Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Is DAS28-CRP with three and four variables interchangeable in individual patients selected for biological treatment in daily clinical practice?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Rheumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

DAS28 is a widely used composite score for the assessment of disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and is often used as a treatment decision tool in the daily clinic. Different versions of DAS28 are available. DAS28-CRP(3) is calculated based on three variables: swollen and tender joint counts and CRP. DAS28-CRP(4) also includes patient global assessment. Thresholds for low and high disease activity are the same for the two scores. Based on the Bland–Altman method, the interchangeability between DAS28-CRP with three and four variables was examined in 319 RA patients selected for initiating biological treatment. Data were extracted from the Danish registry for biological treatment in rheumatology (DANBIO). Multiple regression analysis was used to assess the predictability of the DAS28 scores by several measures of disease activity. The overall mean DAS28-CRP was 4.7 ± 1.2. The mean difference between the two scores (the bias) was −0.29 ± 0.33 (CI −0.33, −0.25) (p < 0.0001). Upper and lower limits of agreement were −0.95 (CI −1.01, −0.89) and 0.37 (CI 0.31, 0.43), respectively. Tender joint count was the most important predictor of both DAS28-CRP(4) (beta = 0.52, p < 0.0001) and DAS28-CRP(3) (beta = 0.62, p < 0.0001). The second most important predictor of DAS28-CRP(4) was patient global assessment (beta = 0.32, p < 0.0001) which did not add to the prediction of DAS28-CRP(3). In conclusion, overall DAS28-CRP(3) was only slightly underestimated compared to DAS28-CRP(4). In the individual patient, however, the two scores may differ considerably. The scores should not be used interchangeably in the daily clinic without caution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Van der Heijde DMFM, van't Hof MA, van Riel PLCM, Theunisse LAM, Lubberts EW, van Leeuwen MA et al (1990) Judging disease activity in clinical practice in rheumatoid arthritis: first step in the development of a disease activity score. Ann Rheum Dis 49:916–920

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Van der Heijde DMFM, van't Hof MA, van Riel PLCM, van Leeuwen MA, van Rijswijk MH, van de Putte LBA (1992) Validity of single variables and composite indices for measuring disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 51:177–181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Prevoo ML, van 't Hof MA, Kuper HH, van Leeuwen MA, van de Putte LB, van Riel PL (1995) Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts. Development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 38:44–48

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. van Gestel AM, Haagsma CJ, van Riel PL (1998) Validation of rheumatoid arthritis improvement criteria that include simplified joint counts. Arthritis Rheum 41:1845–1850

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fransen J, Welksing PMJ, de Keijzer RMH, van Riel PLCM (2003) Disease activity scores using C-reactive protein: CRP may replace ESR in the assessment of RA disease activity. Ann Rheum Dis 62:151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ringold S, Singer NG (2008) Measures of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis: a clinician's guide. Curr Rheumatol Rev 4:259–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fransen J, van Riel PL (2009) The disease activity score and the EULAR response criteria. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 35:745–757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. http://www.das-score.nl/www.das-score.nl/. Accessed 25 February 2011

  9. van Gestel AM, Prevoo ML, van 't Hof MA, van Rijswijk MH, van de Putte LB, van Riel PL (1996) Development and validation of the European League Against Rheumatism response criteria for rheumatoid arthritis. Comparison with the preliminary American College of Rheumatology and the World Health Organization/International League Against Rheumatism Criteria. Arthritis Rheum 39:34–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. van Gestel AM, Anderson JJ, van Riel PL, Boers M, Haagsma CJ, Rich B et al (1999) ACR and EULAR improvement criteria have comparable validity in rheumatoid arthritis trials. American College of Rheumatology European League of Associations for Rheumatology. J Rheumatol 26:705–711

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Goekoop-Ruiterman YP, de Vries-Bouwstra JK, Kerstens PJ, Nielen MM, Vos K, van Schaardenburg D (2010) DAS-driven therapi versus routine care in patients with recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 69:65–69

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kuriya B, Arkema EV, Bykerk VP, Keystone EC (2010) Efficacy of initial methotrexate monotherapy versus combination therapy with a biological agent in early rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis of clinical and radiographic remission. Ann Rheum Dis 69:1298–1304

