Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • 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
  • Log Out

Search

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

Advanced Search

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

Prediction of Remission in a French Early Arthritis Cohort by RAPID3 and other Core Data Set Measures, but Not by the Absence of Rheumatoid Factor, Anticitrullinated Protein Antibodies, or Radiographic Erosions

Isabel Castrejón, Maxime Dougados, Bernard Combe, Bruno Fautrel, Francis Guillemin and Theodore Pincus
The Journal of Rheumatology July 2016, 43 (7) 1285-1291; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.141586
Isabel Castrejón
From the Division of Rheumatology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Paris Descartes University; Department of Rheumatology, Hôpital Cochin; Assistance Publique, Hôpitaux de Paris INSERM (U1153): Clinical epidemiology and biostatistics, PRES Sorbonne Paris-Cité; Pitie-Salpetriere University Hospital, Paris; Department of Rheumatology, CHU Lapeyronie, Montpellier University, Montpellier; University of Lorraine, EA 4360 APEMAC, Nancy, France.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maxime Dougados
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bernard Combe
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bruno Fautrel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Francis Guillemin
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Theodore Pincus
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: tedpincus@gmail.com
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters
PreviousNext
Loading

Abstract

Objective. To identify baseline variables that predict remission according to different criteria in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a comprehensive French ESPOIR early arthritis database.

Methods. Individual variables and indices at baseline were analyzed in 664 patients for capacity to predict remission either 6 or 12 months later according to 4 criteria that require a formal joint count: the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Boolean criteria, the Simplified Disease Activity Index, the Clinical Disease Activity Index, and the 28-joint Disease Activity Score; and 2 remission criteria that do not require a formal joint count: the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) and the RAPID3 ≤ 3 + swollen joint, using univariate and multivariate logistic regressions.

Results. Remission was predicted significantly 6 and/or 12 months later in 26.8%–51.4% of patients, according to all 6 criteria by younger age, low index scores, and better status for the 6/7 clinical RA core dataset measures: tender joint count, swollen joint count (SJC), physician’s global estimate, patient self-report Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) physical function, pain, and patient’s global estimate. Remission was not predicted by the absence of “poor prognosis RA” indicators, rheumatoid factor (RF), anticitrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA), or radiographic erosions. In multivariate regressions that included only 3 variables, low HAQ function predicted remission by all criteria as effectively as SJC, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, or C-reactive protein.

Conclusion. Younger age and 6 core dataset clinical measures, but not the absence of traditional “poor prognosis RA” indicators, RF, ACPA, or radiographic erosions, predicted remission according to 6 criteria, including 2 without a formal joint count.

Key Indexing Terms:
  • RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
  • REMISSION CRITERIA
  • RAPID3
  • ESPOIR

An American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) expert committee designated 2 criterion sets for remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA): the Boolean and the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) < 3.3, based on a decision that remission criteria should include a formal tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), and a laboratory test1. Therefore, it was relatively unexpected that similar results for remission in the ACR/EULAR criteria, as well as the 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) and the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), were seen according to an index that did not include formal joint counts or a laboratory test: RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 + 1 or 0 swollen joints), in patients in the French ESPOIR early arthritis database2. RAPID3 is composed of the 3 patient self-report measures among the 7 RA core dataset measures3, physical function, pain, and patient’s global assessment (PtGA)4.

RAPID3 is correlated significantly with DAS28 and CDAI in clinical trials and clinical care, and distinguishes active from control treatment in RA clinical trials as efficiently as these indices5. RAPID3 is feasible in busy clinical rheumatology settings because it requires only 5 s to score, in contrast with 114 s for the DAS28 and 110 s for the CDAI6. The Multi-Dimensional HAQ (MDHAQ)/RAPID3 completed by a patient in the waiting area7 provides a quantitative measure to enhance clinical decisions in busy clinical settings, particularly because most rheumatologists do not perform a formal joint count in most patients8,9. RAPID3 has been found to be valuable in all rheumatic diseases in which it has been studied10,11,12,13,14,15,16.

