Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
    • 50th Volume Reprints
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services

User menu

  • My Cart
  • Log In

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Rheumatology
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services
  • My Cart
  • Log In
The Journal of Rheumatology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
    • 50th Volume Reprints
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • Follow jrheum on Twitter
  • Visit jrheum on Facebook
  • Follow jrheum on LinkedIn
  • Follow jrheum on YouTube
  • Follow jrheum on Instagram
  • Follow jrheum on RSS
Research ArticleArticle

Remission in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Physician and Patient Perspectives

FREDERICK WOLFE, MAARTEN BOERS, DAVID FELSON, KALEB MICHAUD and GEORGE A. WELLS
The Journal of Rheumatology May 2009, 36 (5) 930-933; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.080947
FREDERICK WOLFE
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: fwolfe@arthritis-research.org
MAARTEN BOERS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DAVID FELSON
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
KALEB MICHAUD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
GEORGE A. WELLS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters
PreviousNext
Loading

Abstract

Objective. To examine the prevalence of remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as determined by physicians and patients independently, and to determine the degree of agreement among methods, the strength of predictor variables of remission, and the length of remission.

Methods. Eight hundred patients with RA completed a remission questionnaire on the day of their rheumatologist visit and their rheumatologists completed a separate questionnaire the same day. The question(s) were: “Given all your experience with disease activity in RA, are you [is your patient] currently in remission?”. Patients also completed 0–10 visual analog scales for RA activity, pain, and functional limitation.

Results. The percentage of patients in remission by physician and patient assessment was 34.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 31.4–38.2] and 30.9% (95% CI 27.7–34.20), respectively. The percentage of patients classified concordantly (full agreement) was 78.6%, and the associated kappa statistic was 0.54 (95% CI 0.45–0.58). The median duration of remission was 2.0 years. The median RA activity, pain, and functional scores were 1.0, 1.5, and 1.25 for patient-determined remission and 1.5, 1.5, and 1.5 for physician-determined remission.

Conclusion. Physician and patient estimates of remission in RA are similar (34.8% to 30.9%), and agreement was 78.6% (kappa 0.53). Based on previous data and the observed presence of disease activity, this definition of remission appears to be a measure of minimal disease activity rather than true remission. The problem of remission rates will not be solved until a consensus definition that has relevance in research and the clinic is developed.

  • REMISSION
  • RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
  • DISEASE ACTIVITY

After cure, remission is the most desirable outcome of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, there is no agreed-upon definition of remission1–8. Remission includes assessments of clinical activity, but also usually has a minimum time component, and might come to include factors such as radiographic progression in future definitions. Currently, an international group of RA experts under the auspices of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) is reviewing remission with plans to propose new criteria1.

In the clinical care setting, the physician usually determines remission based on apparent clinical activity. Compared with research criteria that may seem Procrustean, physicians may be able to determine when pain, fatigue, and laboratory test abnormalities are unrelated to RA activity. Still, there are a number of problems with physician criteria. Physicians do not use a uniform set of criteria, something that would be needed for research studies. In addition, RA activity exists as a continuum, and physicians must pick a point on that continuum that they define as remission, a point that still might include residual activity. There are few data on remission prevalence as defined by practicing physicians. But knowledge of this prevalence can inform the current remaking of the remission criteria.

It also might be useful to ask patients if they are in remission. Patients with RA are knowledgeable about RA activity. However, patients may not know about laboratory results, might inappropriately identify swelling, or misattribute non-RA pain as being related to RA. Patients’ assessments of remission could be valuable in clinical care and research, but only if they agree with other methods of determining remission.

In our study, we examined the prevalence of remission as determined by physicians and patients independently, and determined the degree of agreement between methods, the strength of predictor variables of remission, and the length of remission.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We surveyed 800 unselected participants in the National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases (NDB) longterm outcome study of RA who completed a remission questionnaire on the day of their rheumatologist visit9, and we asked the rheumatologist to complete a separate questionnaire that same day. The question(s) were: “Given all your experience with disease activity in RA, are you [is your patient] currently in remission?”. Patients also completed 0–10 visual analog scales for RA activity, pain, and functional limitation10. The RA activity scale was a component of the RA Disease Activity Index (RADAI)11. Patients reported the length of remission. The median age and RA duration of NDB participants were 65.2 and 15.4 years, respectively. Men constituted 20.5% of the study population.

