The 2010 American college of rheumatology fibromyalgia survey diagnostic criteria and symptom severity scale is a valid and reliable tool in a French speaking fibromyalgia cohort

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia (FM) is a pain condition with associated symptoms contributing to distress. The Fibromyalgia Survey Diagnostic Criteria and Severity Scale (FSDC) is a patient-administered questionnaire assessing diagnosis and symptom severity. Locations of body pain measured by the Widespread Pain Index (WPI), and the Symptom Severity scale (SS) measuring fatigue, unrefreshing sleep, cognitive and somatic complaints provide a score (0–31), measuring a composite of polysymptomatic distress. The reliability and validity of the translated French version of the FSDC was evaluated. METHODS: The French FSDC was administered twice to 73 FM patients, and was correlated with measures of symptom status including: Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for global severity and pain. Test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity were evaluated. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability was between .600 and .888 for the 25 single items of the FSDC, and .912 for the total FSDC, with all correlations significant (p < 0.0001). There was good internal consistency measured by Cronbach’s alpha (.846 for FSDC assessment 1, and .867 for FSDC assessment 2). Construct validity showed significant correlations between the FSDC and FIQ 0.670, HAQ 0.413, MPQ 0.562, global VAS 0.591, and pain VAS 0.663 (all p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The French FSDC is a valid instrument in French FM patients with reliability and construct validity. It is easily completed, simple to score, and has the potential to become the standard for measurement of polysymptomatic distress in FM

Rheumatoid arthritis specific anti-Sa antibodies target citrullinated vimentin

Antibodies directed to the Sa antigen are highly specific for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and can be detected in approximately 40% of RA sera. The antigen, a doublet of protein bands of about 50 kDa, is present in placenta and in RA synovial tissue. Although it has been stated that the Sa antigen is citrullinated vimentin, experimental proof for this claim has never been published. In this study, we investigated the precise nature of the antigen. Peptide sequences that were obtained from highly purified Sa antigen were unique to vimentin. Recombinant vimentin, however, was not recognized by anti-Sa reference sera. In vivo, vimentin is subjected to various post-translational modifications, including citrullination. Since antibodies to citrullinated proteins are known to be highly specific for RA, we investigated whether Sa is citrullinated and found that Sa indeed is citrullinated vimentin. Anti-Sa antibodies thus belong to the family of anticitrullinated protein/peptide antibodies. The presence of the Sa antigen in RA synovial tissue, and the recent observation that vimentin is citrullinated in dying human macrophages, make citrullinated vimentin an interesting candidate autoantigen in RA and may provide new insights into the potential role of citrullinated synovial antigens and the antibodies directed to them in the pathophysiology of RA

Anti-Sa antibodies and antibodies against cyclic citrullinated peptide are not equivalent as predictors of severe outcomes in patients with recent-onset polyarthritis

The prognostic value of two antibodies targeting citrullinated antigens, anti-Sa and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP), present at inclusion, was evaluated prospectively in a cohort of 165 consecutive patients with recent-onset or early polyarthritis (EPA) followed for up to 30 months. Patients were treated according to current Good Clinical Practice standards. Predefined outcomes were severe arthritis and persistent arthritis. At inclusion, a median of 3 months after disease onset, 133 (81%) patients fulfilled at least four American College of Rheumatology criteria for rheumatoid arthritis and 30 (18%) had erosive changes on radiographs of hands and feet. Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs were used in close to 80% of the patients at 30 months. Joint damage increased linearly over time, whereas disease activity declined markedly and remained low at each follow-up. Autoantibodies were identified in 76 (46%) patients: rheumatoid factor (RF) in 68 (41%), anti-CCP in 53 (33%), and anti-Sa in 46 (28%). All three antibodies were correlated, but anti-Sa antibodies best predicted severity at 18 and 30 months. RF and anti-CCP performed less well. For both outcomes, anti-Sa alone performed better than any combination of antibodies. The presence of any autoantibody identified about 50 to 60% of the patients with poor outcomes. In multivariate analysis, anti-Sa (odds ratio (OR) 8.83), the presence of erosions at inclusion (OR 3.47) and increasing age (OR 1.06/year) were significantly associated with severity, whereas RF and anti-CCP were not significant predictors. Persistent arthritis was present in up to 84% of patients; autoantibodies were specific but poorly sensitive predictors of this outcome. We conclude that assays for antibodies against citrullinated antigens differ in their ability to predict poorer outcomes in patients with EPA. In our EPA cohort treated in accordance with current standards, detection of anti-Sa but not of RF or anti-CCP antibodies, in combination with clinical and radiological variables present at the first encounter, allowed the identification of a subgroup of EPA patients suffering more rapid and more severe joint damage over 30 months

2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: An American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative

Objective The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly, the American Rheumatism Association) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticized for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for RA. Methods A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in 3 phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated inflammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/or erosive disease—this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct “rheumatoid arthritis.” Results In the new criteria set, classification as “definite RA” is based on the confirmed presence of synovitis in at least 1 joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis that better explains the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in 4 domains: number and site of involved joints (score range 0–5), serologic abnormality (score range 0–3), elevated acute-phase response (score range 0–1), and symptom duration (2 levels; range 0–1). Conclusion This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimize the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct “rheumatoid arthritis.”Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78045/1/27584_ftp.pd

Emending the Teacher : From Marcus the "Magician" to Valentinus and Back

akzeptierte Manuskriptversio

The 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: Phase 2 methodological report

Objective The American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism have developed new classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of Phase 2 of the development process was to achieve expert consensus on the clinical and laboratory variables that should contribute to the final criteria set. Methods Twenty-four expert RA clinicians (12 from Europe and 12 from North America) participated in Phase 2. A consensus-based decision analysis approach was used to identify factors (and their relative weights) that influence the probability of “developing RA,” complemented by data from the Phase 1 study. Patient case scenarios were used to identify and reach consensus on factors important in determining the probability of RA development. Decision analytic software was used to derive the relative weights for each of the factors and their categories, using choice-based conjoint analysis. Results The expert panel agreed that the new classification criteria should be applied to individuals with undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis in whom at least 1 joint is deemed by an expert assessor to be swollen, indicating definite synovitis. In this clinical setting, they identified 4 additional criteria as being important: number of joints involved and site of involvement, serologic abnormality, acute-phase response, and duration of symptoms in the involved joints. These criteria were consistent with those identified in the Phase 1 data-driven approach. Conclusion The consensus-based, decision analysis approach used in Phase 2 complemented the Phase 1 efforts. The 4 criteria and their relative weights form the basis of the final criteria set.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78048/1/27580_ftp.pd