The observation that RAPID3-based remission criteria identified patients who were in remission similarly to criteria that included formal joint counts and laboratory tests suggested that patient questionnaire measures might also predict remission as effectively as laboratory and radiographic measures. We formulated a hypothesis that RAPID3, an index of patient self-report measures only, would predict remission as effectively as the absence of variables that are regarded as indicators of “poor prognosis RA,” such as rheumatoid factor (RF), anticitrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA), and radiographic erosions17,18.

Most reported studies concerning the prediction of remission in RA are primarily based on data from clinical trials19, which include a minority of selected patients20,21 and only a limited number of variables19. The ESPOIR database includes a comprehensive set of baseline variables from actual clinical care. In our report, we analyzed individual measures and indices at baseline to predict remission either 6 or 12 months later (or at both timepoints) according to 6 different criteria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The ESPOIR cohort

The ESPOIR is a prospective observational cohort of patients with early arthritis sponsored by the French Society for Rheumatology. Patients had early arthritis (disease duration < 6 mos), a certain/probable clinical diagnosis of RA or undifferentiated arthritis potentially becoming RA, and were naive to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD). Corticosteroids were permitted only if prescribed for < 2 weeks and with a maximum mean dose of 20 mg/day22. A total of 813 patients were enrolled between December 2002 and March 2005 at 14 academic regional centers, with the participation of a network of private rheumatologists. Patients were treated by their rheumatologists according to standard of care and evaluated per protocol every 6 months over the first 2 years and every year thereafter. Further details are described in a previous report22.

The ESPOIR database includes demographic, clinical, and radiographic variables, and is used by multiple investigators who apply to perform specific studies. The database available through application for the study reported here included only the first year of observation. Analyses were restricted to 664 individuals with complete data at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months for each variable studied. Baseline characteristics were similar in the study patients to non-included ESPOIR patients (data not shown).

Remission criteria

Remission was defined retrospectively using prospectively collected data at 6 months, 12 months, or both timepoints according to 6 different criteria including the Boolean [TJC28, SJC28, C-reactive protein (CRP), and PtGA ≤ 11,23], SDAI < 3.324, CDAI < 2.825, DAS28 ≤ 2.626, RAPID3 ≤ 3, and RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 12. The rationale for studying the 6 criteria were the following: Boolean and SDAI were recommended by the ACR/EULAR committee, DAS28 is the criterion for remission in 90% of published reports, CDAI is widely used instead of SDAI and DAS28, and RAPID3-SJ1 is the focus of our study and should be analyzed to recognize how it differs from RAPID3 because it requires an extra step by the assessor.

Clinical variables as possible predictors of remission

Available baseline variables were analyzed for capacity to predict remission, including demographic variables (age, sex, and family history of RA), disease duration, traditional variables regarded as indicating “poor prognosis RA”18,27 (RF, ACPA positivity, and presence of erosions at baseline using the score for erosions from a baseline Sharp/van der Heijde score as a dichotomous variable), RA core dataset variables [3 from a physician: TJC28, SJC28, and physician’s global assessment (PGA)], 1 laboratory test [erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) or CRP], 3 from patient self-report [Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) physical function scores (0–3 converted to 0–10 to calculate RAPID3)28, 0–10 visual analog scale for pain, and for PtGA], and 4 RA indices (DAS2826, SDAI25, CDAI29, and RAPID34.

Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed using Stata, version 12 (StataCorp). Individual variables were assessed descriptively at baseline as mean and SD for normally distributed variables, and median and interquartile range for non-normally–distributed variables. Baseline variables were compared for patients in remission versus not in remission according to each of the 6 remission criteria. Student t tests were performed for variables with normal distributions, and Mann-Whitney U tests for variables with non-normal distributions.

Univariate regressions were performed to identify baseline individual variables and indices as potential predictors of remission. Those variables with p values < 0.10 were carried forward into multivariate logistic regressions. Results are presented as multivariate OR with 95% CI.

A separate multivariate regression was performed in view of the unexpected finding that patient questionnaire data were more likely to predict remission than a laboratory test or joint counts. These analyses included only 3 measures, 1 from each category of the core dataset, SJC, ESR, or CRP because they are regarded by most rheumatologists as optimal indicators of inflammation1, and HAQ physical function, regarded as most likely to be affected by joint damage and is irreversible30,31,32 and therefore a poor indicator of inflammation. The other 4 RA core dataset measures (TJC, PGA, pain, and PtGA) and demographic measures were not included in these regressions.

