scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI: 10.1093/RHEUMATOLOGY/KEAA626

Construct validity of the ASAS health index in psoriatic arthritis: a cross-sectional analysis.

02 Mar 2021-Rheumatology (Oxford Academic)-Vol. 60, Iss: 3, pp 1465-1473
Abstract: OBJECTIVES The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society health index (ASAS-HI) was designed to assess the global health of patients with spondyloarthritis, but its performance in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is hardly known. We addressed the clinimetric properties of this instrument in patients with PsA. METHODS This was a cross-sectional observational study that included 90 consecutive patients with PsA. The measurement properties of ASAS-HI were analysed against the Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) and the Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID) questionnaire. A multivariate analysis was performed to weigh the ASAS-HI items associated with DAPSA active disease and PsAID high impact. RESULTS Mean ASAS-HI was 5.8 (4.3). Convergent validity was high both against DAPSA (ρ 0.78, P < 0.0001) and PsAID (ρ 0.80, P < 0.0001). ASAS-HI showed a high discriminant capacity for both DAPSA remission [optimal criterion ≤ 2, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.97), P < 0.0001], and low activity [optimal criterion ≤6, AUC 0.87 (95% CI: 0.79, 0.94), P < 0.0001]. The ASAS-HI items significantly associated with DAPSA active disease were: 'I find it hard to stand for long' (β 4.48, P < 0.0001), 'I find it hard to concentrate' (β 2.94, P = 0.042) and 'I sleep badly at night' (β 1.86, P = 0.044). As for PsAID, the only item significantly associated with a high impact was 'I sleep badly at night' (β -3.29, P = 0.015). CONCLUSION We demonstrated construct validity of ASAS-HI, a spondyloarthritis instrument, for the assessment of global health in patients with PsA.

... read more

Topics: Psoriatic arthritis (51%)
Citations
  More

5 results found


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.3899/JRHEUM.210377
Rubén Queiro1, Isla MoranteInstitutions (1)
Abstract: To the Editor: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory arthritis that affects almost one-third of patients with psoriasis. PsA is a relatively common inflammatory condition in rheumatology clinics. In fact, a recent epidemiological study raised the prevalence of PsA to almost 0.6% in the general population in Spain.1 PsA presents multiple musculoskeletal and cutaneous manifestations that should be adequately represented in disease activity assessment tools. Also, it is important that these tools address how PsA affects patients’ lives, as seen in such tools as the PsA Impact of Disease (PsAID) questionnaire, an instrument promoted by the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology and recently endorsed by the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and PsA to assess the quality of life (QOL) in PsA.2,3 On the other hand, the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Health Index (ASAS HI) is a more generic disease impact instrument, initially designed for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), and very recently also applied in PsA.4,5 Both impact instruments capture similar but also different aspects in PsA, so it would be of interest to compare their clinimetric properties in this population. In the present work, …

... read more

Topics: Psoriatic arthritis (55%), Population (52%), Inflammatory arthritis (50%)

1 Citations





Journal ArticleDOI: 10.1007/S10067-021-05774-9
Abstract: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a highly heterogenous disease, with many different clinical manifestations inside or outside of the musculoskeletal system and the skin. It is often accompanied by comorbidities like cardiovascular diseases and mental health disorders. Acute phase reactants are not always elevated and specific markers for diagnosis and/or monitor the disease are lacking thus far. These characteristics possibly reflect the difficulty in agreement about a disease activity index for PsA. Many indices have been proposed over the last years, each of them considering different combinations of disease characteristics. We performed a literature search for relevant articles using PubMed and Embase. No data limits were applied. The keywords "Psoriatic arthritis" OR "PsA" AND "disease activity" AND "index" OR "indices" were used. Reference lists of relevant articles were also reviewed. Articles were also identified through searches of the authors' own files. In this review, we comparatively present the available indices (simple or composite) used for measuring activity in PsA, highlighting their weaknesses, strengths, and disparities. We comment also on the caveats and pitfalls that are encountered in assessment of disease activity, in relation to clinical practice and research. A widely accepted index for measuring disease activity in PsA is lacking. Other parameters, mostly related to patient-reported outcomes and to novel biomarkers might be included in the future, in such indices. Key points • Disease activity in PsA is multiparametric and its assessment is challenging due to many different phenotypes. • Many different indices are currently in use of PsA disease activity assessment. • Each PsA disease activity index has specific pros and cons.