The NDB is a research data bank that surveys patients by mail and Internet at 6-month intervals. Patients are diagnosed by rheumatologists and referred to the data bank from their practices. To protect patient confidentiality in our study, the data were deidentified; we did not have access to any data on these patients beyond the study questionnaire and their RA diagnosis.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients in remission by physician and patient assessment was 34.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 31.4–38.2] and 30.9% (95% CI 27.7–34.20), respectively (Table 1). The percentage of patients classified concordantly (full agreement) was 78.6%, and the associated kappa statistic was 0.54 (95% CI 0.45–0.58). Using the physicians and the patients as the “gold standard,” the area under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve was, respectively, 0.75 (95% CI 0.72–0.78) and 0.77 (95% CI 0.73–0.78); and specificity was high in both groups [86.6% (95% CI 83.4–89.4) and 81.7% (95% CI 78.3–84.9)]. The median duration of remission reported by patients was 2.0 years.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Agreement measures using physicians’ and then patients’ remission as the “gold standard.”

Patient-reported RA activity and pain were similar in their strength of predictive ability for physician- and patient-determined remission, and were stronger than functional status (Figure 1). Associations were also stronger for patient-reported remission than physician-reported remission. For example, the area under the ROC curve for RA activity was 0.798 compared with 0.730.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curves for patient- and physician-reported rheumatoid arthritis (RA) remission for patient-reported pain, RA activity, and functional ability, using 0–10 visual analog scales.

Of interest, the median RA activity, pain, and functional scores were 1.0, 1.5, and 1.25 for patient-determined remission and 1.5, 1.5, and 1.5 for physician-determined remission (Figure 2).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Box plots of visual analog scale (0–10) measures of RA activity, pain, and function for patients in remssion by physician definition (left panel) and patient definition (right). Horizontal white lines indicate median values; boxes define 25th and 75th percentiles; lines indicate 5th and 95th percentiles.

DISCUSSION

The prevalence of remission in our study (30.9% to 34.8%) is similar to what we have noted previously for the Disease Activity Score 28-joint count (DAS-28), 28.5%8. In that study we also found the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission prevalence to be 6.5% to 8.1%; and we used a physician’s global that was specifically designed for RA activity and was marked 0 for no activity and 1–3 as mild activity8. To be inclusive, we then accepted scores of 0 or 1 as remission, and found that 12.5% of patients were in remission using that definition. In addition, minimal disease activity was 34.7% by DAS-28 criteria and 26.9 by the ACR core set criteria. Based on data from that study8, it seems likely that the physician and patient remission prevalences reported in this study overestimate remission, and instead represent low disease activity rather than remission. Additional support for the idea that the study “remission” really represents minimal disease activity comes from Figure 2, where it can be seen that there are many > 1 or > 2 scores for RA activity and pain in patients classified as being in remission. The problem of remission rates will not be solved until a consensus definition that has relevance in research and the clinic is developed.

We found that agreement between patients and physicians was moderate, with an overall agreement of 78.6%. Therefore, we think that the patients’ self-reported remission can be used in observational research studies. However, it should be understood that it is measuring low disease activity, not remission.

Recently, in a preliminary separate study, we asked clinic physicians to note whether the patient is in remission and to complete the physician’s global severity-RA activity scale. Therefore, physicians were aware of the level of their global at the time they indicated remission. We found no global scores > 1 for patients in remission. This suggests that the global scale adds an implicit remission definition when both are used together.

Physician and patient estimates of remission in RA were 34.8% and 30.9%, respectively. Agreement between observers was moderate, 78.6%, kappa 0.53. Based on previous data and the observed presence of disease activity, this definition of remission appears to be a measure of minimal disease activity rather than true remission.

