Clinical Presentation and Treatment Response in ACPA-negative Rheumatoid Arthritis.

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Baptiste Chevet, Divi Cornec
{"title":"Clinical Presentation and Treatment Response in ACPA-negative Rheumatoid Arthritis.","authors":"Baptiste Chevet, Divi Cornec","doi":"10.1016/j.jbspin.2024.105823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease characterized by joint inflammation and potential extra-articular manifestations. This review compares the presentation and treatment response between anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA)-positive and ACPA-negative RA patients. The incidence of seronegative RA (rheumatoid factor (RF)-negative and ACPA-negative) has increased in recent decades, emphasizing the need for new diagnostic biomarkers.Diagnostically, ACPA is highly specific for RA, yet many patients remain ACPA-negative. The absence of RF and ACPA in RA should trigger further analysis to test alternative diagnosis, in particular when new symptoms arise. Emerging biomarkers like anti-PAD4 and anti-CarP antibodies provide additional diagnostic value, identifying some ACPA-negative patients. Clinically, ACPA-negative patients often exhibit higher disease activity at diagnosis, with more swollen joints and elevated CRP levels. They also tend to have fewer pulmonary and ocular manifestations compared to ACPA-positive patients. Radiographically, ACPA-positive patients are at a higher risk for joint erosions over time.Response to treatment also differs according to ACPA status. Abatacept and rituximab have demonstrated greater efficacy in ACPA-positive patients, showing better disease activity control and higher treatment retention rates. Continuous re-evaluation is crucial for ACPA-negative patients, especially when first-line treatments like methotrexate are ineffective, to rule out RA mimickers and adjust the treatment approach accordingly.These findings underscore the importance of personalized treatment strategies in RA management.</p>","PeriodicalId":54902,"journal":{"name":"Joint Bone Spine","volume":" ","pages":"105823"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Joint Bone Spine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2024.105823","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease characterized by joint inflammation and potential extra-articular manifestations. This review compares the presentation and treatment response between anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA)-positive and ACPA-negative RA patients. The incidence of seronegative RA (rheumatoid factor (RF)-negative and ACPA-negative) has increased in recent decades, emphasizing the need for new diagnostic biomarkers.Diagnostically, ACPA is highly specific for RA, yet many patients remain ACPA-negative. The absence of RF and ACPA in RA should trigger further analysis to test alternative diagnosis, in particular when new symptoms arise. Emerging biomarkers like anti-PAD4 and anti-CarP antibodies provide additional diagnostic value, identifying some ACPA-negative patients. Clinically, ACPA-negative patients often exhibit higher disease activity at diagnosis, with more swollen joints and elevated CRP levels. They also tend to have fewer pulmonary and ocular manifestations compared to ACPA-positive patients. Radiographically, ACPA-positive patients are at a higher risk for joint erosions over time.Response to treatment also differs according to ACPA status. Abatacept and rituximab have demonstrated greater efficacy in ACPA-positive patients, showing better disease activity control and higher treatment retention rates. Continuous re-evaluation is crucial for ACPA-negative patients, especially when first-line treatments like methotrexate are ineffective, to rule out RA mimickers and adjust the treatment approach accordingly.These findings underscore the importance of personalized treatment strategies in RA management.

ACPA阴性类风湿关节炎的临床表现和治疗反应。
类风湿性关节炎(RA)是一种自身免疫性疾病,以关节炎症和潜在的关节外表现为特征。本综述比较了抗瓜氨酸蛋白抗体(ACPA)阳性和ACPA阴性RA患者的表现和治疗反应。近几十年来,血清阴性RA(类风湿因子(RF)阴性和ACPA阴性)的发病率不断上升,强调了对新诊断生物标志物的需求。RA患者缺乏RF和ACPA应引发进一步分析,以测试替代诊断,尤其是在出现新症状时。抗PAD4和抗CarP抗体等新出现的生物标志物可提供额外的诊断价值,识别出一些ACPA阴性患者。临床上,ACPA 阴性患者在确诊时通常表现出较高的疾病活动性,关节肿胀和 CRP 水平升高的情况较多。与 ACPA 阳性患者相比,他们的肺部和眼部表现也往往较少。从影像学角度看,ACPA 阳性患者随着时间的推移出现关节侵蚀的风险更高。阿巴他赛普和利妥昔单抗对 ACPA 阳性患者的疗效更佳,显示出更好的疾病活动控制和更高的治疗维持率。对ACPA阴性患者进行持续的再评估至关重要,尤其是在甲氨蝶呤等一线治疗无效的情况下,以排除RA模拟物并相应调整治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Joint Bone Spine
Joint Bone Spine 医学-风湿病学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.90%
发文量
184
审稿时长
25 days
期刊介绍: Bimonthly e-only international journal, Joint Bone Spine publishes in English original research articles and all the latest advances that deal with disorders affecting the joints, bones, and spine and, more generally, the entire field of rheumatology. All submitted manuscripts to the journal are subjected to rigorous peer review by international experts: under no circumstances does the journal guarantee publication before the editorial board makes its final decision. (Surgical techniques and work focusing specifically on orthopedic surgery are not within the scope of the journal.)Joint Bone Spine is indexed in the main international databases and is accessible worldwide through the ScienceDirect and ClinicalKey platforms.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信