RESULTS

Among the 664 patients studied, 507 (76.4%) were women. The mean age was 48.4 years, and the median duration of disease was 4.8 months (Table 1). The number and proportion of patients who were in remission at 6 and/or 12 months according to the Boolean criteria was 165 (24.8%), compared with 339 (51.4%) by DAS28, 204 (30.8%) by SDAI, 205 (30.9%) by CDAI, 273 (41.1%) by RAPID3, and 209 (31.5%) by RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1 (Table 2, Table 3).

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

Characteristics of the 664 patients from the ESPOIR cohort at baseline and comparison of the remission group versus nonremission at 6 or 12 months according to the Boolean criteria. Student t test was performed for variables with a normal distribution and Mann-Whitney U test for variables with a non-normal distribution. Values are median (interquartile range) unless otherwise specified.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Univariate logistic regression models to estimate the associations among baseline variables that are potential predictors of remission by the Boolean criteria, DAS28, SDAI, CDAI, RAPID3, and RAPID3-SJ1 at 6 and/or 12 months.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Multivariate logistic regression models to estimate the associations among baseline variables that are potential predictors of remission by the Boolean criteria, DAS28, SDAI, CDAI, RAPID3, and RAPID3-SJ1 at 6 and/or 12 months. Disease duration, erosive at baseline, CRP, ACPA, and RF were not significant in univariate analysis for any of the criteria and were not included in the multivariate analysis.

Possible predictors of remission showed a similar pattern for each of the 6 remission criteria (Table 2). In univariate analyses, 5 of 7 core dataset measures (TJC, PGA, HAQ function, pain, and PtGA) were significant to predict remission according to all 6 criteria. SJC was significant for 4 criteria (Boolean, SDAI, CDAI, and RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1), and ESR for 1 criteria set (DAS28). Among other measures, younger age was significant to predict remission according to all 6 criteria, no family history of RA for 2 criteria (DAS28 and RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1), and female sex only for DAS28. RF, ACPA, radiographic erosions, CRP, or disease duration were not significant to predict remission according to any of the 6 criteria (Table 2).

Multivariate logistic regressions that included individual variables with p values < 0.10 in univariate analyses (Table 3) indicated significant prediction of remission for the Boolean criteria (p < 0.05) by low age, low TJC28, and pain (Table 3); for DAS28 by low age, male sex, no family history of RA, low TJC28, and low pain; for SDAI and CDAI by low age, TJC28, PGA, and pain; for RAPID3 by low age, pain, and HAQ physical function; and for RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1 by low age and pain (Table 3). Only low age and low pain were associated independently with each of the 6 remission criteria, and TJC with 4 of 6 (Table 3). Again, RF, ACPA, radiographic erosions, CRP, and disease duration were not significant to predict remission by any of the 6 criteria.

Analyses according to the 4 RA clinical indices, CDAI, DAS28, RAPID3, and SDAI (Table 4), indicated that all were significant to predict remission status at both 6 and 12 months according to all 6 remission criteria in univariate logistic regressions. The lowest OR (indicating greatest capacity) to predict remission according to all remission criteria were seen for the DAS28, followed by RAPID3. In multivariate regressions, only RAPID3 predicted remission significantly according to the Boolean criteria, RAPID3, and RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1. No index was significant to predict remission criteria according to the SDAI criteria, only CDAI predicted CDAI remission significantly, and DAS28 remission was predicted by DAS28, CDAI, and RAPID3.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4.

Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions to estimate associations among 4 indices (SDAI, CDAI, RAPID3, and DAS28) to predict remission status at both 6- and 12-month timepoints. All univariate logistic regression results to predict SDAI or CDAI remission are p < 0.001 except for RAPID3, which is p < 0.01. All multivariate logistic regression results are p < 0.001 except the Boolean criteria to predict SDAI, CDAI, DAS28, and RAPID3, which are p = 0.18, p = 0.52, p = 0.75, and p = 0.02, respectively.

