基于计算机断层扫描的类风湿关节炎相关间质性肺疾病定量评分系统:进行性纤维化检测的回顾性诊断准确性研究

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 RHEUMATOLOGY
Mehmet Cihan Karacaoğlu, Betül Kızıldağ, Burak Okyar, Gözde Yıldırım Çetin, Adem Doğaner, Nurhan Atilla
{"title":"基于计算机断层扫描的类风湿关节炎相关间质性肺疾病定量评分系统:进行性纤维化检测的回顾性诊断准确性研究","authors":"Mehmet Cihan Karacaoğlu, Betül Kızıldağ, Burak Okyar, Gözde Yıldırım Çetin, Adem Doğaner, Nurhan Atilla","doi":"10.1007/s10067-025-07511-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the ability of quantitative parameters to assess the severity of rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-associated interstitial lung disease (ILD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thorax CT images and pulmonary function tests of RA patients followed up in a tertiary reference center were retrospectively examined. Radiologically, patients were divided into two groups as limited and extensive ILD, using two semiquantitative scoring systems. Two different methods (Method 1, Method 2) were used for quantitative image analysis, in which different Hounsfield unit values were selected as thresholds. Spearman's correlation test was used to evaluate the relationship between variables. The diagnostic performance of quantitative methods for the ability to distinguish limited ILD from extensive ILD was calculated using ROC analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-four patients, 29 female and 15 male, were included in the study. A significant correlation was found between diffusion capacity of the lungs carbonmonoxide (DLCO) and total lung capacity (TLC), which are clinical markers, and both quantitative methods (p < 0.001). In terms of the performance of diagnostic tests, the power of Method 1 and Method 2 to distinguish limited and extensive disease classified based on semiquantitative scores was found to be strong (Method 1 AUC = 0.945, Method 2 AUC = 0.785 based on \"ILD score\"; Method 1 AUC = 0.911, Method 2 AUC = 0.700 based on \"modified coarseness of reticular disease (MCRD) score\").</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates that quantitative methods (Method 1 [- 700 to - 200 HU] and Method 2 [- 800 to - 500 HU]) play a significant role in assessing the severity of RA-associated ILD (RA-ILD). Both methods showed significant correlations with pulmonary function tests (DLCO [r<sub>1</sub> = - 0.338, p<sub>1</sub> = 0.025; r<sub>2</sub> = - 0.452, p<sub>2</sub> = 0.002] and TLC [r<sub>1</sub> = - 0.567, p<sub>1</sub> < 0.001; r<sub>2</sub> = - 0.576, p<sub>2</sub> < 0.001), with Method 1 (AUC<sub>ILD</sub> = 0.945 and AUC<sub>MCRD</sub> = 0.911) demonstrating superior performance in distinguishing between limited and extensive ILD. Our findings suggest that Hounsfield unit threshold-based quantitative CT analysis may serve as a more objective and reproducible alternative to semiquantitative systems (e.g., Goh score) in the standard evaluation of RA-ILD. Specifically, Method 1 may enable early detection of progression by mechanism, e.g., \"tracking subtle density changes.\" However, further validation in multicenter prospective cohorts is needed to address limitations such as bias. Key Points • Interobserver and intraobserver variability poses a significant challenge in the objective assessment of rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease. • User independent quantitative methods can be used instead of user-dependent semiquantitative methods in assessing rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease. • Quantitative computed tomography analysis enables precise stratification of disease severity in rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease, distinguishing limited interstitial lung disease from extensive interstitial lung disease, which has a poor prognosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":10482,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rheumatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Computed tomography-based quantitative scoring system for rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease: a retrospective diagnostic accuracy study for progressive fibrosis detection.\",\"authors\":\"Mehmet Cihan Karacaoğlu, Betül Kızıldağ, Burak Okyar, Gözde Yıldırım Çetin, Adem Doğaner, Nurhan Atilla\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10067-025-07511-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the ability of quantitative parameters to assess the severity of rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-associated interstitial lung disease (ILD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thorax CT images and pulmonary function tests of RA patients followed up in a tertiary reference center were retrospectively examined. Radiologically, patients were divided into two groups as limited and extensive ILD, using two semiquantitative scoring systems. Two different methods (Method 1, Method 2) were used for quantitative image analysis, in which different Hounsfield unit values were selected as thresholds. Spearman's correlation test was used to evaluate the relationship between variables. The diagnostic performance of quantitative methods for the ability to distinguish limited ILD from extensive ILD was calculated using ROC analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-four patients, 29 female and 15 male, were included in the study. A significant correlation was found between diffusion capacity of the lungs carbonmonoxide (DLCO) and total lung capacity (TLC), which are clinical markers, and both quantitative methods (p < 0.001). In terms of the performance of diagnostic tests, the power of Method 1 and Method 2 to distinguish limited and extensive disease classified based on semiquantitative scores was found to be strong (Method 1 AUC = 0.945, Method 2 AUC = 0.785 based on \\\"ILD score\\\"; Method 1 AUC = 0.911, Method 2 AUC = 0.700 based on \\\"modified coarseness of reticular disease (MCRD) score\\\").</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates that quantitative methods (Method 1 [- 700 to - 200 HU] and Method 2 [- 800 to - 500 HU]) play a significant role in assessing the severity of RA-associated ILD (RA-ILD). Both methods showed significant correlations with pulmonary function tests (DLCO [r<sub>1</sub> = - 0.338, p<sub>1</sub> = 0.025; r<sub>2</sub> = - 0.452, p<sub>2</sub> = 0.002] and TLC [r<sub>1</sub> = - 0.567, p<sub>1</sub> < 0.001; r<sub>2</sub> = - 0.576, p<sub>2</sub> < 0.001), with Method 1 (AUC<sub>ILD</sub> = 0.945 and AUC<sub>MCRD</sub> = 0.911) demonstrating superior performance in distinguishing between limited and extensive ILD. Our findings suggest that Hounsfield unit threshold-based quantitative CT analysis may serve as a more objective and reproducible alternative to semiquantitative systems (e.g., Goh score) in the standard evaluation of RA-ILD. Specifically, Method 1 may enable early detection of progression by mechanism, e.g., \\\"tracking subtle density changes.\\\" However, further validation in multicenter prospective cohorts is needed to address limitations such as bias. Key Points • Interobserver and intraobserver variability poses a significant challenge in the objective assessment of rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease. • User independent quantitative methods can be used instead of user-dependent semiquantitative methods in assessing rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease. • Quantitative computed tomography analysis enables precise stratification of disease severity in rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease, distinguishing limited interstitial lung disease from extensive interstitial lung disease, which has a poor prognosis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Rheumatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Rheumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-025-07511-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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":"Clinical Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-025-07511-y","RegionNum":3,"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

