ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1496

Do Patients in MDA Report Low Disease Activity Regardless of Which of the MDA Criteria Are Met?

Sarah Yazji1, Philip Helliwell2, Andra Balanescu3, JUAN CANETE4, Emmanuelle Dernis5, Uta Kiltz6, Ying Ying Leung7, Ennio Lubrano8, Ana-Maria Orbai9, PENELOPE PALOMINOS10, Rossana Scrivo11, Josef Smolen12, Sandra Meisalu13, Maarten de Wit14, Laure Gossec15 and Laura Coates16, 1University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom, 3University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila, Bucharest, Romania, 4Rheumatology Department, Hospital Clinic and IDIBAPS, Barcelona, Spain, 5LE MANS general hospital, LE MANS, France, 6Rheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet, Herne, Germany, 7Rheumatology Department, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore, 8Academic Rheumatology Unit, Dipartimento di Medicina e Scienze della Salute ‘‘Vincenzo Tiberio’’, Università degli Studi del Molise, Campobasso, Italy, 9Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Baltimore, MD, 10Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, 11Rheumatology Unit, Department of Clinical Internal, Anesthesiological and Cardiovascular Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy, Roma, Rome, Italy, 12Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria, 13East Tallinn Central Hospital, Tallinn, Estonia, 14Patient research partner, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 15Sorbonne Université, Paris, France, 16Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, Oxford, England, United Kingdom

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2022

Keywords: Outcome measures, Psoriatic arthritis

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Sunday, November 13, 2022

Title: Spondyloarthritis Including PsA – Diagnosis, Manifestations, and Outcomes Poster III

Session Type: Poster Session C

Session Time: 1:00PM-3:00PM

Background/Purpose: The Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) criteria evaluate PsA disease activity and response to treatment and are defined as meeting ≥5 criteria: tender joint count ≤1, swollen joint count ≤1, patient global visual analogue scale (PG VAS) ≤20mm, pain VAS ≤15mm, health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) ≤0.5, enthesitis count ≤1 and psoriasis body surface area ≤3%.

The EMA recently published a qualification letter of support for MDA but asked: Is there evidence showing ‘minimal disease activity’ as measured by the MDA score is also perceived as such by the patient regardless of which of the 5 criteria are met?

Methods: We analysed data from patients in ReFlap (NCT03119805), a cross-sectional international study of adult patients with PsA for >2 years. Patients self-reported remission (REM) or low disease activity (LDA) by answering positively to the questions ‘At this time, is your psoriatic arthritis in remission, if that means you feel your disease is as good as gone?’ and ‘At this time, are you in low disease activity, if this means your disease is in low activity but it’s not as good as gone?’ respectively.

For patients in MDA the frequencies of criteria met were examined. Odds ratios examined whether there is an increase in the odds of a patient not reporting LDA/REM when a criterion is not met. Chi squared tests, Fisher’s exact and Yates’ correction were used to compare patient-reported LDA/REM against MDA with different individual criteria. Specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of MDA were calculated for when each criterion was not met to identify if patients are being over-detected as having low disease activity by the MDA score.

Results: Of the 466 recruited participants, 420 had complete data. Of the 420, 159 patients (37.9%) met MDA and 105 patients (25%) met MDA but not VLDA (i.e. 5-6 criteria). 15 of the patients who met MDA criteria did not self-report LDA/REM (Fig A).

The most common criteria not met within MDA were pain VAS (not met in 42.1% of MDA patients) and PG VAS (not met in 30%.) Odds ratios showed no significant difference in the odds of a patient self-reporting LDA/REM when a criterion is not met (Table 2). The chi square analyses also showed no significant difference between criteria met, however group sizes were small. Fisher’s exact test, more accurate in smaller sample sizes, confirmed the chi squared findings (Table 1).

Specificity was consistently high ( >90%) for MDA score overall and MDA with each criteria missing suggesting the tool did not over-detect patients to be in MDA no matter which criterion was not individually met (Table 2).

The same analyses were performed for when both PG VAS and pain VAS were not met as this was commonest when only 5 criteria were met. No significant differences were found. Specificity remained high (95.2%).

Conclusion: The likelihood of a patient self-reporting LDA/REM and specificity of MDA score were unaffected by which MDA criteria were met. Pain VAS and PG VAS were the hardest criteria to meet in this analysis, but not meeting them was independent of patients reporting LDA/REM. High specificity and PPV identified for MDA are especially relevant to clinical practice where it is important to reliably detect patients with active disease.

Supporting image 1

Figure 1: Frequencies of criteria met/not met for patients in MDA who did not self-report low disease activity/remission (n=15). TJC=tender joint count, SJC=swollen joint count, HAQ=health assessment questionnaire, BSA=body surface area

Supporting image 2

Table 1: Chi square, Fisher’s exact p value and Yates’ correction p value comparing self-reported low disease activity/remission to meeting each criterion for patients who met minimal disease activity (MDA) but not very low disease activity (VLDA)

Supporting image 3

Table 2: Specificity analysis and PPV for MDA criteria and for when each criterion is not met. Odds ratios are the odds of a patient self-reporting LDA/REM when meeting MDA in total, and if each individual criteria is missed. PPV=positive predictive value, CI=confidence interval


Disclosures: S. Yazji, None; P. Helliwell, Eli Lilly, AbbVie, Amgen, Janssen, Novartis; A. Balanescu, AbbVie; J. CANETE, None; E. Dernis, AbbVie/Abbott, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb(BMS), Janssen, Nordic Pharma France, Novartis, UCB; U. Kiltz, AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Fresenius, GSK, Hexal, Novartis, Pfizer, Biocad, Lilly, Grünenthal, Janssen, MSD, Roche, UCB; Y. Leung, AbbVie/Abbott, Janssen, Pfizer, DKSH; E. Lubrano, None; A. Orbai, AbbVie/Abbott, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb(BMS), Celgene, Janssen, UCB; P. PALOMINOS, None; R. Scrivo, None; J. Smolen, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Galapagos-Gilead, Janssen, Merck-Sharp-Dohme, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Samsung, UCB; S. Meisalu, None; M. de Wit, Stiching Tools, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, UCB; L. Gossec, Amgen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz, UCB Pharma, AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKlein (GSK), Celltrion, MSD; L. Coates, AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, Gilead, Galapagos, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Celgene, Biogen, Moonlake, GlaxoSmithKlein (GSK).

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Yazji S, Helliwell P, Balanescu A, CANETE J, Dernis E, Kiltz U, Leung Y, Lubrano E, Orbai A, PALOMINOS P, Scrivo R, Smolen J, Meisalu S, de Wit M, Gossec L, Coates L. Do Patients in MDA Report Low Disease Activity Regardless of Which of the MDA Criteria Are Met? [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2022; 74 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/do-patients-in-mda-report-low-disease-activity-regardless-of-which-of-the-mda-criteria-are-met/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2022

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/do-patients-in-mda-report-low-disease-activity-regardless-of-which-of-the-mda-criteria-are-met/

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 »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology