K Bates Gribbons1, Cristina Ponte2, Anthea Craven3, Joanna C Robson4, Ravi Suppiah5, Raashid Luqmani3, Richard Watts6, Peter A Merkel7, Peter C Grayson1. 1. National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland. 2. Hospital de Santa Maria and Centro Hospitalar Universitário Lisboa Norte, Lisbon, Portugal. 3. University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 4. University of the West of England, Bristol, UK. 5. Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand. 6. University of East Anglia Norwich Medical School, Norwich, UK, and University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 7. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Diagnostic assessment in giant cell arteritis (GCA) is rapidly changing as vascular imaging becomes more available. This study was undertaken to determine if clinical GCA subsets have distinct profiles or reflect differential diagnostic assessments. METHODS: Patients were recruited from an international cohort and divided into 4 subsets based on a temporal artery (TA) abnormality (positive TA biopsy [TAB] or halo sign on TA ultrasound [TA-US]) and/or evidence of large vessel (LV) involvement on imaging: 1) both TA abnormality and LV involvement (TA+/LV+ GCA); 2) TA abnormality without LV involvement (TA+/LV- GCA); 3) LV involvement without TA abnormality (TA-/LV+ GCA); and 4) clinically diagnosed GCA without LV involvement or TA abnormality (TA-/LV- GCA). RESULTS: Nine hundred forty-one patients with GCA were recruited from 72 international study sites. Most patients received multiple forms of diagnostic assessment, including TAB (n = 705 [75%]), TA-US (n = 328 [35%]), and LV imaging (n = 534 [57%]). Assessment using TAB, TA-US, and LV imaging confirmed the diagnosis of GCA in 66%, 79%, and 40% of cases, respectively. GCA subsets had distinct profiles independent of diagnostic assessment strategies. TA+/LV- were the most common subset (51%), with a high burden of cranial ischemia. Those in the TA-/LV- subset (26%) had a high prevalence of cranial ischemia and musculoskeletal symptoms. Patients in the TA-/LV+ subset (12%) had prevalent upper extremity vascular abnormalities and a low prevalence of vision loss, and those in the TA+/LV+ subset (11%) were older and had a high prevalence of cranial ischemia, constitutional symptoms, and elevated acute-phase reactant levels. CONCLUSION: Vascular imaging is increasingly incorporated into the diagnostic assessment of GCA and identifies clinical subsets of patients based on involvement of temporal and extracranial arteries.
OBJECTIVE: Diagnostic assessment in giant cell arteritis (GCA) is rapidly changing as vascular imaging becomes more available. This study was undertaken to determine if clinical GCA subsets have distinct profiles or reflect differential diagnostic assessments. METHODS: Patients were recruited from an international cohort and divided into 4 subsets based on a temporal artery (TA) abnormality (positive TA biopsy [TAB] or halo sign on TA ultrasound [TA-US]) and/or evidence of large vessel (LV) involvement on imaging: 1) both TA abnormality and LV involvement (TA+/LV+ GCA); 2) TA abnormality without LV involvement (TA+/LV- GCA); 3) LV involvement without TA abnormality (TA-/LV+ GCA); and 4) clinically diagnosed GCA without LV involvement or TA abnormality (TA-/LV- GCA). RESULTS: Nine hundred forty-one patients with GCA were recruited from 72 international study sites. Most patients received multiple forms of diagnostic assessment, including TAB (n = 705 [75%]), TA-US (n = 328 [35%]), and LV imaging (n = 534 [57%]). Assessment using TAB, TA-US, and LV imaging confirmed the diagnosis of GCA in 66%, 79%, and 40% of cases, respectively. GCA subsets had distinct profiles independent of diagnostic assessment strategies. TA+/LV- were the most common subset (51%), with a high burden of cranial ischemia. Those in the TA-/LV- subset (26%) had a high prevalence of cranial ischemia and musculoskeletal symptoms. Patients in the TA-/LV+ subset (12%) had prevalent upper extremity vascular abnormalities and a low prevalence of vision loss, and those in the TA+/LV+ subset (11%) were older and had a high prevalence of cranial ischemia, constitutional symptoms, and elevated acute-phase reactant levels. CONCLUSION: Vascular imaging is increasingly incorporated into the diagnostic assessment of GCA and identifies clinical subsets of patients based on involvement of temporal and extracranial arteries.
Authors: Anthea Craven; Joanna Robson; Cristina Ponte; Peter C Grayson; Ravi Suppiah; Andrew Judge; Richard Watts; Peter A Merkel; Raashid A Luqmani Journal: Clin Exp Nephrol Date: 2013-08-31 Impact factor: 2.801
Authors: Christian Dejaco; Sofia Ramiro; Christina Duftner; Florent L Besson; Thorsten A Bley; Daniel Blockmans; Elisabeth Brouwer; Marco A Cimmino; Eric Clark; Bhaskar Dasgupta; Andreas P Diamantopoulos; Haner Direskeneli; Annamaria Iagnocco; Thorsten Klink; Lorna Neill; Cristina Ponte; Carlo Salvarani; Riemer H J A Slart; Madeline Whitlock; Wolfgang A Schmidt Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2018-01-22 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Hubert de Boysson; Eric Liozon; Marc Lambert; Anael Dumont; Jonathan Boutemy; Gwénola Maigné; Nicolas Martin Silva; Kim Heang Ly; Alain Manrique; Boris Bienvenu; Achille Aouba Journal: Am J Med Date: 2017-04-29 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Francesco Muratore; Tanaz A Kermani; Cynthia S Crowson; Abigail B Green; Carlo Salvarani; Eric L Matteson; Kenneth J Warrington Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2014-09-05 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: Dan Pugh; Maira Karabayas; Neil Basu; Maria C Cid; Ruchika Goel; Carl S Goodyear; Peter C Grayson; Stephen P McAdoo; Justin C Mason; Catherine Owen; Cornelia M Weyand; Taryn Youngstein; Neeraj Dhaun Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 65.038
Authors: Jianna He; Luke Williamson; Beverly Ng; Jeremy Wang; Nicholas Manolios; Socrates Angelides; David Farlow; Peter K K Wong Journal: Int J Rheum Dis Date: 2022-01-22 Impact factor: 2.558