... read more

References
  More

25 results found


Journal ArticleDOI: 10.1002/ART.21972
Abstract: Objective To compare the accuracy of existing classification criteria for the diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and to construct new criteria from observed data. Methods Data were collected prospectively from consecutive clinic attendees with PsA and other inflammatory arthropathies. Subjects were classified by each of 7 criteria. Sensitivity and specificity were compared using conditional logistic regression analysis. Latent class analysis was used to calculate criteria accuracy in order to confirm the validity of clinical diagnosis as the gold standard definition of “case”-ness. Classification and Regression Trees methodology and logistic regression were used to identify items for new criteria, which were then constructed using a receiver operating characteristic curve. Results Data were collected on 588 cases and 536 controls with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 384), ankylosing spondylitis (n = 72), undifferentiated arthritis (n = 38), connective tissue disorders (n = 14), and other diseases (n = 28). The specificity of each set of criteria was high. The sensitivity of the Vasey and Espinoza method (0.97) was similar to that of the method of McGonagle et al (0.98) and greater than that of the methods of Bennett (0.44), Moll and Wright (0.91), the European Spondylarthropathy Study Group (0.74), and Gladman et al (0.91). The CASPAR (ClASsification criteria for Psoriatic ARthritis) criteria consisted of established inflammatory articular disease with at least 3 points from the following features: current psoriasis (assigned a score of 2; all other features were assigned a score of 1), a history of psoriasis (unless current psoriasis was present), a family history of psoriasis (unless current psoriasis was present or there was a history of psoriasis), dactylitis, juxtaarticular new bone formation, rheumatoid factor negativity, and nail dystrophy. These criteria were more specific (0.987 versus 0.960) but less sensitive (0.914 versus 0.972) than those of Vasey and Espinoza. Conclusion The CASPAR criteria are simple and highly specific but less sensitive than the Vasey and Espinoza criteria.

... read more

2,408 Citations


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.1136/ARD.2009.108233
Abstract: Objective: To validate and refine two sets of candidate criteria for the classification/diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis (SpA). Methods: All Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) members were invited to include consecutively new patients with chronic (⩾3 months) back pain of unknown origin that began before 45 years of age. The candidate criteria were first tested in the entire cohort of 649 patients from 25 centres, and then refined in a random selection of 40% of cases and thereafter validated in the remaining 60%. Results: Upon diagnostic work-up, axial SpA was diagnosed in 60.2% of the cohort. Of these, 70% did not fulfil modified New York criteria and, therefore, were classified as having “non-radiographic” axial SpA. Refinement of the candidate criteria resulted in new ASAS classification criteria that are defined as: the presence of sacroiliitis by radiography or by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) plus at least one SpA feature (“imaging arm”) or the presence of HLA-B27 plus at least two SpA features (“clinical arm”). The sensitivity and specificity of the entire set of the new criteria were 82.9% and 84.4%, and for the imaging arm alone 66.2% and 97.3%, respectively. The specificity of the new criteria was much better than that of the European Spondylarthropathy Study Group criteria modified for MRI (sensitivity 85.1%, specificity 65.1%) and slightly better than that of the modified Amor criteria (sensitivity 82.9, specificity 77.5%). Conclusion: The new ASAS classification criteria for axial SpA can reliably classify patients for clinical studies and may help rheumatologists in clinical practice in diagnosing axial SpA in those with chronic back pain. Trial registration number: NCT00328068.

