2022年ACR/EULAR分类标准与欧洲药品管理局ANCA相关性血管炎算法的性能比较。

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q2 RHEUMATOLOGY
Yuki Imai, Yuichiro Ota, Kotaro Matsumoto, Mitsuhiro Akiyama, Katsuya Suzuki, Yuko Kaneko
{"title":"2022年ACR/EULAR分类标准与欧洲药品管理局ANCA相关性血管炎算法的性能比较。","authors":"Yuki Imai, Yuichiro Ota, Kotaro Matsumoto, Mitsuhiro Akiyama, Katsuya Suzuki, Yuko Kaneko","doi":"10.3899/jrheum.2024-0335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare the 2022 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) classification criteria with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) algorithm for antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All consecutive, newly diagnosed patients with AAV according to the 2012 Chapel Hill Consensus Conference who visited Keio University Hospital between March 2012 and May 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were reclassified according to the EMA algorithm and the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria, and their clinical characteristics were statistically analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 114 patients with AAV were included in the analyses. Using the EMA algorithm as a reference, reclassification of the patients revealed sensitivity and specificity of the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria of 100% and 96% for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, 40% and 97% for granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), and 90% and 49% for microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), respectively. Approximately half of patients classified as EMA-GPA or EMA-unclassifiable were reclassified as 2022-MPA; these patients were older, were more disposed to be positive for myeloperoxidase (MPO)-ANCA, and had interstitial lung disease (ILD) more frequently than patients with 2022-GPA or non-2022-MPA. Further, some patients positive for MPO-ANCA with biopsy-proven granulomatous inflammation were also reclassified from EMA-GPA to 2022-MPA. Over the mean observation period of 4.0 years, 16 patients died. Overall survival for each classification group differed significantly from the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria (<i>P</i> = 0.02), but not with the EMA algorithm (<i>P</i> = 0.21).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among the patients classified as EMA-GPA or EMA-unclassifiable, older patients with MPO-ANCA and ILD tended to be reclassified as 2022-MPA. The 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria were more useful in prognostic prediction than the EMA algorithm.</p>","PeriodicalId":50064,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rheumatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of the 2022 ACR/EULAR Classification Criteria in Comparison With the European Medicines Agency Algorithm in Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis.\",\"authors\":\"Yuki Imai, Yuichiro Ota, Kotaro Matsumoto, Mitsuhiro Akiyama, Katsuya Suzuki, Yuko Kaneko\",\"doi\":\"10.3899/jrheum.2024-0335\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare the 2022 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) classification criteria with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) algorithm for antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All consecutive, newly diagnosed patients with AAV according to the 2012 Chapel Hill Consensus Conference who visited Keio University Hospital between March 2012 and May 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were reclassified according to the EMA algorithm and the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria, and their clinical characteristics were statistically analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 114 patients with AAV were included in the analyses. Using the EMA algorithm as a reference, reclassification of the patients revealed sensitivity and specificity of the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria of 100% and 96% for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, 40% and 97% for granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), and 90% and 49% for microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), respectively. Approximately half of patients classified as EMA-GPA or EMA-unclassifiable were reclassified as 2022-MPA; these patients were older, were more disposed to be positive for myeloperoxidase (MPO)-ANCA, and had interstitial lung disease (ILD) more frequently than patients with 2022-GPA or non-2022-MPA. Further, some patients positive for MPO-ANCA with biopsy-proven granulomatous inflammation were also reclassified from EMA-GPA to 2022-MPA. Over the mean observation period of 4.0 years, 16 patients died. Overall survival for each classification group differed significantly from the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria (<i>P</i> = 0.02), but not with the EMA algorithm (<i>P</i> = 0.21).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among the patients classified as EMA-GPA or EMA-unclassifiable, older patients with MPO-ANCA and ILD tended to be reclassified as 2022-MPA. The 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria were more useful in prognostic prediction than the EMA algorithm.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rheumatology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Rheumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.2024-0335\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.2024-0335","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究旨在比较2022年ACR/EULAR分类标准与欧洲药品管理局(EMA)关于抗中性粒细胞胞浆抗体(ANCA)相关性血管炎(AAV)的算法:回顾性分析2012年3月至2022年5月期间在庆应义塾大学医院就诊的所有根据2012年教堂山共识会议新确诊的AAV患者。根据EMA算法和2022年ACR/EULAR标准对患者进行了重新分类,并对其临床特征进行了统计分析:结果:共有114名AAV患者纳入分析。以EMA算法为参考,对患者进行重新分类后发现,2022 ACR/EULAR标准对嗜酸性粒细胞性肉芽肿伴多血管炎的敏感性和特异性分别为100%和96%,对肉芽肿伴多血管炎(GPA)的敏感性和特异性分别为40%和97%,对显微镜下多血管炎(MPA)的敏感性和特异性分别为90%和49%。约有一半的 EMA-GPA 或 EMA 无法分类的患者被重新分类为 2022-MPA;与 2022-GPA 或非 2022-MPA 患者相比,他们年龄更大,髓过氧化物酶(MPO)-ANCA 呈阳性,并更常患有间质性肺病。相反,一些经活检证实为肉芽肿性炎症的 MPO-ANCA 阳性患者则从 EMA-GPA 重新分类为 2022-MPA。在平均 4.0 年的观察期内,有 16 名患者死亡。各分类组的总生存率与2022 ACR/EULAR标准(P = 0.02)有显著差异,但与EMA算法(P = 0.21)无显著差异:结论:在EMA-GPA或EMA无法分类的患者中,患有MPO-ANCA和间质性肺病的老年患者被重新分类为2022-MPA。2022 ACR/EULAR标准在预后预测方面比EMA算法更有用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Performance of the 2022 ACR/EULAR Classification Criteria in Comparison With the European Medicines Agency Algorithm in Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the 2022 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) classification criteria with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) algorithm for antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV).

Methods: All consecutive, newly diagnosed patients with AAV according to the 2012 Chapel Hill Consensus Conference who visited Keio University Hospital between March 2012 and May 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were reclassified according to the EMA algorithm and the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria, and their clinical characteristics were statistically analyzed.

Results: A total of 114 patients with AAV were included in the analyses. Using the EMA algorithm as a reference, reclassification of the patients revealed sensitivity and specificity of the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria of 100% and 96% for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, 40% and 97% for granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), and 90% and 49% for microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), respectively. Approximately half of patients classified as EMA-GPA or EMA-unclassifiable were reclassified as 2022-MPA; these patients were older, were more disposed to be positive for myeloperoxidase (MPO)-ANCA, and had interstitial lung disease (ILD) more frequently than patients with 2022-GPA or non-2022-MPA. Further, some patients positive for MPO-ANCA with biopsy-proven granulomatous inflammation were also reclassified from EMA-GPA to 2022-MPA. Over the mean observation period of 4.0 years, 16 patients died. Overall survival for each classification group differed significantly from the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria (P = 0.02), but not with the EMA algorithm (P = 0.21).

Conclusion: Among the patients classified as EMA-GPA or EMA-unclassifiable, older patients with MPO-ANCA and ILD tended to be reclassified as 2022-MPA. The 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria were more useful in prognostic prediction than the EMA algorithm.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Rheumatology
Journal of Rheumatology 医学-风湿病学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
5.10%
发文量
285
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Rheumatology is a monthly international serial edited by Earl D. Silverman. The Journal features research articles on clinical subjects from scientists working in rheumatology and related fields, as well as proceedings of meetings as supplements to regular issues. Highlights of our 41 years serving Rheumatology include: groundbreaking and provocative editorials such as "Inverting the Pyramid," renowned Pediatric Rheumatology, proceedings of OMERACT and the Canadian Rheumatology Association, Cochrane Musculoskeletal Reviews, and supplements on emerging therapies.
×
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