ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meeting Abstracts
    • All Meetings
    • PRSYM 2026
    • ACR Convergence 2025
    • Download Abstract Supplements
  • Keyword Index
  • My Favorites
    • View & print my favorites
  • Search

Home » Meeting Abstracts » ACR/ARP Annual Meeting 2019

Abstract Number: 2458

Predictors of Structural Progression in Psoriatic Arthritis: Clinical versus Systemic Inflammation

Carina Borst1, Farideh Alasti 2 and Daniel Aletaha 3, 1Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria, 2Medical University of Vienna, Department of Medicine III, Division of Rheumatology, Vienna, Austria, 3Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Share on X (Twitter) Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on Email
Print

Meeting: ACR/ARP Annual Meeting 2019

Keywords: C-reactive protein (CRP), joint destruction and progression, joint inflammation, Psoriatic arthritis

Session Information

Date: Tuesday, November 12, 2019

Title: Spondyloarthritis Including Psoriatic Arthritis – Clinical Poster III: Psoriatic Arthritis, Clinical Features

Session Type: Poster Session (Tuesday)

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) belongs to the group of the spondylarthropathies. It is associated with psoriasis and typically seronegative for autoantibodies. PsA disease activity can be measured using the Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) score which is based on both clinical (e.g., swollen joint count, SJC) and systemic (e.g., C-reactive protein, CRP) markers of inflammation. However, the impact of clinical and systemic inflammation on structural progression is unclear. In this analysis, our aim was to determine the contribution of clinical and systemic inflammation to structural progression of patients with PsA.

Methods: In a secondary data analysis, we analyzed patient data from the IMPACT 2 trial of infliximab (INF) vs. placebo (PLC) in patients with established PsA (disease duration in years: INF: 7.5±7.8, PLC: 8.4±7.2). Concomitant methotrexate treatment was allowed but not mandatory in both treatment arms. We obtained modified Sharp-van-der-Heijde scores from X-rays performed at baseline and after one year to compute radiographic progression. We further extracted levels of SJC and CRP and calculated time-averaged SJC (taSJC) and CRP (taCRP) values to reflect the clinical and systemic inflammation, respectively. In a multivariable binary logistic regression model, we assessed the impact of taSJC, taCRP, and their interaction, on structural progression. Next, we divided patients into different subgroups depending on their taSJC and taCRP levels into active (+) or inactive (-). We tested whether radiographic progression was different in taSJC+ vs. taSJC- and taCRP+ vs. taCRP- using the Mann-Whitney-U-test.

Results: We analyzed available data of 151 patients (76 PLC, 75 INF). Patients in the INF arm showed no radiographic progression (-1.16±3.96), while patients in the PLC arm showed little progression (0.74±2.98). We therefore focused on the 76 PLC patients. Despite the small overall progression, taSJC, taCRP, and their interaction were associated with radiographic progression (OR for taSJC: 1.24, CI 95 %: 1.04-1.47, p=0.016; OR for taCRP: 6.08, CI 95%: 1.12-33.03, p=0.036; interaction term: p=0.097). Radiographic progression was higher in taSJC+ patients compared to taSJC- patients (1.05±3.21 and 0.56±2.30, respectively; p=0.016), as well as numerically higher without statistical significance in taCRP+ vs. taCRP- patients (1.14±3.23 and 0.05±2.37, respectively; p=0.532). Also, despite the limited power of subgroup analyses, there was evidence that SJC activity plays a role in CRP- patients (p=0.076), whereas CRP activity seems to be of less importance SJC- patients (p=0.643).

Conclusion: In patients with PsA, both clinical and systemic inflammation have impact on structural progression; in patients without systemic inflammation, clinical joint activity may still be considered as a risk factor for progression.


Disclosure: C. Borst, None; F. Alasti, None; D. Aletaha, AbbVie, 2, 5, 8, AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche, 5, AbbVie, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and Roche., 2, Amgen, 5, 8, Bristol-Myers Squibb, 8, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and UCB, 8, Celgene, 5, 8, Janssen, 5, Lilly, 5, 8, Medac, 5, 8, Merck, 5, 8, Merck Sharp and Dohme, 2, 8, Novartis, 2, 5, 8, Pfizer, 5, 8, Roche, 2, 5, 8, Sandoz, 5, 8, Sanofi/Genzyme, 5, 8, UCB, 8.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Borst C, Alasti F, Aletaha D. Predictors of Structural Progression in Psoriatic Arthritis: Clinical versus Systemic Inflammation [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/predictors-of-structural-progression-in-psoriatic-arthritis-clinical-versus-systemic-inflammation/. Accessed .

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/predictors-of-structural-progression-in-psoriatic-arthritis-clinical-versus-systemic-inflammation/

My Favorites

Save and print abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract (must have cookies enabled in browser). See saved favorites.

Abstract Policies

  • ACR Convergence Abstract Embargo Policies
  • ACR Convergence Abstract Permissions & Reprints
  • PRSYM Abstract Policies

ACR Convergence. Where Rheumatology Meets

ACR Convergence 2026

Join us November 6-11 in Orlando, Florida.
See Registration Information

  • Contact ACR
  • Privacy Policy
  • ACR Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2026 American College of Rheumatology