... read more

2,227 Citations


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.1136/ANNRHEUMDIS-2017-211734
Josef S. Smolen, Monika Schöls, Jürgen Braun1, Maxime Dougados2  +33 moreInstitutions (20)
Abstract: Therapeutic targets have been defined for axial and peripheral spondyloarthritis (SpA) in 2012, but the evidence for these recommendations was only of indirect nature. These recommendations were re-evaluated in light of new insights. Based on the results of a systematic literature review and expert opinion, a task force of rheumatologists, dermatologists, patients and a health professional developed an update of the 2012 recommendations. These underwent intensive discussions, on site voting and subsequent anonymous electronic voting on levels of agreement with each item. A set of 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations were developed and voted on. Some items were present in the previous recommendations, while others were significantly changed or newly formulated. The 2017 task force arrived at a single set of recommendations for axial and peripheral SpA, including psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The most exhaustive discussions related to whether PsA should be assessed using unidimensional composite scores for its different domains or multidimensional scores that comprise multiple domains. This question was not resolved and constitutes an important research agenda. There was broad agreement, now better supported by data than in 2012, that remission/inactive disease and, alternatively, low/minimal disease activity are the principal targets for the treatment of PsA. As instruments to assess the patients on the path to the target, the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) for axial SpA and the Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) and Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) for PsA were recommended, although not supported by all. Shared decision-making between the clinician and the patient was seen as pivotal to the process. The task force defined the treatment target for SpA as remission or low disease activity and developed a large research agenda to further advance the field.

... read more

342 Citations


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.1136/ANNRHEUMDIS-2015-207507
Abstract: Background The Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) is a valid and discriminative tool. Definitions of disease activity states and therapeutic response are still missing. We derived such criteria for the DAPSA. Methods We retrieved 30 patient profiles from an observational database including joint counts, patient pain and global activity ratings and C-reactive protein (CRP) and carried out a survey among experts to classify patients into remission (REM), low (LDA), moderate (MDA) or high (HDA) disease activity. Based on the distributions of DAPSA in each of these expert-assigned states we defined the cutpoints between groups. We performed similar analyses evaluating a clinical score (cDAPSA), omitting CRP. To define minor, moderate and major treatment response, we used Cohen9s Kappa statistics and analysed agreement of DAPSA percentage change with ACR20/50/70-response in three randomised controlled trials. Results Our survey yielded a response rate of 75% (n=33). Mean DAPSA differed significantly between patients classified as REM, LDA, MDA or HDA (p 4 and ≤14 for LDA, >14 and ≤28 for MDA and >28 for HDA. We observed best agreement with ACR20/50/70-response at DAPSA changes of 50/75/85%, reflecting minor, moderate and major improvement. Conclusions The DAPSA constitutes a disease-specific, validated and feasible tool for PsA assessment. In this study, we provide criteria for disease activity states and treatment response. They are based on an international expert survey, and show good performance in clinical trials and observational data.

... read more

221 Citations


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.1136/ANNRHEUMDIS-2014-205207
Laure Gossec, Maarten de Wit, Uta Kiltz1, Juergen Braun1  +22 moreInstitutions (7)
Abstract: Introduction The objective was to develop a questionnaire that can be used to calculate a score reflecting the impact of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) from the patients’ perspective: the PsA Impact of Disease (PsAID) questionnaire. Methods Twelve patient research partners identified important domains (areas of health); 139 patients prioritised them according to importance. Numeric rating scale (NRS) questions were developed, one for each domain. To combine the domains into a single score, relative weights were determined based on the relative importance given by 474 patients with PsA. An international cross-sectional and longitudinal validation study was performed in 13 countries to examine correlations of the PsAID score with other PsA or generic disease measures. Test–retest reliability and responsiveness (3 months after a treatment change) were examined in two subsets of patients. Results Two PsAID questionnaires were developed with both physical and psychological domains: one for clinical practice (12 domains of health) and one for clinical trials (nine domains). Pain, fatigue and skin problems had the highest relative importance. The PsAID scores correlated well with patient global assessment (N=474, Spearman r=0.82–0.84), reliability was high in stable patients (N=88, intraclass correlation coefficient=0.94–0.95), and sensitivity to change was also acceptable (N=71, standardised response mean=0.90–0.91). Conclusions A questionnaire to assess the impact of PsA on patients’ lives has been developed and validated. Two versions of the questionnaire are available, one for clinical practice (PsAID-12) and one for clinical trials (PsAID-9). The PsAID questionnaires should allow better assessment of the patient9s perspective in PsA. Further validation is needed.

... read more

Topics: Patient-reported outcome (55%)

216 Citations