Two separate logistic regressions were performed that included only 3 measures (SJC, either ESR or CRP, and HAQ physical function) as independent variables to predict each of the 6 remission criteria as dependent variables (Table 5). As noted, these analyses were based on a rationale that SJC, ESR, and CRP are regarded as optimal indicators of inflammation1, while HAQ physical function is regarded as least reversible because of joint damage30,31,32. However, HAQ physical function was significant independently to predict remission for all 6 criteria sets, including for the 4 criteria sets that do not include HAQ physical function: the Boolean, SDAI, CDAI, and DAS28 (Table 5). SJC (as well as HAQ physical function) was significant to predict remission according to the SDAI and CDAI. ESR was significant in these analyses to predict remission by CDAI, RAPID3, and RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1. CRP was significant to predict remission by RAPID3 and RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 5.

Multivariate models to predict remission at 6 and/or 12 months according to 6 criteria using only SJC, ESR or CRP, and HAQ function.

DISCUSSION

In our study, younger age and the 6 clinical core dataset measures, but not traditional indicators of “poor prognosis RA,” including absence of baseline RF, ACPA, or radiographic damage17,18, were significant predictors of remission according to 6 remission criteria in univariate analyses. Traditional variables for poor prognosis would likely be significant with a larger number of patients. However, younger age and low TJC, SJC, PGA, HAQ function, pain, and PtGA would appear to be more robust predictors of remission 6 and/or 12 months later than laboratory tests and radiographs in the ESPOIR database.

An excellent systematic review of 18 studies of baseline variables that might predict RA remission indicated that these were prognostic in some studies but not all: younger age, male sex, short disease duration, low baseline DAS28, low radiographic damage, absence of RF, absence of ACPA, and low levels of acute-phase reactants19,33,34,35,36,37. Most of these reports analyzed only selected variables from selected patients from clinical trials, for which most patients with RA have not been eligible20,21, and other clinical research studies in which patients may be selected for many variables thought to connote “poor prognosis RA”17,18 rather than a comprehensive set of demographic, clinical, patient questionnaire, and laboratory variables19. Results with a limited number of variables in selected populations may differ from those seen in patients in routine care. Further, most of these studies assessed remission according to the DAS2819,33,34,35,36,37, which is regarded as insufficiently stringent1.

The observation that HAQ physical function was as likely as SJC, ESR, or CRP to predict remission (or more likely) may appear inconsistent with reports that HAQ function score is more likely than other core dataset measures to be unresponsive to therapies because scores reflect damage more than other variables30,31,32. Favorable HAQ function score could be more prognostic for remission without necessarily being responsive to treatment, simply serving as a marker for low severity. However, HAQ function was as responsive as SJC, ESR, or CRP to distinguish between active and control treatments in the 9 reported comparisons in clinical trials of DMARD and biological agents38. Differences from other reports30,31,32 may be explained in part by different methods, different populations, and other features of different studies.

RAPID3 and RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1, which includes only patient self-report scores and observation of 1 swollen joint or none, have been developed to overcome the workflow complexities in busy clinical settings to collect more elaborate remission criteria7. It is far simpler in busy settings to ask patients to complete the same questionnaire at each visit than to collect different patient questionnaires for patients with different diagnoses. The MDHAQ/RAPID3 has been shown to document improvement in many rheumatic diseases11,12,13,14,15,16,39, and can be of value in new (or return) patients with an unknown diagnosis.

Several limitations are seen in our study. Only a single cohort of patients (664) with early arthritis from France was analyzed. Analyses were conducted only at baseline, 6 months, or 12 months after baseline, to identify remission status. It might be more desirable to analyze potential predictors of sustained remission, which is uncommon in clinical cohorts40,41, although associated with better outcomes42. However, only the first year of observation was available for the reported study. No adjustment was made for treatment, recognizing that early aggressive treatment improved RA outcomes, regardless of other variables43,44. Finally, the 7 RA core dataset measures are correlated significantly with one another, which may distort statistical significance of individual variables and indices because of multicollinearity.

Nonetheless, RAPID3 appears to be a robust index for feasible prediction and identification of remission compared with other indices, particularly because formal joint counts are not performed in usual care8,9, and most rheumatology settings in the United States do not include assessment of any index9. Remission is excluded by recognizing more than 1 swollen joint, which is far more feasible than performing a formal joint count. Laboratory tests are frequently the only quantitative clinical measures available in the medical records of most patients with RA to support clinical decisions in patient care, despite being regarded as inadequate by regulatory agencies, for which an RA index is required.

