 1Division of Rheumatology, University of Pavia School of Medicine, IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Foundation, Pavia, Italy, 2Italian Society for Rheumatology, Milan, Italy

Meeting: 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Classification criteria and rheumatoid arthritis (RA)

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Session Title: Rheumatoid Arthritis - Clinical Aspects III: Infections/Risk Factors for Incident Rheumatoid Arthritis/Metrology/Classification/Biomarkers/Predictors of Rheumatolid Arthritis Activity & Severity

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose: in 2010 ACR and EULAR proposed new classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This new set of criteria has been tested in several external populations. The aim of the present study was to summarize the available evidence performing a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of their diagnostic accuracy.

Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and screened the abstracts of the ACR and EULAR congresses from 2010 to 2012. The inclusion criteria were: 1) population of patients with recent onset arthritis, at least one swollen joint, no alternative diagnosis; 2) The ACR/EULAR 2010 criteria (cut-off of 6) as index test; 3) The use of methotrexate (MTX) or disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) as reference standard; 4) Diagnostic accuracy, case control, prospective or retrospective cohort studies; 5) Sufficient data to build a 2×2 table of diagnostic accuracy. Sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) were calculated for each study, data were pooled using a hierarchical summary receiving operator characteristic curve (HSROC) with confidence and prediction intervals. Three separate meta-analysis were performed, considering MTX, DMARDs or their combination as reference standard. To test the robustness of the results, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was calculated and an exploratory meta-regression was performed for the analysis of MTX+DMARDs, considering as confounders symptom duration, rheumatoid factor, anti cyclic citrullinated petide antibodies and the timing of assessment of the reference standard. The risk of bias of the included studies was evaluated using the modified version of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) proposed by the Cochrane collaboration.

Results: a total of 1,257 references were retrieved, after screening title and abstract 4 full papers were included, together with 6 abstracts from the ACR and EULAR congresses. Using MTX as reference standard, the first meta-analysis showed: Se (95% confidence interval, CI) was 0.73 (0.64,0.80), Sp was 0.74 (0.68,0.79), positive likelihood ratio (LR+) (95% CI) was 2.85 (2.53,3.22), negative LR (LR-) 0.35 (0.27,0.45), DOR 8.03 (6.4,10.09). Using DMARDs as reference standard, Se was 0.80 (0.74,0.85), Sp was 0.61 (0.56,0.67), LR+ 2.11 (1.92,2.32), LR- 0.31 (0.25,0.38), DOR 6.74 (5.49,8.28). Using the combination of MTX and DMARDs as reference standard, Se was 0.76 (0.71,0.81), Sp was 0.69 (0.61,0.75), LR+ 2.48 (2.08,2.95), LR- 0.33 (0.29,0.38), OR 7.38 (6.33,8.62). Meta-regression demonstrated no influence of the possible confounders on the results. The risk of bias was low or unclear for most of the studies.

Conclusion: the new classification criteria have a good sensitivity, while specificity is lower. The development of an optimal diagnostic tool for RA is limited by the absence of a real reference standard. In fact, also the decision to start MTX or DMARDs depends on the rheumatologist and the setting. However, these results confirm the mainly classificative and not diagnostic role of the criteria.


Disclosure:

G. Sakellariou,
None;

C. A. Scirè,
None;

R. Caporali,
None;

C. Montecucco,
None.

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/diagnostic-performance-of-the-2010-american-college-of-rheumatologyeuropean-league-against-rheumatism-classification-criteria-for-rheumatoid-arthritis-systematic-literature-review-and-meta-anal/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

ACR Pediatric Rheumatology Symposium 2020

© COPYRIGHT 2023 AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RHEUMATOLOGY

Wiley

  • Home
  • Meetings Archive
  • Advanced Search
  • Meeting Resource Center
  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences