Rheumatoid Arthritis: Le Henaff C

Binard A, Alassane S, Devauchelle-Pensec V, Berthelot JM, Jousse-Joulin S, Chalés G, Le Henaff C, Thorel JB, Hoang S, Youinou P, Saraux A. · Unit of Rheumatology and the Laboratory of Immunology, la Cavale Blanche Hospital, Brest Teaching Hospitals, Brest, France. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #17985408 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical, laboratory, and radiological features and outcomes in patients with monoarthritis (MA), identified in a cohort of patients with early arthritis. METHODS: A cohort of 270 patients with undiagnosed arthritis of less than 1 year's duration was divided into 3 groups: single episode of MA (MA, n = 27), MA with a history of patient-reported arthritis (MA + past, n = 23), and oligo- or polyarthritis (OA/PA, n = 220). At 6-month intervals, all patients underwent a standardized examination, radiographs, and standard laboratory tests including rheumatoid factors (RF), antiperinuclear factor (APF), antikeratin antibody (AKA), anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibody (anti-CCP), antinuclear antibodies, and HLA-AB-DR typing. After a median followup of 30 months, the diagnosis was evaluated by a hospital-based rheumatologist. RESULTS: Age and sex did not differ across the 3 groups. Knee involvement was more common in the MA group than in the MA + past group (p < 0.03), whereas hand and metatarsophalangeal involvement was less common (p < 0.03 and p < 0.0001, respectively). RF and anti-CCP were less often positive in the MA group than in the MA + past group (p < 0.02 and p < 0.001, respectively) and the OA/PA group (p < 0.02 and p < 0.03). No patient in the MA group received a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). RA was less common and disease modifying antirheumatic drugs were prescribed less often in the MA group than in the other 2 groups (p < 0.0001 for both comparisons). CONCLUSION: The MA group was clearly different from the other groups, with a favorable outcome and no risk of progression to RA.

Saraux A, Berthelot JM, Devauchelle V, Bendaoud B, Chalès G, Le Henaff C, Thorel JB, Hoang S, Jousse S, Baron D, Le Goff P, Youinou P. · Unit of Rheumatology and the Laboratory of Immunology, Hôpital de la Cavale Blanche, CHU Brest, BP 824, F-29609 Brest-Cedex, France. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #14719190 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic values of antiperinuclear factor (APF), antikeratin antibody (AKA), and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptides (anti-CCP) to discriminate between patients with and without rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to determine the diagnostic value of anti-CCP used alone or with other tests. METHODS: Two hundred and seventy patients with early arthritis underwent standardized investigations in 1995-1997. The clinical utility of APF, AKA, and anti-CCP in first-visit sera was evaluated using receiver-operating characteristic curves. Combinations of anti-CCP with other laboratory tests were assessed by multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Anti-CCP, APF, and AKA were not perfectly correlated with one another. Anti-CCP with 53 UI as the cutoff was 47% sensitive and 93% specific, versus 52% and 79%, and 47% and 94%, for APF and AKA, respectively. Multiple logistic regression selected anti-CCP, AKA, IgM-rheumatoid factor (RF) ELISA, and the latex test. CONCLUSION: Rheumatologists can routinely use 2 or 3 tests for diagnosing RA (latex and/or IgM RF ELISA, and either AKA or anti-CCP ELISA) and can add a third or fourth test when the diagnosis remains in doubt.

Saraux A, Berthelot JM, Chalès G, Le Henaff C, Mary JY, Thorel JB, Hoang S, Dueymes M, Allain J, Devauchelle V, Baron D, Le Goff P, Youinou P. · Rheumatology Unit, Hôpital de la Cavale Blanche, Brest, France. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #11954009 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine which laboratory test or tests at presentation best predicted a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) 2 years later. METHODS: Two hundred seventy patients with early arthritis seen in 7 hospitals underwent comprehensive evaluations at 6-month intervals for 2 years, when the diagnosis of RA was assessed by 5 rheumatologists. The sensitivity and specificity of each test at the first visit for discriminating between RA (38%, n = 98) and non-RA patients were determined. Optimal cutoffs for continuous tests were derived from receiver operating characteristic curves. Sensitivity and specificity of test combinations selected by multiple logistic regression were determined. RESULTS: IgM rheumatoid factor (RF) by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, IgG-antikeratin antibody (AKA), and latex test had the strongest associations with RA. These 3 tests formed the most powerful combination for distinguishing RA from non-RA. CONCLUSION: IgM-RF, IgG-AKA, and the latex test are the best laboratory tests for discriminating between patients with and without RA. Combining these tests slightly improves diagnostic value.

Devauchelle Pensec V, Saraux A, Berthelot JM, Alapetite S, Chalès G, Le Henaff C, Thorel JB, Hoang S, Nouy-Trolle I, Martin A, Baron D, Youinou P, Le Goff P. · Unit of Rheumatology and the Laboratory of Immunology, Hôpital de la Cavale Blanche, Brest, France. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #11764204 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of hand radiographs collected at study inclusion to predict a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) 2 years later, in a cohort of patients with early arthritis. METHODS: We evaluated 270 patients with arthritis of less than one year duration. At the first visit, all patients underwent a standardized evaluation including laboratory tests and radiographs. Followup was 30+/-11.3 mo. The hand radiographs were read by observers blinded to patient data who looked for item 7 of the 1987 ACR criteria for RA and used Sharp's method to score erosions and joint space narrowing. RESULTS: The kappa coefficient for ACR item 7 was < 0.65 for bony decalcification and > 0.8 for erosions. Intra and interobserver correlation coefficients for Sharp score ranged from 0.90 to 0.95. The "erosion" component of ACR item 7 was more specific than the full item 7 (96% versus 87.5%; p = 0.02). Sharp erosion score was not better than the erosion component of item 7 (sensitivity 17%; specificity 96%). CONCLUSION: Regardless of the criterion used, hand radiographs were of limited value to predict which patients would be considered as having RA 2 years later. Diagnostic performance was similar for the "erosions" component of the 1987 ACR item 7 and for Sharp erosion score. The full 1987 ACR item 7 (erosions or bony decalcification) performed less well.

Saraux A, Berthelot JM, Chalès G, Le Henaff C, Thorel JB, Hoang S, Valls I, Devauchelle V, Martin A, Baron D, Pennec Y, Botton E, Mary JY, Le Goff P, Youinou P. · Rheumatology Unit, la Cavale Blanche Hospital, Brest Teaching Hospital, France. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #11710704 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine how well the American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly, the American Rheumatism Association) 1987 classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), when used at study inclusion in a cohort of 270 patients with early (<1 year) arthritis, predicted a diagnosis of RA 2 years later and how well they classified these patients at the end of the 2 years. METHODS: Patients were evaluated during 1995-1997 at 7 hospitals in the Brittany region of France. Patients were evaluated at 6-month intervals until November 1999. The diagnosis made by a panel of 5 rheumatologists (P5R) after the last visit was used as the "gold standard." The ACR 1987 criteria for RA were applied prospectively, without taking into account the initial diagnosis. RESULTS: At the last visit (mean +/- SD followup 29.1 +/- 11.8 months; median 30 months), the P5R diagnosed RA in 98 patients. At the last visit, classification by the ACR criteria was satisfactory, and the combination of an office-based rheumatologist's (OBR's) diagnosis of RA and fulfillment of the ACR criteria was sensitive (87%; 85 of 98 RA patients had both) and highly specific (99%; 170 of 172 non-RA patients did not have both). Application of the criteria at the first visit was of limited value for predicting a diagnosis of RA 2 years later. CONCLUSION: After a 2-year followup, the ACR 1987 classification criteria used in combination with an OBR's diagnosis were effective in distinguishing patients with and without RA. The criteria were not useful for predicting RA in patients with arthritis onset within the previous year. Some patients who met the criteria at baseline and after 2 years did not have RA, suggesting that incorporating exclusion criteria may improve the performance of the ACR criteria when used without taking into account the diagnosis by a rheumatologist, particularly in early arthritis.