Variables regarded as indicators of “poor prognosis RA,” such as laboratory tests and radiographic erosions, were not statistically significant to predict remission according to 6 criteria. Predictors of remission according to all 6 criteria appear more similar than different. RAPID3 and RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1 criteria, based primarily on patient variables, predict remission similarly to criteria that require a formal joint count, including 4 criteria that do not include pain or HAQ physical function. In an earlier report, we found that remission criteria based only on RAPID3 and a careful joint examination instead of a formal joint count yielded similar results compared with the Boolean and other remission criteria2. Collection of RAPID3 does not exclude a formal joint count as well as formal scoring of DAS28, SDAI, and CDAI. However, RAPID3 does assure that some quantitative data beyond laboratory tests will be recorded at each patient visit. RAPID3 ≤ 3 + SJ ≤ 1 may provide a feasible approach to predict and document remission in usual patient care.

Acknowledgment

The authors thank Nathalie Rincheval for expert monitoring and data management, and all the investigators who recruited and followed the patients: F. Berenbaum, Paris-Saint Antoine; M.C. Boissier, Paris-Bobigny; A. Cantagrel, Toulouse; P. Fardelonne and P. Boumier, Amiens; P. Bourgeois, Paris-La Pitie; R.M. Flipo, Lille; P. Goupille, Tours; F. Liote, Paris-Lariboisiere; X. Le Loet and O. Vittecoq, Rouen; X. Mariette, Paris Bicetre; O. Meyer, Paris Bichat; A. Saraux, Brest; T. Schaeverbeke, Bordeaux; and J. Sibilia, Strasbourg.

Footnotes

  • Supported by Health Report Services Inc. An unrestricted grant from Merck Sharp and Dohme was allocated for the first 5 years of the ESPOIR cohort. Two additional grants from INSERM were obtained to support part of the biological database. The French Society of Rheumatology, AbbVie, Pfizer, and Roche also supported the ESPOIR cohort. Dr. Pincus is president of Health Report Services Inc., which owns a copyright and a trademark for MDHAQ and RAPID3.