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sokka T, Toloza S, Cutolo M, Kautiainen H, Makinen H, Gogus F et al (2009) Women, men, and rheumatoid arthritis: analyses of disease activity, disease characteristics, and treatments in the QUEST-RA study. Arthritis Res Ther 11:R7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. van Riel PL, Fransen J (2005) DAS28: a useful instrument to monitor infliximab treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 7:189–190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. van der Heijde DM, Jacobs JW (1998) The original “DAS” and the “DAS28” are not interchangeable: comment on the articles by Prevoo et al. Arthritis Rheum 41:942–945

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hetland ML, Christensen IJ, Tarp U, Dreyer L, Hansen A, Hansen IT et al (2010) Direct comparison of treatment responses, remission rates, and drug adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with adalimumab, etanercept, or infliximab. Arthritis Rheum 62:22–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 327:307–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bland JM, Altman DG (1996) Statistics notes: measurement error. BMJ 313:744

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Wells G, Becker JC, Teng J, Dougados M, Schiff M, Smolen J et al (2009) Validation of the 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) and European League Against Rheumatism response criteria based on C-reactive protein against disease progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and comparison with the DAS28 based on erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Ann Rheum Dis 68:954–960

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kushner I (1991) C-reactive protein in rheumatology. Arthritis Rheum 34:1065–1068

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Talstad I, Scheie P, Dalen H, Roli J (1983) Influence of plasma proteins on erythrocyte morphology and sedimentation. Scand J Haematol 31:478–484

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. van Leeuwen MA, van Rijswijk MH, van der Heijde DM, Te Meerman GJ, van Riel PL, Houtman PM et al (1993) The acute-phase response in relation to radiographic progression in early rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective study during the first three years of the disease. Br J Rheumatol 32:9–13

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mallya RK, de Beer FC, Berry H, Hamilton ED, Mace BE, Pepys MB (1982) Correlation of clinical parameters of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis with serum concentration of C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate. J Rheumatol 9:224–228

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Wolfe F (1997) Comparative usefulness of C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 24:1477–1485

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hensor EM, Emery P, Bingham SJ, Conaghan PG, YEAR Consortium (2010) Discrepancies in categorizing rheumatoid arthritis patients by DAS-28(ESR) and DAS-28(CRP): can they be reduced? Rheumatology 49:1521–1529

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Matsui T, Kuga Y, Kaneko J, Eto Y, Chiba N, Yasuda M et al (2007) Disease activity score 28 (DAS28) using C-reactive protein underestimates disease activity and overestimates EULAR response criteria compared with DAS28 using erythrocyte sedimentation rate in a large observational cohort of rheumatoid arthritis patients in Japan. Ann Rheum Dis 66:1221–1226

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Inoue E, Yamanaka H, Hara M, Tomatsu T, Kamatani N (2007) Comparison of disease activity score (DAS)28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate and DAS28-C-reactive protein thresholds values. Ann Rheum Dis 66:407–409

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Castrejõn I, Ortiz AM, Garcia-Vicuña R, Lopez-Bote JP, Humbría A, Carmona L et al (2008) Are the C-reactive protein values and erythrocyte sedimentation rate equivalent when estimating the 28-joint disease activity score in rheumatoid arthritis? Clin Exp Rheumatol 26:769–775

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. van Riel PL ed. (2004) Disease activity. EULAR handbook of clinical assessment in rheumatoid arthritis. Van Zuiden Communications BV, the Netherlands, p 37

  30. Van der Maas A, van den Ende CHM, van Eerd J, Fransen J, den Broeder AA (2010) The use of different methods for rapid determination of the ESR induces DAS28 misclassification in clinical practice. Clin Exp Rheumatol 28:477–482

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Wolfe F, Sharp JT (1998) Radiographic outcome of recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis: a 19-year study of radiographic progression. Arthritis Rheum 41:1571–1582

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Mäkinen H, Kautiainen H, Hannonen P, Möttönen T, Korpela M, Leirisalo-Repo M et al (2007) Disease activity score 28 as an instrument to measure disease activity in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 34:1987–1991

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine C/Rheumatology, Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, and the DANBIO Registry, Department of Rheumatology, Copenhagen University Hospital Glostrup, DK-2900, Hellerup, Denmark

    Ole Rintek Madsen

Authors
  1. Ole Rintek Madsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ole Rintek Madsen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Madsen, O.R. Is DAS28-CRP with three and four variables interchangeable in individual patients selected for biological treatment in daily clinical practice?. Clin Rheumatol 30, 1577–1582 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-011-1847-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-011-1847-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation