H J M Kerkhof1, S M A Bierma-Zeinstra2, N K Arden3, S Metrustry4, M Castano-Betancourt1, D J Hart4, A Hofman5, F Rivadeneira6, E H G Oei7, Tim D Spector4, A G Uitterlinden6, A C J W Janssens5, A M Valdes8, J B J van Meurs1. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands The Netherlands Genomics Initiative-sponsored Netherlands Consortium for Healthy Aging, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 2. Department of General Practice, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands Department of Orthopaedics, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 3. NIHR musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 4. Department of Twin Research, King's College London, London, UK. 5. Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands The Netherlands Genomics Initiative-sponsored Netherlands Consortium for Healthy Aging, Rotterdam, The Netherlands Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Radiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 8. Department of Twin Research, King's College London, London, UK Department of Academic Rheumatology, University of Nottingham, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a prognostic model for incident knee osteoarthritis (KOA) in a general population and determine the value of different risk factor groups to prediction. METHODS: The prognostic model was developed in 2628 individuals from the Rotterdam Study-I (RS-I). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for questionnaire/easily obtainable variables, imaging variables, genetic and biochemical markers. The extended multivariate model was tested on discrimination (receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve (AUC)) in two other population-based cohorts: Rotterdam Study-II and Chingford Study. RESULTS: In RS-I, there was moderate predictive value for incident KOA based on the genetic score alone in subjects aged <65 years (AUC 0.65), while it was only 0.55 for subjects aged ≥65 years. The AUC for gender, age and body mass index (BMI) in prediction for KOA was 0.66. Addition of the questionnaire variables, genetic score or biochemical marker urinary C-terminal cross-linked telopeptide of type II collagen to the model did not change the AUC. However, when adding the knee baseline KL score to the model the AUC increased to 0.79. Applying external validation, similar results were observed in the Rotterdam Study-II and the Chingford Study. CONCLUSIONS: Easy obtainable 'Questionnaire' variables, genetic markers, OA at other joint sites and biochemical markers add only modestly to the prediction of KOA incidence using age, gender and BMI in an elderly population. Doubtful minor radiographic degenerative features in the knee, however, are a very strong predictor of future KOA. This is an important finding, as many radiologists do not report minor degenerative changes in the knee. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a prognostic model for incident knee osteoarthritis (KOA) in a general population and determine the value of different risk factor groups to prediction. METHODS: The prognostic model was developed in 2628 individuals from the Rotterdam Study-I (RS-I). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for questionnaire/easily obtainable variables, imaging variables, genetic and biochemical markers. The extended multivariate model was tested on discrimination (receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve (AUC)) in two other population-based cohorts: Rotterdam Study-II and Chingford Study. RESULTS: In RS-I, there was moderate predictive value for incident KOA based on the genetic score alone in subjects aged <65 years (AUC 0.65), while it was only 0.55 for subjects aged ≥65 years. The AUC for gender, age and body mass index (BMI) in prediction for KOA was 0.66. Addition of the questionnaire variables, genetic score or biochemical marker urinary C-terminal cross-linked telopeptide of type II collagen to the model did not change the AUC. However, when adding the knee baseline KL score to the model the AUC increased to 0.79. Applying external validation, similar results were observed in the Rotterdam Study-II and the Chingford Study. CONCLUSIONS: Easy obtainable 'Questionnaire' variables, genetic markers, OA at other joint sites and biochemical markers add only modestly to the prediction of KOA incidence using age, gender and BMI in an elderly population. Doubtful minor radiographic degenerative features in the knee, however, are a very strong predictor of future KOA. This is an important finding, as many radiologists do not report minor degenerative changes in the knee. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Authors: Albert Hofman; Guy G O Brusselle; Sarwa Darwish Murad; Cornelia M van Duijn; Oscar H Franco; André Goedegebure; M Arfan Ikram; Caroline C W Klaver; Tamar E C Nijsten; Robin P Peeters; Bruno H Ch Stricker; Henning W Tiemeier; André G Uitterlinden; Meike W Vernooij Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2015-09-19 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: Gabby B Joseph; Charles E McCulloch; Michael C Nevitt; Jan Neumann; Alexandra S Gersing; Martin Kretzschmar; Benedikt J Schwaiger; John A Lynch; Ursula Heilmeier; Nancy E Lane; Thomas M Link Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-11-16 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Cesar Garriga; Maria T Sánchez-Santos; Andrew Judge; Deborah Hart; Tim Spector; Cyrus Cooper; Nigel K Arden Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Kholoud Hafsi; Janine McKay; Jinjie Li; José Fábio Lana; Alex Macedo; Gabriel Silva Santos; William D Murrell Journal: J Clin Orthop Trauma Date: 2018-10-15