Article

Is ASDAS better than BASDAI as a measure of disease activity in axial psoriatic arthritis?

Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, University of Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Clinic, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Annals of the rheumatic diseases (Impact Factor: 9.27). 12/2010; 69(12):2160-4. DOI: 10.1136/ard.2010.129726
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To assess the discriminative ability and correlation of the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Activity Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) with disease activity in axial psoriatic arthritis (AxPsA).
Patients with AxPsA were selected from a large prospective cohort study of psoriatic arthritis. Patient and physician global scores were used as constructs of disease activity. Patients were categorised into high and low disease activity states based on patient and physician global assessment scores and physician's decision to change treatment. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, linear and logistic regression.
201 patients with AxPsA were included in the study. ASDAS and BASDAI showed good correlation with disease activity as reflected by the patient global score (correlation coefficients (r) for BASDAI 0.84, ASDAS-B 0.77, ASDAS-C 0.81, p < 0.001) and the physician global score (r = 0.53 for BASDAI, r = 0.50 for ASDAS-B, r = 0.55 for ASDAS-C, p < 0.001). Both scores showed good discriminative ability between high and low disease activity states. However, there were no significant differences between areas under the curve for the models that compared ASDAS with BASDAI for each definition of disease activity state.
In patients with AxPsA, ASDAS and BASDAI scores show similar good to moderate discriminative ability and correlation with different constructs of disease activity. ASDAS was not superior to BASDAI in its ability to discriminate between high and low disease activity states in AxPsA.

1 Bookmark
 · 
245 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Over the last decade, significant progresses have been achieved in the development and validation of new tools for the evaluation of disease activity in axial spondyloarthritis (SpA). Despite they play a key role in the assessment of these patients, the calculation scores are relatively complex and difficult to be quickly assessed in the busy daily clinical practice.Objectives To test the construct validity of the Simplified Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (SADSAS) to define disease activity and compare its internal and external responsiveness with the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) and the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) in patients with axial SpA.Methods The patient cohort comprised 397 consecutive axial SpA patients who had never been treated with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blockers. Clinical and laboratory outcome assessments were performed at baseline, and at week 24. The following parameters were evaluated: BASDAI, ASDAS-CRP, ASDAS-ESR, and SASDAS. Construct convergent validity was evaluated by correlating SASDAS with ASDAS ERS/CRP, BASDAI, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) and EuroQol five-dimensional (EQ-5D) questionnaire. One hundred and fifty-six patients were observed longitudinally for 6 months. Responsiveness was assessed after six months of treatment with sulfasalazine (SSZ) or biologics. Internal responsiveness was evaluated by using the effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM). External responsiveness was investigated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Change scores were compared by calculating paired t-test statistic for the difference.ResultsIn testing for convergent validity a strong correlations (p¿<¿0.0001) were observed between both SASDAS and ASDAS-ESR (r¿=¿0.835), and ASDAS-CRP (r¿=¿0.805). Strong correlations (p¿<¿0.0001) were also found between SASDAS and BASDAI score (r¿=¿¿0.886), SASDAS and BASFI scores (rho¿=¿0.588) and SASDAS and EQ-5D scores (rho¿=¿¿0.579). The cross-classification showed a significant overall agreement (defined as the percentage of observed exact agreements) for SASDAS vs ASDAS-ESR (weighted k¿=¿0.704) and for SASDAS vs ASDAS-CRP (k¿=¿0.661). The most efficient composite measure in detecting change was the ASDAS-CRP (ES 1.95 and SRM 0.97). The responsiveness of SASDAS was slightly higher to ASDAS-ESR with an ES of 1.62 and 1.33, and an SRM of 0.88 and 0.71, respectively. The BASDAI appear to be the less responsive (ES¿=¿0.93 and SRM¿=¿0.52). The area under ROC curve of the SASDAS gives similar results to those provided by ASDAS CRP/ESR. The score changes of all combinations were highly correlated (p¿<¿0.0001).Conclusions The new SASDAS is a highly effective measure in assessing disease activity and it showed comparable internal and external responsiveness with respect to the ASDAS ESR/CRP response criteria in patients with axial SpA. SASDAS is easy to calculate and, therefore, appear suitable for clinical decision making, epidemiologic research, and clinical trials.
    Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 08/2014; 12(1):129. · 2.10 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The prognosis for patients with rheumatoid arthritis or spondyloarthritides has improved dramatically due to earlier diagnosis, recognition of the need to treat early with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), alone or in combinations, the establishment of treatment targets, and the development of biological DMARDs (bDMARDs). Many patients are now able to achieve clinical remission or low disease activity with therapy, and reduce or eliminate systemic corticosteroid use. Guidelines recommend methotrexate as a first-line agent for the initial treatment of rheumatoid arthritis; however, a majority of patients will require a change of csDMARD or step up to combination therapy with the addition of another csDMARD or a bDMARD. However, treatment failure is common and switching to a different therapy may be required. The large number of available treatment options, combined with a lack of comparative data, makes the choice of a new therapy complex and often not evidence based. We summarize and discuss evidence to inform treatment decisions in patients who require a change in therapy, including baseline factors that may predict response to therapy.
    Advances in Therapy 08/2014; · 2.44 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Axial involvement in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) remains common and can be defined in terms of spinal disease alone or in combination with peripheral manifestations. Diagnosis is based upon inflammatory spinal symptoms or the presence of radiological sacroiliitis and other radiographic signs of spondylitis, or by criteria for axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) defined by ASAS (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society). Although recent data are scarce for efficacy of traditional therapies for axial disease (e.g., nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, methotrexate, etc.), limited data are available for targeted biologics and novel agents. We identify and evaluate the efficacy of therapeutic interventions for treatment of axial disease in PsA. This review is an update of the axial PsA section of the treatment recommendations project by the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA).
    The Journal of Rheumatology 11/2014; 41(11):2286-2289. · 3.17 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
19 Downloads
Available from
May 26, 2014

Similar Publications