ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Home
  • Meetings Archive
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 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: 2259

Does a Ratingen Score Of ≥ 3 At Disease Onset Define RA In ACR/EULAR 2010 Criteria Negative Patients?

Ruediger Mueller1, Toni Kaegi1, Sarah Haile2 and Johannes von Kempis1, 1Rheumatology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland, 2Clinical Trials Unit, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

Meeting: 2013 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: classification criteria, Early Rheumatoid Arthritis, Joint destruction and rheumatoid arthritis (RA)

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Session Title: Rheumatoid Arthritis-Clinical Aspects III: Outcome Measures, Socioeconomy, Screening, Biomarkers in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose: A EULAR task force has recently selected an evidence and consensus based definition of erosive disease defining rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients who do otherwise not fulfil the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria for classification of the disease. Erosive disease was defined as a minimum of 3 erosions in particular joints.

Methods: For this observational cohort study within the RA cohort of the Swiss registry SCQM, we included patients suffering from early RA or undifferentiated arthritis (disease duration ≤1 year), as defined by the treating rheumatologist, who had not received any previous DMARDs. Baseline diagnosis of RA/UA was reassessed according to the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria at baseline. 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria negative patients were separated into 2 groups depending on whether or not they had more than two erosions in the Ratingen score (Ratingen positive: >2; Ratingen negative <3). The primary outcome measures were the radiological progression. HAQ and DAS 28 were used as secondary outcome measures. The average observation period was 4 years.

Results: A total number of 592 patients was analysed. 240 were not classifiable as RA according to the new criteria at baseline. 133 patients were Ratingen positive and 50 patients were Ratingen negative, 57 patients were not classifiable. Treatment was initiated in all patients with DMARDs, mostly MTX. There were no significant differences in the therapeutic strategies between Ratingen positive and negative patients. No differences in DAS 28 and HAQ scores were found during follow up over 4 years. Average radiographic progression was higher among Ratingen positive as compared to Ratingen negative patients (6.6 erosions/year vs. 0.4, resp., p=0.0004).

Conclusion: The presence of more than 2 erosions in the Ratingen score selected RA patients not fulfilling the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria who will suffer from a radiographic progressive disease. This indicates that the propose definition of erosive disease is, indeed, selecting patients, who will develop definite RA.


Disclosure:

R. Mueller,
None;

T. Kaegi,
None;

S. Haile,
None;

J. von Kempis,
None.

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2013 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/does-a-ratingen-score-of-%e2%89%a5-3-at-disease-onset-define-ra-in-acreular-2010-criteria-negative-patients/

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 »

© COPYRIGHT 2023 AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RHEUMATOLOGY

Wiley

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