  • Accepted for publication March 1, 2016.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Felson DT,
    2. Smolen JS,
    3. Wells G,
    4. Zhang B,
    5. van Tuyl LH,
    6. Funovits J,
    7. et al;
    8. American College of Rheumatology; European League Against Rheumatism
    . American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism provisional definition of remission in rheumatoid arthritis for clinical trials. Arthritis Rheum 2011;63:573–86.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Castrejón I,
    2. Dougados M,
    3. Combe B,
    4. Guillemin F,
    5. Fautrel B,
    6. Pincus T
    . Can remission in rheumatoid arthritis be assessed without laboratory tests or a formal joint count? Possible remission criteria based on a self-report RAPID3 score and careful joint examination in the ESPOIR cohort. J Rheumatol 2013;40:386–93.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Felson DT,
    2. Anderson JJ,
    3. Boers M,
    4. Bombardier C,
    5. Chernoff M,
    6. Fried B,
    7. et al.
    The American College of Rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. The Committee on Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials. Arthritis Rheum 1993;36:729–40.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Pincus T,
    2. Swearingen CJ,
    3. Bergman M,
    4. Yazici Y
    . RAPID3 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3), a rheumatoid arthritis index without formal joint counts for routine care: proposed severity categories compared to disease activity score and clinical disease activity index categories. J Rheumatol 2008;35:2136–47.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Pincus T
    . Can RAPID3, an index without formal joint counts or laboratory tests, serve to guide rheumatologists in tight control of rheumatoid arthritis in usual clinical care? Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 2009;67:254–66.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Pincus T,
    2. Swearingen CJ,
    3. Bergman MJ,
    4. Colglazier CL,
    5. Kaell AT,
    6. Kunath AM,
    7. et al.
    RAPID3 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data) on an MDHAQ (Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire): agreement with DAS28 (Disease Activity Score) and CDAI (Clinical Disease Activity Index) activity categories, scored in five versus more than ninety seconds. Arthritis Care Res 2010;62:181–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. 7.↵
    1. Pincus T,
    2. Oliver AM,
    3. Bergman MJ
    . How to collect an MDHAQ to provide rheumatology vital signs (function, pain, global status, and RAPID3 scores) in the infrastructure of rheumatology care, including some misconceptions regarding the MDHAQ. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 2009;35:799–812, x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Pincus T,
    2. Segurado OG
    . Most visits of most patients with rheumatoid arthritis to most rheumatologists do not include a formal quantitative joint count. Ann Rheum Dis 2006;65:820–2.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Anderson J,
    2. Caplan L,
    3. Yazdany J,
    4. Robbins ML,
    5. Neogi T,
    6. Michaud K,
    7. et al.
    Rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures: American College of Rheumatology recommendations for use in clinical practice. Arthritis Care Res 2012;64:640–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. 10.↵
    1. Slatkowsky-Christensen B,
    2. Mowinckel P,
    3. Kvien TK
    . Health status and perception of pain: a comparative study between female patients with hand osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Scand J Rheumatol 2009;38:342–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Askanase AD,
    2. Castrejon I,
    3. Pincus T
    . Quantitative data for care of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in usual clinical settings: a patient Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire and physician estimate of noninflammatory symptoms. J Rheumatol 2011;38:1309–16.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Castrejón I,
    2. Bergman MJ,
    3. Pincus T
    . MDHAQ/RAPID3 to recognize improvement over 2 months in usual care of patients with osteoarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, spondyloarthropathy, and gout, as well as rheumatoid arthritis. J Clin Rheumatol 2013;19:169–74.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Danve A,
    2. Reddy A,
    3. Vakil-Gilani K,
    4. Garg N,
    5. Dinno A,
    6. Deodhar A
    . Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 score (RAPID3) correlates well with Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity index (BASDAI) in the assessment of disease activity and monitoring progression of axial spondyloarthritis. Clin Rheumatol 2015;34:117–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Cinar M,
    2. Yilmaz S,
    3. Cinar FI,
    4. Koca SS,
    5. Erdem H,
    6. Pay S,
    7. et al.
    A patient-reported outcome measures-based composite index (RAPID3) for the assessment of disease activity in ankylosing spondylitis. Rheumatol Int 2015;35:1575–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Park S,
    2. Choe JY,
    3. Kim SK,
    4. Lee H,
    5. Castrejón I,
    6. Pincus T
    . Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data (RAPID3) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) scores yield similar information in 85 Korean patients with ankylosing spondylitis seen in usual clinical care. J Clin Rheumatol 2015;21:300–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Annapureddy N,
    2. Elsallabi O,
    3. Baker J,
    4. Sreih AG
