| Literature DB >> 20731827 |
Sylvie Seeuws1, Peggy Jacques, Jens Van Praet, Michael Drennan, Julie Coudenys, Tine Decruy, Ellen Deschepper, Lien Lepescheux, Philippe Pujuguet, Line Oste, Nick Vandeghinste, Reginald Brys, Gust Verbruggen, Dirk Elewaut.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Disease severity in collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) is commonly assessed by clinical scoring of paw swelling and histological examination of joints. Although this is an accurate approach, it is also labour-intensive and the application of less invasive and less time-consuming methods is of great interest. However, it is still unclear which of these methods represents the most discriminating measure of disease activity.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20731827 PMCID: PMC2945063 DOI: 10.1186/ar3119
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arthritis Res Ther ISSN: 1478-6354 Impact factor: 5.156
Figure 1A) Clinical scoring of arthritis symptoms in CIA. From Day 20 after CIA induction, mice received semi-therapeutic treatment with one of four therapies: dexamethasone (n = 23), etanercept (n = 23), zoledronic acid (n = 24) or abatacept (n = 23). Control mice were treated with the vehicle PBS (n = 24). Signs of arthritis were monitored until Day 42. Significant reduced arthritis scores were observed for dexamethasone and etanercept treatment as compared to PBS administration (mixed model analysis, random intercept, P < 0.001 for both dexamethasone and etanercept). Means + SEM of pooled data from two independent experiments are depicted. B) Histological examination of arthritis symptoms in the knee joint of CIA mice. At Day 42 post-immunization, knee joints were isolated and prepared for histological examination. Femorotibial joints were scored for five different parameters. Kruskall-Wallis test: P ≤ 0,001 for all parameters as compared to PBS. *: significant P-values (compared to PBS) according to Mann-Whitney U test and correction using the Holm procedure. Bars represent means + SEM.
Overview of pooled clinical data from two individual experiments
| Incidence of arthritis | Day of onset of arthritis | Day 42 score | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment groups | N | Frequency of arthritis (%) | Median | IQR | Median | IQR | |||
| Vehicle (PBS) | 24 | 87.5 | 29 | 26 to 33 | 3.25 | 3 to 6 | |||
| Dexamethasone | 23 | 4.3 | 0.000* | ND | ND | ND | 0 | 0 to 0 | 0.000* |
| Etanercept | 23 | 69.6 | 0.168* | 33 | 23 to 35 | 0.600 | 0.5 | 0 to 3.5 | 0.004* |
| Zoledronic acid | 24 | 83.3 | 1.000* | 31 | 28 to 32 | 0.212 | 4.5 | 0.625 to 6 | 0.840* |
| Abatacept | 23 | 73.9 | 0.286* | 28 | 25 to 32 | 0.400 | 3 | 0 to 7 | 0.378* |
Depicted are the number of mice (N), frequency of arthritis at Day 42, median day of onset and median arthritis score at Day 42 with their interquartile range (IQR) and P-values (*: significant P-values according to Mann-Whitney U test (MW) and correction using the Holm procedure). Fisher's exact test for frequencies of arthritis: P < 0.001; Kruskall Wallis test for day of onset: P = 0.349; Kruskall Wallis test for Day 42 score: P < 0.001. ND, not determined. PBS, phosphate buffered saline.
Figure 2Visualisation of joint damage by X-ray and micro-CT imaging. A) X-ray pictures of representative paws from naive and treated or untreated CIA mice. B) Three-dimensional reconstructions of micro-CT images of representative calcaneus bones from naive and treated or untreated CIA mice.
Best-fit models for clinical score, and cartilage and bone destruction predicted by different scoring methods
| Dependent variable | Best-fit model | Adjusted R2 | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical score | Composite score of knee histology | 0.464 | < 0.001 |
| Cartilage destruction | Larsen score | 0.525 | < 0.001 |
| Larsen score + micro-CT calcaneus score | 0.667 | < 0.001 | |
| Larsen score + micro-CT calcaneus score + clinical score | 0.704 | < 0.001 | |
| Bone destruction | Micro-CT calcaneus score | 0.605 | < 0.001 |
| Micro-CT calcaneus score + Larsen score | 0.713 | < 0.001 | |
Best-fit models for clinical score, and cartilage and bone destruction in the hind paw as proposed by linear regression analysis with scoring methods and treatment group as independent variables. R2 indicates the squared correlation between the observed values of the dependent variable and the predicted values based on the regression model. Adjusted R2 is a modification of R2 that adjusts for the number of covariates in the regression model.
Best-fit models for clinical score, and cartilage and bone destruction predicted by different serum markers
| Dependent variable | Best-fit model | Adjusted R2 | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical score | MMP-3 | 0.414 | < 0.001 |
| MMP-3 + anti-collagen IgG2a | 0.499 | < 0.001 | |
| Cartilage destruction | MMP-3 | 0.451 | < 0.001 |
| MMP-3 + CTXII | 0.485 | < 0.001 | |
| Bone destruction | MMP-3 | 0.372 | < 0.001 |
| MMP-3 + anti-collagen IgG2a | 0.411 | < 0.001 | |
Best-fit models for clinical score, and cartilage and bone destruction in the knee joint as proposed by linear regression analysis with nine serum markers and treatment group as independent variables. MMP-3, matrix metalloproteinase-3.
Best-fit models for cartilage and bone destruction predicted by both scoring methods and serum markers
| Dependent variable | Best-fit model | Adjusted R2 | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cartilage destruction | Larsen score | 0.530 | < 0.001 |
| Larsen score + micro-CT calcaneus score | 0.664 | < 0.001 | |
| Larsen score + micro-CT calcaneus score + clinical score | 0.700 | < 0.001 | |
| Bone destruction | Micro-CT calcaneus score | 0.602 | < 0.001 |
| Micro-CT calcaneus score + Larsen score | 0.711 | < 0.001 | |
| Micro-CT calcaneus score + Larsen score + COMP | 0.731 | < 0.001 | |
Best-fit models for cartilage and bone destruction in the paw as proposed by linear regression analysis with all scoring methods and serum markers and treatment group as independent variables. COMP, cartilage oligomeric matrix protein.
Figure 3Validation of the proposed regression models. Graphical reproduction of the observed and predicted values for clinical score, cartilage destruction and bone erosions based on a second independent data set. Predicted values were calculated using the linear regression equations obtained from the first experiment. Bars represent means + SEM and r = Spearman's rho representing the correlations between the observed and predicted mean values for each treatment group.