Catalogo Articoli (Spogli Riviste)

OPAC HELP

Titolo:
ACR and EULAR improvement criteria have comparable validity in rheumatoid arthritis trials
Autore:
van Gestel, AM; Anderson, JJ; van Riel, PLCM; Boers, M; Haagsma, CJ; Rich, B; Wells, G; Lange, MLM; Felson, DT;
Indirizzi:
Univ Nijmegen Hosp, Dept Rheumatol, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands Univ Nijmegen Hosp Nijmegen Netherlands NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands VAMC, CHQOER Unit, Bedford, MA USA VAMC Bedford MA USAVAMC, CHQOER Unit, Bedford, MA USA Free Univ Amsterdam, Dept Clin Epidemiol, Amsterdam, Netherlands Free UnivAmsterdam Amsterdam Netherlands emiol, Amsterdam, Netherlands Amgen rhIL Ira Clin Res Prod Team, Boulder, CO USA Amgen rhIL Ira Clin ResProd Team Boulder CO USA d Team, Boulder, CO USA Immunex Corp, Stat Biometr, Seattle, WA USA Immunex Corp Seattle WA USAImmunex Corp, Stat Biometr, Seattle, WA USA Boston Univ, Arthrit Ctr, Boston, MA 02215 USA Boston Univ Boston MA USA 02215 n Univ, Arthrit Ctr, Boston, MA 02215 USA
Titolo Testata:
JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY
fascicolo: 3, volume: 26, anno: 1999,
pagine: 705 - 711
SICI:
0315-162X(199903)26:3<705:AAEICH>2.0.ZU;2-H
Fonte:
ISI
Lingua:
ENG
Soggetto:
COLLEGE-OF-RHEUMATOLOGY; WORLD-HEALTH-ORGANIZATION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL-TRIAL; DOUBLE-BLIND; METHOTREXATE; COMBINATION; AURANOFIN; THERAPY; PLACEBO; DRUGS;
Keywords:
rheumatoid arthritis; trial evaluation; improvement criteria;
Tipo documento:
Article
Natura:
Periodico
Settore Disciplinare:
Clinical Medicine
Life Sciences
Citazioni:
19
Recensione:
Indirizzi per estratti:
Indirizzo: van Gestel, AM Univndsjmegen Hosp, Dept Rheumatol, POB 9101, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherla Univ Nijmegen Hosp POB 9101 Nijmegen Netherlands NL-6500 HB
Citazione:
A.M. van Gestel et al., "ACR and EULAR improvement criteria have comparable validity in rheumatoid arthritis trials", J RHEUMATOL, 26(3), 1999, pp. 705-711

Abstract

We compared the validity of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) andthe European League of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) definitions of response in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) clinical trials. US: ACR and EULAR improvement criteria were calculated in 7 large randomized RA clinical trials. The discriminant validity of the response criteria between treatment groups was studied using the Mantel-Haenszel chi-squared value. To compare both sets of criteria the chi-squared ratio was determined for each trial. Europe: In 2 large randomized RA clinical trials, ACR and EULAR criteria werecalculated, once with extensive and once with 28 joint counts. The classification of patients with these 4 criteria were compared with each other using cross tables. We further studied the difference in response between treatment groups per trial, the association of response with patient and investigator assessment of improvement, and the association of response with radiological progression. US: The chi-squared ratio for most trials was close to 1. There was no clear pattern suggesting that the discriminant validity of the ACR criteria was stronger than the discriminant validity of the EULARdefinition of response or vice versa. Europe: Conflicting results between ACR and EULAR were present in only 3% of patients in both trials. The discriminant validity of all 4 criteria (ACR and EULAR with reduced and extensive joint counts) was comparable. All criteria were related with the overall assessment of improvement by both investigator and patient. The associationwith radiographic progression was comparable for EULAR and ACR improvementcriteria. There is a high level of agreement between ACR and EULAR improvement classification, and their validity is equivalent. The discriminating potential of the criteria between treatment groups is comparable, as is the association with patient's and investigator's overall assessment and with radiographic progression.

ASDD Area Sistemi Dipartimentali e Documentali, Università di Bologna, Catalogo delle riviste ed altri periodici
Documento generato il 12/07/20 alle ore 09:43:13