    . Patient-reported outcomes in ANCA-associated vasculitis. A comparison between Birmingham Vasculitis Activity Score and routine assessment of patient index data 3. Clin Rheumatol 2016;35:395–400.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Smolen JS,
    2. Landewé R,
    3. Breedveld FC,
    4. Dougados M,
    5. Emery P,
    6. Gaujoux-Viala C,
    7. et al.
    EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:964–75.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. O’Dell JR,
    2. Curtis JR,
    3. Mikuls TR,
    4. Cofield SS,
    5. Bridges SL Jr,
    6. Ranganath VK,
    7. et al;
    8. TEAR Trial Investigators
    . Validation of the methotrexate-first strategy in patients with early, poor-prognosis rheumatoid arthritis: results from a two-year randomized, double-blind trial. Arthritis Rheum 2013;65:1985–94.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Katchamart W,
    2. Johnson S,
    3. Lin HJ,
    4. Phumethum V,
    5. Salliot C,
    6. Bombardier C
    . Predictors for remission in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a systematic review. Arthritis Care Res 2010;62:1128–43.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. 20.↵
    1. Sokka T,
    2. Pincus T
    . Most patients receiving routine care for rheumatoid arthritis in 2001 did not meet inclusion criteria for most recent clinical trials or American College of Rheumatology criteria for remission. J Rheumatol 2003;30:1138–46.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    1. Sokka T,
    2. Pincus T
    . Eligibility of patients in routine care for major clinical trials of anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha agents in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:313–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Combe B,
    2. Benessiano J,
    3. Berenbaum F,
    4. Cantagrel A,
    5. Daures JP,
    6. Dougados M,
    7. et al.
    The ESPOIR cohort: a ten-year follow-up of early arthritis in France: methodology and baseline characteristics of the 813 included patients. Joint Bone Spine 2007;74:440–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Felson DT,
    2. Smolen JS,
    3. Wells G,
    4. Zhang B,
    5. van Tuyl LH,
    6. Funovits J,
    7. et al.
    American College of Rheumatology/European League against Rheumatism provisional definition of remission in rheumatoid arthritis for clinical trials. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:404–13.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Smolen JS,
    2. Breedveld FC,
    3. Schiff MH,
    4. Kalden JR,
    5. Emery P,
    6. Eberl G,
    7. et al.
    A simplified disease activity index for rheumatoid arthritis for use in clinical practice. Rheumatology 2003;42:244–57.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Aletaha D,
    2. Nell VP,
    3. Stamm T,
    4. Uffmann M,
    5. Pflugbeil S,
    6. Machold K,
    7. et al.
    Acute phase reactants add little to composite disease activity indices for rheumatoid arthritis: validation of a clinical activity score. Arthritis Res Ther 2005;7:R796–806.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Prevoo ML,
    2. van ‘t Hof MA,
    3. Kuper HH,
    4. van Leeuwen MA,
    5. van de Putte LB,
    6. van Riel PL
    . 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 1995;38:44–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Singh JA,
    2. Furst DE,
    3. Bharat A,
    4. Curtis JR,
    5. Kavanaugh AF,
    6. Kremer JM,
    7. et al.
    2012 update of the 2008 American College of Rheumatology recommendations for the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and biologic agents in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res 2012;64:625–39.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  28. 28.↵
    1. Pincus T,
    2. Yazici Y,
    3. Sokka T,
    4. Aletaha D,
    5. Smolen JS
    . Methotrexate as the “anchor drug” for the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2003;21 Suppl 31:S179–85.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Aletaha D,
    2. Smolen J
    . The Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) and the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI): a review of their usefulness and validity in rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005;23 Suppl 39:S100–8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Welsing PM,
    2. van Gestel AM,
    3. Swinkels HL,
    4. Kiemeney LA,
    5. van Riel PL
    . The relationship between disease activity, joint destruction, and functional capacity over the course of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2001;44:2009–17.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Aletaha D,
    2. Smolen J,
    3. Ward MM
    . Measuring function in rheumatoid arthritis: Identifying reversible and irreversible components. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:2784–92.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Aletaha D,
    2. Alasti F,
    3. Smolen JS
    . Chronicity of rheumatoid arthritis affects the responsiveness of physical function, but not of disease activity measures in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:532–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    1. Gossec L,
    2. Dougados M,
    3. Goupille P,
    4. Cantagrel A,
    5. Sibilia J,
    6. Meyer O,
    7. et al.
    Prognostic factors for remission in early rheumatoid arthritis: a multiparameter prospective study. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:675–80.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. 34.↵
    1. Verstappen SM,
    2. van Albada-Kuipers GA,
    3. Bijlsma JW,
    4. Blaauw AA,
    5. Schenk Y,
    6. Haanen HC,
    7. et al;
    8. Utrecht Rheumatoid Arthritis Cohort Study Group (SRU)
