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: 656

What Is the Level of Agreement between Local and Central Readers in the Detection of Active and Structural MRI Lesions Typical of Axial Spondyloarthritis? Data from the Assessments in Spondyloarthritis Classification Cohort Study

Walter P. Maksymowych1,2, Xenofon Baraliakos3, Robert G. Lambert4, Ulrich Weber5, Joachim Sieper6, Stephanie Wichuk1, Denis Poddubnyy7, Mikkel Østergaard8, Joel Paschke2, Susanne J Pedersen8 and Pedro Machado9, 1Medicine, Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 2CaRE Arthritis, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 3Rheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet Herne, Herne, Germany, 4Radiology, Radiology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 5University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark, 6Charité Universitätsmeidzin Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 7Rheumatology, Charité Universitätsmeidzin Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 8COPECARE University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark, 9University College London, London, United Kingdom

Meeting: 2018 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: classification criteria and spondylarthritis, MRI

  • 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, October 21, 2018

Title: Spondyloarthritis Including Psoriatic Arthritis – Clinical Poster I: Imaging, Clinical Studies, and Treatment

Session Type: ACR Poster Session A

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

Background/Purpose:

There has been no central reader evaluation of MRI scans from the ASAS Classification Cohort (ASAS-CC)1 to compare detection of lesions between central and ASAS-CC local site readers. Local readers reported active MRI lesions typical of axSpA in the SIJ of 61.6% and 2.2% of patients diagnosed with axSpA and non-axSpA back pain, respectively. Structural lesions were recorded but not reported. We aimed to compare the frequencies of active and structural lesions from the ASAS-CC according to diagnostic category and agreement for their detection between ASAS-CC local site readers and central readers from the ASAS-MRI group.


Methods:

MRI lesions were recorded in an eCRF that included wording of lesions defining active and structural lesions typical of axSpA that was exactly the same as in the original ASAS-CC eCRF permitting comparisons between central and local site readers. In addition, lesions that met the criteria for an ASAS positive MRI were recorded by central readers. MRI images were available from 276 of the 495 cases who had MRI performed in the ASAS-CC and also had a local rheumatologist expert opinion diagnosis. Image quality was considered sufficient to record global data by 7 central readers in all cases. Lesion frequencies were assessed descriptively according to majority agreement (≥4/7) of central reader data and also any 2 central readers. Agreement for detection of MRI lesions was compared using the kappa coefficient.


Results:

Significant differences in lesion frequencies were observed according to diagnostic category (Table 1). However, the frequency of active lesions reported by local readers (61%)was greater than for central readers (43.2%). Structural lesions were also more frequently reported by local readers (42.1%) compared to central readers (34.7%) but less so than active lesions. Agreement for detection of active lesions was good but poor for structural lesions (Table 2).


Conclusion:

Local readers may have overestimated the presence of MRI lesions in the ASAS-CC, particularly active lesions. Agreement for detection of structural lesions was limited. The impact on diagnosis by the local rheumatologist cannot be deduced.

1. Rudwaleit et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68: 777-831.

 

Table 1. Central MRI reader assessment according to diagnostic ascertainment of local physician in the ASAS classification study for all 276 cases with MRI scans of SIJ and baseline local clinical and imaging assessment.

 

Reader

MRI Lesion Type

Local Rheumatologist Diagnosis

 

P value

AxSpA

(n=199)

Not AxSpA

(n=77)

ACTIVE LESIONS

Local

Active lesions typical of axSpA

114 (61.0%)†

 

3 (4.2%)†

 

<0.0001

Central

(≥4/7 agreement)

Active lesions typical of axSpA

86 (43.2%)

3 (3.9%)

<0.0001

Central

(≥4/7 agreement)

ASAS MRI positive

79 (39.7%)

2 (2.6%)

<0.0001

Central

(any 2 readers)

Active lesions typical of axSpA

96(48.2%)

7 (9.1%)

<0.0001

Central

(any 2 readers)

ASAS MRI positive

92 (46.2%)

6 (7.8%)

<0.0001

STRUCTURAL LESIONS

Local

Structural lesions typical of axSpA

77 (42.1%)#

6 (8.5%)#

<0.0001

Central

(≥4/7 agreement)

Structural lesions typical of axSpA

69 (34.7%)

6 (7.8%)

<0.0001

Central

(any 2 readers)

Structural lesions typical of axSpA

94 (47.2%)

10 (13%)

<0.0001

 

† Total with clinical and MRI data = 258

# Total with clinical and MRI data = 254

 

Table 2. Agreement between central and local readers for active and structural lesions typical for axSpA.

 

Local Reader

 

 

Central Readers

 

Active lesion

(any 2 readers)

Active Lesion

(≥4 readers)

 

Yes

No

Yes

No

Active lesion

Yes

85

32

78

39

No

14

127

8

133

Kappa (95% CI)

0.64 (0.54-0.73)

0.62 (0.53-0.72)

Structural lesion

Yes

58

25

43

40

No

41

130

27

144

Kappa (95% CI)

0.44 (0.32 to 0.55)

0.38 (0.25 to 0.50)

 


Disclosure: W. P. Maksymowych, CaRE rthritis, 9; X. Baraliakos, None; R. G. Lambert, None; U. Weber, None; J. Sieper, None; S. Wichuk, None; D. Poddubnyy, None; M. Østergaard, None; J. Paschke, None; S. J. Pedersen, None; P. Machado, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Maksymowych WP, Baraliakos X, Lambert RG, Weber U, Sieper J, Wichuk S, Poddubnyy D, Østergaard M, Paschke J, Pedersen SJ, Machado P. What Is the Level of Agreement between Local and Central Readers in the Detection of Active and Structural MRI Lesions Typical of Axial Spondyloarthritis? Data from the Assessments in Spondyloarthritis Classification Cohort Study [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018; 70 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/what-is-the-level-of-agreement-between-local-and-central-readers-in-the-detection-of-active-and-structural-mri-lesions-typical-of-axial-spondyloarthritis-data-from-the-assessments-in-spondyloarthriti/. 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 2018 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/what-is-the-level-of-agreement-between-local-and-central-readers-in-the-detection-of-active-and-structural-mri-lesions-typical-of-axial-spondyloarthritis-data-from-the-assessments-in-spondyloarthriti/

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