David Felson1. 1. Clinical Epidemiology Research and Training Unit, Boston University, 715 Albany Street, A203, Boston, MA 02118, USA. dfelson@bu.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Given the inconsistency of remission definitions in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) trials, the goal of this American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism committee was to define remission. METHODS: The committee instructed a working group that a new remission definition, among other requirements, needed to allow for little, if any, active clinical disease and to be defined using the core set of outcome measures for RA trials and that those in remission at one time needed to have a low risk of later worsening function or radiograph progression. Remission was to be defined using trial data for use in trials but needed to anticipate use in a practice setting. RESULTS: The working group started by evaluating the thresholds for core set measures compatible with remission and determined that patient-reported outcomes contributed importantly to the ability of outcome assessment to distinguish more from less effective treatments. The group created a candidate group of remission definitions to test, including Boolean versions and widely used indexes. Testing how well these candidate definitions predicted later good outcomes, the group found that Disease Activity Score 28 thresholds for remission performed worse than Simplified Disease Activity Index/Clinical Disease Activity Index or Boolean versions. Also, persons with low Disease Activity Score 28 occasionally had high joint counts, which were incompatible with remission. The parent committee chose two definitions: one Boolean (patient had to have all of the following: tender joint count, swollen joint count ≤ 1, C reactive protein ≤ 1 mg/dl) and patient global assessment ≤ 1 (on a 0-10 scale) and one Simplified Disease Activity Index ≤ 3.3. CONCLUSION: The American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism has promulgated two new similar definitions of remission for RA trials.
OBJECTIVE: Given the inconsistency of remission definitions in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) trials, the goal of this American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism committee was to define remission. METHODS: The committee instructed a working group that a new remission definition, among other requirements, needed to allow for little, if any, active clinical disease and to be defined using the core set of outcome measures for RA trials and that those in remission at one time needed to have a low risk of later worsening function or radiograph progression. Remission was to be defined using trial data for use in trials but needed to anticipate use in a practice setting. RESULTS: The working group started by evaluating the thresholds for core set measures compatible with remission and determined that patient-reported outcomes contributed importantly to the ability of outcome assessment to distinguish more from less effective treatments. The group created a candidate group of remission definitions to test, including Boolean versions and widely used indexes. Testing how well these candidate definitions predicted later good outcomes, the group found that Disease Activity Score 28 thresholds for remission performed worse than Simplified Disease Activity Index/Clinical Disease Activity Index or Boolean versions. Also, persons with low Disease Activity Score 28 occasionally had high joint counts, which were incompatible with remission. The parent committee chose two definitions: one Boolean (patient had to have all of the following: tender joint count, swollen joint count ≤ 1, C reactive protein ≤ 1 mg/dl) and patient global assessment ≤ 1 (on a 0-10 scale) and one Simplified Disease Activity Index ≤ 3.3. CONCLUSION: The American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism has promulgated two new similar definitions of remission for RA trials.
Authors: M Boers; P Tugwell; D T Felson; P L van Riel; J R Kirwan; J P Edmonds; J S Smolen; N Khaltaev; K D Muirden Journal: J Rheumatol Suppl Date: 1994-09
Authors: D T Felson; J J Anderson; M Boers; C Bombardier; M Chernoff; B Fried; D Furst; C Goldsmith; S Kieszak; R Lightfoot Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 1993-06
Authors: David T Felson; Josef S Smolen; George Wells; Bin Zhang; Lilian H D van Tuyl; Julia Funovits; Daniel Aletaha; Cornelia F Allaart; Joan Bathon; Stefano Bombardieri; Peter Brooks; Andrew Brown; Marco Matucci-Cerinic; Hyon Choi; Bernard Combe; Maarten de Wit; Maxime Dougados; Paul Emery; Daniel Furst; Juan Gomez-Reino; Gillian Hawker; Edward Keystone; Dinesh Khanna; John Kirwan; Tore K Kvien; Robert Landewé; Joachim Listing; Kaleb Michaud; Emilio Martin-Mola; Pamela Montie; Theodore Pincus; Pamela Richards; Jeffrey N Siegel; Lee S Simon; Tuulikki Sokka; Vibeke Strand; Peter Tugwell; Alan Tyndall; Desirée van der Heijde; Suzan Verstappen; Barbara White; Frederick Wolfe; Angela Zink; Maarten Boers Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2011-03
Authors: A K Brown; P G Conaghan; Z Karim; M A Quinn; K Ikeda; C G Peterfy; E Hensor; R J Wakefield; P J O'Connor; P Emery Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2008-10
Authors: Isabel Morales-Ivorra; Javier Narváez; Carmen Gómez-Vaquero; Carmen Moragues; Joan M Nolla; José A Narváez; Manuel Alejandro Marín-López Journal: RMD Open Date: 2022-07
Authors: Philip Conaghan; Stanley Cohen; Gerd Burmester; Eduardo Mysler; Peter Nash; Yoshiya Tanaka; William Rigby; Jayeshkumar Patel; Tim Shaw; Keith A Betts; Pankaj Patel; Jianzhong Liu; Rochelle Sun; Roy Fleischmann Journal: Rheumatol Ther Date: 2021-11-23
Authors: Lynn Austin; Charlotte A Sharp; Sabine N van der Veer; Matthew Machin; John Humphreys; Peter Mellor; Jill McCarthy; John Ainsworth; Caroline Sanders; William G Dixon Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 7.580