Literature DB >> 25988705

Determining the Minimally Important Difference in the Clinical Disease Activity Index for Improvement and Worsening in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients.

J R Curtis1, S Yang1, L Chen1, J E Pope2, E C Keystone3, B Haraoui4, G Boire5, J C Thorne6, D Tin6, C A Hitchon7, C O Bingham8, V P Bykerk9.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Simplified measures to quantify rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity are increasingly used. The minimum clinically important differences (MCID) for some measures, such as the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), have not been well-defined in real-world clinic settings, especially for early RA patients with low/moderate disease activity.
METHODS: Data from Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort patients were used to examine absolute change in CDAI in the first year after enrollment, stratified by disease activity. MCID cut points were derived to optimize the sum of sensitivity and specificity versus the gold standard of patient self-reported improvement or worsening. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values were calculated against patient self-reported improvement (gold standard) and for change in pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) improvement. Discrimination was examined using the area under receiver operator curves. Similar methods were used to evaluate MCIDs for worsening for patients who achieved low disease activity.
RESULTS: A total of 578 patients (mean ± SD age 54.1 ± 15.3 years, 75% women, median [interquartile range] disease duration 5.3 [3.3, 8.0] months) contributed 1,169 visit pairs to the improvement analysis. The MCID cut points for improvement were 12 (patients starting in high disease activity: CDAI >22), 6 (moderate: CDAI 10-22), and 1 (low disease activity: CDAI <10). Performance characteristics were acceptable using these cut points for pain, HAQ, and DAS28. The MCID for CDAI worsening among patients who achieved low disease activity was 2 units.
CONCLUSION: These minimum important absolute differences in CDAI can be used to evaluate improvement and worsening and increase the utility of CDAI in clinical practice.
© 2015, American College of Rheumatology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25988705      PMCID: PMC4580563          DOI: 10.1002/acr.22606

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)        ISSN: 2151-464X            Impact factor:   4.794


  28 in total

Review 1.  Minimal clinically important differences: review of methods.

Authors:  G Wells; D Beaton; B Shea; M Boers; L Simon; V Strand; P Brooks; P Tugwell
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 4.666

2.  Index for rating diagnostic tests.

Authors:  W J YOUDEN
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1950-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Does the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire have potential as a monitoring tool for subjects with rheumatoid arthritis?

Authors:  M C Greenwood; D V Doyle; M Ensor
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 19.103

4.  Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts. Development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  M L Prevoo; M A van 't Hof; H H Kuper; M A van Leeuwen; L B van de Putte; P L van Riel
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  1995-01

5.  Statistical approaches to the analysis of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

Authors:  B J McNeil; J A Hanley
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement.

Authors:  F Tubach; P Ravaud; G Baron; B Falissard; I Logeart; N Bellamy; C Bombardier; D Felson; M Hochberg; D van der Heijde; M Dougados
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2004-06-18       Impact factor: 19.103

7.  Minimum important difference between patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the patient's perspective.

Authors:  G A Wells; P Tugwell; G R Kraag; P R Baker; J Groh; D A Redelmeier
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 4.666

8.  Development and validation of the European League Against Rheumatism response criteria for rheumatoid arthritis. Comparison with the preliminary American College of Rheumatology and the World Health Organization/International League Against Rheumatism Criteria.

Authors:  A M van Gestel; M L Prevoo; M A van 't Hof; M H van Rijswijk; L B van de Putte; P L van Riel
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  1996-01

9.  Validation of rheumatoid arthritis improvement criteria that include simplified joint counts.

Authors:  A M van Gestel; C J Haagsma; P L van Riel
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  1998-10

10.  The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire: a review of its history, issues, progress, and documentation.

Authors:  Bonnie Bruce; James F Fries
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.666

View more
  28 in total

1.  Three Quality Improvement Initiatives and Performance of Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Measures in Electronic Health Records: Results From an Interrupted Time Series Study.

Authors:  Julie Gandrup; Jing Li; Zara Izadi; Milena Gianfrancesco; Torkell Ellingsen; Jinoos Yazdany; Gabriela Schmajuk
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 4.794

2.  Dosing of Intravenous Tocilizumab in a Real-World Setting of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Analyses from the Corrona Registry.

Authors:  Dimitrios A Pappas; Ani John; Jeffrey R Curtis; George W Reed; Chitra Karki; Robert Magner; Joel M Kremer; Ashwini Shewade; Jeffrey D Greenberg
Journal:  Rheumatol Ther       Date:  2016-02-08

3.  Utilizing a PTPN22 gene signature to predict response to targeted therapies in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Hui-Hsin Chang; Ching-Huang Ho; Beverly Tomita; Andrea A Silva; Jeffrey A Sparks; Elizabeth W Karlson; Deepak A Rao; Yvonne C Lee; I-Cheng Ho
Journal:  J Autoimmun       Date:  2019-04-26       Impact factor: 7.094

4.  Association Between Pain Sensitization and Disease Activity in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Yvonne C Lee; Clifton O Bingham; Robert R Edwards; Wendy Marder; Kristine Phillips; Marcy B Bolster; Daniel J Clauw; Larry W Moreland; Bing Lu; Alyssa Wohlfahrt; Zhi Zhang; Tuhina Neogi
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 4.794

5.  Validity and Responsiveness of a 10-Item Patient-Reported Measure of Physical Function in a Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinic Population.

Authors:  Elizabeth Wahl; Andrew Gross; Vladimir Chernitskiy; Laura Trupin; Lianne Gensler; Krishna Chaganti; Kaleb Michaud; Patricia Katz; Jinoos Yazdany
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 4.794

6.  Use of Low-Literacy Decision Aid to Enhance Knowledge and Reduce Decisional Conflict Among a Diverse Population of Adults With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results of a Pilot Study.

Authors:  Jennifer L Barton; Laura Trupin; Dean Schillinger; Gina Evans-Young; John Imboden; Victor M Montori; Edward Yelin
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.794

7.  Delayed Treatment Acceleration in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have Inadequate Response to Initial Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors: Data from the Corrona Registry.

Authors:  Dimitrios A Pappas; Robert A Gerber; Heather J Litman; David Gruben; Jamie Geier; Winnie D Hua; Connie Chen; Youfu Li; Joel M Kremer; John S Andrews; Jeffrey A Bourret
Journal:  Am Health Drug Benefits       Date:  2018-05

8.  Tofacitinib versus tocilizumab in the treatment of biological-naïve or previous biological-failure patients with methotrexate-refractory active rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Shunsuke Mori; Yukitomo Urata; Tamami Yoshitama; Yukitaka Ueki
Journal:  RMD Open       Date:  2021-05

9.  Association of weight loss with improved disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A retrospective analysis using electronic medical record data.

Authors:  David J Kreps; Florencia Halperin; Sonali P Desai; Zhi Z Zhang; Elena Losina; Amber T Olson; Elizabeth W Karlson; Bonnie L Bermas; Jeffrey A Sparks
Journal:  Int J Clin Rheumtol       Date:  2018

10.  Predictive ability, validity, and responsiveness of the multi-biomarker disease activity score in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating methotrexate.

Authors:  Brent A Luedders; Tate M Johnson; Harlan Sayles; Geoffrey M Thiele; Ted R Mikuls; James R O'Dell; Bryant R England
Journal:  Semin Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 5.532

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.