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: 498

Should There Be Hierarchical Scoring Applied to Serologic Testing in the 2010 ACR/EULAR Classification Criteria?

Barbara Mascialino1 and Teresa Tarrant 2, 1Thermo Fisher Scientific, Uppsala, Uppsala Lan, Sweden, 2Duke School of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology and Immunology, Durham, NC

Meeting: 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

Keywords: anti-CCP antibodies and RF, classification criteria, meta-analysis, Rheumatoid arthritis (RA)

  • 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 10, 2019

Title: RA – Diagnosis, Manifestations, & Outcomes Poster I: Risk Factors, Predictors, & Prognosis

Session Type: Poster Session (Sunday)

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

Background/Purpose: The 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) are based on a combination of clinical, laboratory, and imaging investigations. Positive serology contributes to the final score when subjects are either positive to CCP or RFIgM; scoring increases based on the strength of an individual test. No more points are awarded to a patient having one versus two serologies positive.

The aim of this study was to model the clinical diagnostic outcomes between the ACR/EULAR full algorithm versus serology alone analyzing different combinations of serological positivity (single versus double positive).

Methods: We simulated a cohort of 1000 RA-suspected individuals and calculated the number of correctly/incorrectly classified subjects using the diagnostic accuracies listed in Table 1; results were compared to the ones generated by the full 2010 ACR/EULAR algorithm.

Results: Compared with the 2010 ACR/EULAR diagnostic criteria (Table 2), serology used in isolation in the current ACR/EULAR definition “CCP or RFIgM” reduces False Positives from 337 to 148 respectively, thereby diminishing the misclassification rate by 50%. Combined positivity to both tests (“CCP and RFIgM”) decreases False Positives by 90%, but False Negatives increase from 39 to 76 (49% increase); overall, misclassification by this methodology drops to 11% from 38% compared to the full ACR/EULAR criteria.

Conclusion: Results show that serology used in isolation and interpreted as “CCP and RFIgM” can reduce misclassifications and may be useful in adding to the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria. Individuals either positive to one test or seronegative should be re-assessed with the other examinations listed within the criteria to reach a final diagnosis.

Diagnostic accuracies -pooled sensitivities, pooled specificities, and 95% Confidence Intervals- from the two Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis used in input to the simulation model.

By simulating a cohort of 1,000 individuals, all tested with CCP and RF and classified with teh 2010 ACR /EULAR Classification Criteria, this table summarises the number of True Positives, False Negatives, False Positives, True Positives, as well as the total number of correctly / incorrectly classified subjects obtained in each case using the diagnostic accuracies listed in Table 1.


Disclosure: B. Mascialino, Thermo Fisher Scientific, 3; T. Tarrant, Thermo Fisher Scientific, 5, 8.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Mascialino B, Tarrant T. Should There Be Hierarchical Scoring Applied to Serologic Testing in the 2010 ACR/EULAR Classification Criteria? [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/should-there-be-hierarchical-scoring-applied-to-serologic-testing-in-the-2010-acr-eular-classification-criteria/. 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 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/should-there-be-hierarchical-scoring-applied-to-serologic-testing-in-the-2010-acr-eular-classification-criteria/

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