Mostrar registro simples

dc.contributor.authorSantos, Isabela Araujopt_BR
dc.contributor.authorBrenol, Claiton Viegaspt_BR
dc.contributor.authorXavier, Ricardo Machadopt_BR
dc.contributor.authorPinheiro, Geraldo da Rocha Castelarpt_BR
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-03T03:36:10Zpt_BR
dc.date.issued2022pt_BR
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203pt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10183/265629pt_BR
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) composite disease activity indices have become handy tools in daily clinical practice and crucial in defining remission or low disease activity, the main target of the RA treatment. However, there is no definition of the best index to assess disease activity in clinical practice. Objectives: To compare the residual activity among the indices with the ACR/EULAR remission criteria (Boolean method) to identify the most feasible for assessing remission in daily practice, also considering correlation and concordance, sensibility, and specificity. Patients and methods: We selected 1116 patients with established RA from the real-life rheumatoid arthritis study database-REAL. The composite disease activity indices-DAS28-ESR, DAS28-CRP, SDAI, and CDAI-and their components were compared to the Boolean method to identify residual activity using binomial regression. The indices were analyzed for correlation and agreement using the Spearman index and weighted kappa. The chi-square test evaluated sensibility and specificity for remission based on the Boolean method. Results: DAS28-CRP overestimated remission and confirmed higher residual activity than SDAI and CDAI. The indices showed good correlation and agreement, with a better relationship between SDAI and CDAI (k:0,88). CDAI and SDAI showed higher sensitivity and specificity for remission based on the Boolean method. CDAI was performed in 99% of patients, while DAS28 and SDAI were completed in approximately 85%. Conclusions: Although all composite indices of activity can be used in clinical practice and showed good agreement, CDAI and SDAI have better performance in evaluating remission based on the Boolean method, showing less residual activity and higher sensibility and specificity. In addition, CDAI seems to be more feasible for disease activity evaluation in daily clinical practice, especially in developing countries.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfpt_BR
dc.language.isoengpt_BR
dc.relation.ispartofPloS one. San Francisco. Vol. 17, no. 9 (Sept. 2022), e0273789, 16 p.pt_BR
dc.rightsOpen Accessen
dc.subjectArtrite reumatóidept_BR
dc.subjectDiagnósticopt_BR
dc.subjectBases de dados factuaispt_BR
dc.subjectProgressão da doençapt_BR
dc.titleComparison of rheumatoid arthritis composite disease activity indices and residual activity in a Brazilian multicenter study - REAL studypt_BR
dc.typeArtigo de periódicopt_BR
dc.identifier.nrb001176070pt_BR
dc.type.originEstrangeiropt_BR


Thumbnail
   

Este item está licenciado na Creative Commons License

Mostrar registro simples