    . A good response to early DMARD treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the first year predicts remission during follow up. Ann Rheum Dis 2005;64:38–43.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. 35.↵
    1. Vázquez I,
    2. Graell E,
    3. Gratacós J,
    4. Cañete JD,
    5. Viñas O,
    6. Ercilla MG,
    7. et al.
    Prognostic markers of clinical remission in early rheumatoid arthritis after two years of DMARDs in a clinical setting. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2007;25:231–8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    1. Schipper LG,
    2. Fransen J,
    3. den Broeder AA,
    4. Van Riel PL
    . Time to achieve remission determines time to be in remission. Arthritis Res Ther 2010;12:R97.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    1. Ma MH,
    2. Ibrahim F,
    3. Walker D,
    4. Hassell A,
    5. Choy EH,
    6. Kiely PD,
    7. et al.
    Remission in early rheumatoid arthritis: predicting treatment response. J Rheumatol 2012;39:470–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    1. Pincus T,
    2. Richardson B,
    3. Strand V,
    4. Bergman MJ
    . Relative efficiencies of the 7 rheumatoid arthritis Core Data Set measures to distinguish active from control treatments in 9 comparisons from clinical trials of 5 agents. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2014;32 Suppl 85:S-47–54.
    OpenUrl
  39. 39.↵
    1. Kvien TK,
    2. Mowinckel P,
    3. Heiberg T,
    4. Dammann KL,
    5. Dale Ø,
    6. Aanerud GJ,
    7. et al.
    Performance of health status measures with a pen based personal digital assistant. Ann Rheum Dis 2005;64:1480–4.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    1. Sokka T,
    2. Hetland ML,
    3. Makinen H,
    4. Kautiainen H,
    5. Horslev-Petersen K,
    6. Luukkainen RK,
    7. et al;
    8. Questionnaires in Standard Monitoring of Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Group
    . Remission and rheumatoid arthritis: data on patients receiving usual care in twenty-four countries. Arthritis Rheum 2008;58:2642–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    1. van der Woude D,
    2. Young A,
    3. Jayakumar K,
    4. Mertens BJ,
    5. Toes RE,
    6. van der Heijde D,
    7. et al.
    Prevalence of and predictive factors for sustained disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-free remission in rheumatoid arthritis: results from two large early arthritis cohorts. Arthritis Rheum 2009;60:2262–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    1. Aletaha D,
    2. Funovits J,
    3. Breedveld FC,
    4. Sharp J,
    5. Segurado O,
    6. Smolen JS
    . Rheumatoid arthritis joint progression in sustained remission is determined by disease activity levels preceding the period of radiographic assessment. Arthritis Rheum 2009;60:1242–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    1. van der Heijde D,
    2. Klareskog L,
    3. Landewé R,
    4. Bruyn GA,
    5. Cantagrel A,
    6. Durez P,
    7. et al.
    Disease remission and sustained halting of radiographic progression with combination etanercept and methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2007;56:3928–39.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. 44.↵
    1. Burmester GR,
    2. Ferraccioli G,
    3. Flipo RM,
    4. Monteagudo-Saez I,
    5. Unnebrink K,
    6. Kary S,
    7. et al.
    Clinical remission and/or minimal disease activity in patients receiving adalimumab treatment in a multinational, open-label, twelve-week study. Arthritis Rheum 2008;59:32–41.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 43, Issue 7
1 Jul 2016
  • 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.
Prediction of Remission in a French Early Arthritis Cohort by RAPID3 and other Core Data Set Measures, but Not by the Absence of Rheumatoid Factor, Anticitrullinated Protein Antibodies, or Radiographic Erosions
(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
Prediction of Remission in a French Early Arthritis Cohort by RAPID3 and other Core Data Set Measures, but Not by the Absence of Rheumatoid Factor, Anticitrullinated Protein Antibodies, or Radiographic Erosions
Isabel Castrejón, Maxime Dougados, Bernard Combe, Bruno Fautrel, Francis Guillemin, Theodore Pincus
The Journal of Rheumatology Jul 2016, 43 (7) 1285-1291; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.141586

Citation Manager Formats

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

 Request Permissions

Share
Prediction of Remission in a French Early Arthritis Cohort by RAPID3 and other Core Data Set Measures, but Not by the Absence of Rheumatoid Factor, Anticitrullinated Protein Antibodies, or Radiographic Erosions
Isabel Castrejón, Maxime Dougados, Bernard Combe, Bruno Fautrel, Francis Guillemin, Theodore Pincus
The Journal of Rheumatology Jul 2016, 43 (7) 1285-1291; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.141586
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
    • Acknowledgment
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters

Keywords

RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
REMISSION CRITERIA
RAPID3
ESPOIR

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Do Patterns of Early Disease Severity Predict Grade 12 Academic Achievement in Youths With Childhood-Onset Chronic Rheumatic Diseases?
  • Pediatric Sarcoidosis: Retrospective Analysis of Biopsy-Proven Patients
  • A Phenome-Wide Association Study of Drugs and Comorbidities Associated With Gastrointestinal Dysfunction in Systemic Sclerosis
Show more Article

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • rheumatoid arthritis
  • REMISSION CRITERIA
  • RAPID3
  • ESPOIR

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