Footnotes

    • Accepted for publication December 2, 2008.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. van Tuyl LHD,
    2. Vlad SC,
    3. Felson D,
    4. Wells G,
    5. Boers M
    . Defining remission in rheumatoid arthritis: results of an initial ACR consensus conference. Arthritis Care Res 2009; (in press).
  2. 2.
    1. Prevoo ML,
    2. van Gestel AM,
    3. van ’t Hof MA,
    4. van Rijswijk MH,
    5. van de Putte LB,
    6. van Riel PL
    . Remission in a prospective study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. American Rheumatism Association preliminary remission criteria in relation to the disease activity score. Br J Rheumatol 1996;35:1101–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.
    1. Fransen J,
    2. Creemers MC,
    3. van Riel PL
    . Remission in rheumatoid arthritis: agreement of the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) with the ARA preliminary remission criteria. Rheumatology 2004;43:1252–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.
    1. Pinals RS,
    2. Baum J,
    3. Bland J,
    4. et al
    . Preliminary criteria for clinical remission in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1981;24:1308–15.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. 5.
    1. Aletaha D,
    2. Ward MM,
    3. Machold KP,
    4. Nell VP,
    5. Stamm T,
    6. Smolen JS
    . Remission and active disease in rheumatoid arthritis: defining criteria for disease activity states. Arthritis Rheum 2005;52:2625–36.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.
    1. van der Heijde D,
    2. Klareskog L,
    3. Boers M,
    4. et al
    . Comparison of different definitions to classify remission and sustained remission: 1 year TEMPO results. Ann Rheum Dis 2005;64:1582–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.
    1. Mierau M,
    2. Schoels M,
    3. Gonda G,
    4. Fuchs J,
    5. Aletaha D,
    6. Smolen JS
    . Assessing remission in clinical practice. Rheumatology 2007;46:975–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Shaver TS,
    2. Anderson JD,
    3. Weidensaul DN,
    4. et al
    . The problem of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity and remission in clinical practice. J Rheumatol 2008;35:1015–22.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Wolfe F,
    2. Michaud K
    . A brief introduction to the National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005;23:S168–71.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Wolfe F,
    2. Michaud K,
    3. Pincus T
    . Preliminary evaluation of a visual analog function scale for use in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2005;32:1261–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Stucki G,
    2. Liang MH,
    3. Stucki S,
    4. Bruhlmann P,
    5. Michel BA
    . A self-administered Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index (RADAI) for epidemiologic research. Psychometric properties and correlation with parameters of disease activity. Arthritis Rheum 1995;38:795–8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 36, Issue 5
1 May 2009
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by Author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Rheumatology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Remission in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Physician and Patient Perspectives
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Rheumatology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Rheumatology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Remission in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Physician and Patient Perspectives
FREDERICK WOLFE, MAARTEN BOERS, DAVID FELSON, KALEB MICHAUD, GEORGE A. WELLS
The Journal of Rheumatology May 2009, 36 (5) 930-933; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.080947

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

 Request Permissions

Share
Remission in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Physician and Patient Perspectives
FREDERICK WOLFE, MAARTEN BOERS, DAVID FELSON, KALEB MICHAUD, GEORGE A. WELLS
The Journal of Rheumatology May 2009, 36 (5) 930-933; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.080947
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Effect of Nonimmune Factors on Renal Prognosis in Adult IgA Vasculitis With Nephritis: A Long-Term Retrospective Cohort Study
  • Functional Connectivity and Structural Signatures of the Visual Cortical System in Fibromyalgia: A Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study
  • Patient-Reported Outcomes in Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition Disease Compared to Gout and Osteoarthritis
Show more Article

Similar Articles

Content

  • First Release
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Collections
  • Audiovisual Rheum
  • COVID-19 and Rheumatology

Resources

  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Author Payment
  • Reviewers
  • Advertisers
  • Classified Ads
  • Reprints and Translations
  • Permissions
  • Meetings
  • FAQ
  • Policies

Subscribers

  • Subscription Information
  • Purchase Subscription
  • Your Account
  • Terms and Conditions

More

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • My Alerts
  • My Folders
  • Privacy/GDPR Policy
  • RSS Feeds
The Journal of Rheumatology
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
Copyright © 2022 by The Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co. Ltd.
Print ISSN: 0315-162X; Online ISSN: 1499-2752
Powered by HighWire