目的:探讨定量参数评估类风湿关节炎(RA)相关间质性肺疾病(ILD)严重程度的能力。方法:回顾性分析在某三级参考中心随访的RA患者的胸部CT图像和肺功能检查。放射学上,将患者分为局限性和广泛性ILD两组,采用两种半定量评分系统。采用方法1、方法2两种不同的方法对图像进行定量分析,选取不同的Hounsfield单位值作为阈值。采用Spearman相关检验评价变量间的关系。采用ROC分析计算定量方法区分局限性ILD和广泛性ILD的诊断性能。结果:共纳入44例患者,其中女性29例,男性15例。结论:本研究表明定量方法(方法1 [- 700 ~ - 200 HU]和方法2 [- 800 ~ - 500 HU])在评估ra相关性ILD (RA-ILD)严重程度方面具有重要作用。两种方法与肺功能检查结果均有显著相关性(DLCO [r1 = - 0.338, p1 = 0.025;r2 = - 0.452, p2 = 0.002]和TLC [r1 = - 0.567, p1 2 = - 0.576, p2 ILD = 0.945, AUCMCRD = 0.911]在区分有限ILD和广泛ILD方面表现优异。我们的研究结果表明,基于Hounsfield单位阈值的定量CT分析可以作为半定量系统(例如Goh评分)的标准评估RA-ILD的更客观和可重复的替代方法。具体地说,方法1可以通过机制实现进展的早期检测,例如,“跟踪细微的密度变化”。然而,需要在多中心前瞻性队列中进一步验证,以解决诸如偏倚等局限性。•观察者之间和观察者内部的可变性对类风湿关节炎相关间质性肺疾病的客观评估提出了重大挑战。•在评估类风湿关节炎相关间质性肺病时,可以使用用户独立的定量方法,而不是用户依赖的半定量方法。•定量计算机断层扫描分析能够对类风湿性关节炎相关间质性肺病的疾病严重程度进行精确分层,区分有限间质性肺病和预后较差的广泛间质性肺病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Computed tomography-based quantitative scoring system for rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease: a retrospective diagnostic accuracy study for progressive fibrosis detection.

Objectives: To investigate the ability of quantitative parameters to assess the severity of rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-associated interstitial lung disease (ILD).

Methods: Thorax CT images and pulmonary function tests of RA patients followed up in a tertiary reference center were retrospectively examined. Radiologically, patients were divided into two groups as limited and extensive ILD, using two semiquantitative scoring systems. Two different methods (Method 1, Method 2) were used for quantitative image analysis, in which different Hounsfield unit values were selected as thresholds. Spearman's correlation test was used to evaluate the relationship between variables. The diagnostic performance of quantitative methods for the ability to distinguish limited ILD from extensive ILD was calculated using ROC analysis.

Results: Forty-four patients, 29 female and 15 male, were included in the study. A significant correlation was found between diffusion capacity of the lungs carbonmonoxide (DLCO) and total lung capacity (TLC), which are clinical markers, and both quantitative methods (p < 0.001). In terms of the performance of diagnostic tests, the power of Method 1 and Method 2 to distinguish limited and extensive disease classified based on semiquantitative scores was found to be strong (Method 1 AUC = 0.945, Method 2 AUC = 0.785 based on "ILD score"; Method 1 AUC = 0.911, Method 2 AUC = 0.700 based on "modified coarseness of reticular disease (MCRD) score").

Conclusion: This study demonstrates that quantitative methods (Method 1 [- 700 to - 200 HU] and Method 2 [- 800 to - 500 HU]) play a significant role in assessing the severity of RA-associated ILD (RA-ILD). Both methods showed significant correlations with pulmonary function tests (DLCO [r1 = - 0.338, p1 = 0.025; r2 = - 0.452, p2 = 0.002] and TLC [r1 = - 0.567, p1 < 0.001; r2 = - 0.576, p2 < 0.001), with Method 1 (AUCILD = 0.945 and AUCMCRD = 0.911) demonstrating superior performance in distinguishing between limited and extensive ILD. Our findings suggest that Hounsfield unit threshold-based quantitative CT analysis may serve as a more objective and reproducible alternative to semiquantitative systems (e.g., Goh score) in the standard evaluation of RA-ILD. Specifically, Method 1 may enable early detection of progression by mechanism, e.g., "tracking subtle density changes." However, further validation in multicenter prospective cohorts is needed to address limitations such as bias. Key Points • Interobserver and intraobserver variability poses a significant challenge in the objective assessment of rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease. • User independent quantitative methods can be used instead of user-dependent semiquantitative methods in assessing rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease. • Quantitative computed tomography analysis enables precise stratification of disease severity in rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease, distinguishing limited interstitial lung disease from extensive interstitial lung disease, which has a poor prognosis.

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
Clinical Rheumatology
Clinical Rheumatology 医学-风湿病学
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
2.90%
发文量
441
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Rheumatology is an international English-language journal devoted to publishing original clinical investigation and research in the general field of rheumatology with accent on clinical aspects at postgraduate level. The journal succeeds Acta Rheumatologica Belgica, originally founded in 1945 as the official journal of the Belgian Rheumatology Society. Clinical Rheumatology aims to cover all modern trends in clinical and experimental research as well as the management and evaluation of diagnostic and treatment procedures connected with the inflammatory, immunologic, metabolic, genetic and degenerative soft and hard connective tissue diseases.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信