Endorsement of definitions of disease activity states and improvement scores for the ankylosing spondylitis disease activity score: Results from OMERACT 10

Journal of Rheumatology

Volumn 38, Issue 7, 2011, Pages 1502-1506

  Machado, Pedro M M C ^a,b   Landewé, Robert B M ^c   Van Der Heijde, Désirée M ^b  

^a CENTRO HOSPITALAR E UNIVERSITÁRIO DE COIMBRA   (Portugal)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Ankylosing spondylitis; Disease activity; Outcome assessment; Response criteria

Indexed keywords

ANTIRHEUMATIC AGENT; DISEASE MODIFYING ANTIRHEUMATIC DRUG; INFLIXIMAB; PLACEBO; TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR ALPHA INHIBITOR; NONSTEROID ANTIINFLAMMATORY AGENT;

ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS; ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS DISEASE ACTIVITY SCORE; CLINICAL FEATURE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); CONFERENCE PAPER; DISEASE ACTIVITY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; HUMAN; MEDICAL SOCIETY; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; REFERENCE VALUE; SCORING SYSTEM; VALIDATION STUDY; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; DRUG EFFICACY; MEASUREMENT ERROR; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VALIDATION PROCESS;

DISABILITY EVALUATION; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPONDYLITIS, ANKYLOSING; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 79959945461     PISSN: 0315162X     EISSN: 14992752     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.110279     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. Lukas C, Landewé R, Sieper J, Dougados M, Davis J, Braun J, et al. Development of an ASAS-endorsed disease activity score (ASDAS) in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:18-24.
2. van der Heijde DM, Lie E, Kvien TK, Sieper J, Van den Bosch F, Listing J, et al. ASDAS, a highly discriminatory ASAS-endorsed disease activity score in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:1811-8.
3. Tugwell P, Bombardier C. A methodologic framework for developing and selecting endpoints in clinical trials. J Rheumatol 1982;9:758-62.
4. van der Heijde DM, van 't Hof MA, van Riel PL, van Leeuwen MA, van Rijswijk MH, van de Putte LB. Validity of single variables and composite indices for measuring disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 1992;51:177-81.
5. Machado P, Landewé R, Lie E, Kvien TK, Braun J, Baker D, et al. Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS): defining cut-off values for disease activity states and improvement scores. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:47-53.
6. Kvien TK, Heiberg, Lie E, Kaufmann C, Mikkelsen K, Nordvag BY, et al. A Norwegian DMARD register: prescriptions of DMARDs and biological agents to patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005;23:S188-94.
7. Anderson JJ, Baron G, van der Heijde D, Felson DT, Dougados M. Ankylosing spondylitis assessment group preliminary definition of short-term improvement in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2001;44:1876-86. (Pubitemid 32758236)
8. Perkins NJ, Schisterman EF. The inconsistency of "optimal" cutpoints obtained using two criteria based on the receiver operating characteristic curve. Am J Epidemiol 2006;163:670-5.
9. van der Heijde DM, Dijkmans B, Geusens P, Sieper J, DeWoody K, Williamson P, et al. Efficacy and safety of infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: results of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial (ASSERT). Arthritis Rheum 2005;52:582-91. (Pubitemid 40216323)
10. Boers M, Brooks P, Strand CV, Tugwell P. The OMERACT filter for Outcome Measures in Rheumatology. J Rheumatol 1998;25:198-9.
11. de Vet HC, Terluin B, Knol DL, Roorda LD, Mokkink LB, Ostelo RW, et al. Three ways to quantify uncertainty in individually applied "minimally important change" values. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:37-45.
12. Turner D, Schunemann HJ, Griffith LE, Beaton DE, Griffiths AM, Critch JN, et al. The minimal detectable change cannot reliably replace the minimal important difference. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:28-36.
13. Tubach F, Ravaud P, Beaton D, Boers M, Bombardier C, Felson DT, et al. Minimal clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state for subjective outcome measures in rheumatic disorders. J Rheumatol 2007;34:1188-93. (Pubitemid 46774873)
14. Wells G, Beaton D, Shea B, Boers M, Simon L, Strand V, et al. Minimal clinically important differences: review of methods. J Rheumatol 2001;28:406-12. (Pubitemid 32165161)
15. Bruynesteyn K, Boers M, Kostense P, van der Linden S, van der Heijde DM. Deciding on progression of joint damage in paired films of individual patients: smallest detectable difference or change. Ann Rheum Dis 2005;64:179-82. (Pubitemid 40193607)
16. de Vet HC, Terwee CB, Ostelo RW, Beckerman H, Knol DL, Bouter LM. Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006;4:54.
17. Brandt J, Listing J, Sieper J, Rudwaleit M, van der Heijde DM, Braun J. Development and preselection of criteria for short term improvement after anti-TNF alpha treatment in ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:1438-44. (Pubitemid 39433948)
18. Braun J, Davis J, Dougados M, Sieper J, van der Linden S, van der Heijde D. First update of the international ASAS consensus statement for the use of anti-TNF agents in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2006;65:316-20. (Pubitemid 43268219)