Performance of the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review

Background The 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were developed to improve the identification of individuals for studies of RA. We aimed to summarise the performance of the criteria based on the published literature. Methods We performed a systematic literature sea...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of the rheumatic diseases 2014-01, Vol.73 (1), p.114-123
Hauptverfasser: Radner, Helga, Neogi, Tuhina, Smolen, Josef S, Aletaha, Daniel
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 123
container_issue 1
container_start_page 114
container_title Annals of the rheumatic diseases
container_volume 73
creator Radner, Helga
Neogi, Tuhina
Smolen, Josef S
Aletaha, Daniel
description Background The 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were developed to improve the identification of individuals for studies of RA. We aimed to summarise the performance of the criteria based on the published literature. Methods We performed a systematic literature search to identify all studies investigating the 2010 criteria and reporting data allowing to calculate sensitivity (SENS), specificity (SPEC), and positive and negative predictive values. Where possible, meta-analysis was performed. Results Seventeen full articles (total 6816 patients) and 17 meeting abstracts (total 4004 patients) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for RA (defined by different reference standards) were 0.82 (95% CI 0.79–0.84) and 0.61 (0.59–0.64). Results were comparable for different reference standards: for initiation of methotrexate pooled sensitivity was 0.85 (0.83–0.86) and specificity was 0.52 (0.49–0.54); for initiation of any disease modifying antirheumatic drug they were 0.80 (0.79–0.82) and 0.65 (0.61–0.68), respectively; and for expert opinion 0.88 (0.86–0.90) and 0.48 (0.35–0.52). No differences were observed for use of different types of joint counts. Eight studies and five meeting abstracts directly compared 1987 and 2010 criteria using different reference standards within different target populations showing higher overall sensitivity (+0.11 compared with 1987 criteria) at the cost of lower overall specificity (–0.04). Conclusions Two years after their publication, the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria have been widely tested in the community. They are sensitive to detect cases of RA among various target populations, independent of how the latter is referenced.
doi_str_mv 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203284
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1465864140</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1465864140</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b450t-2c9f9989c7cbf749a96b8743e3b75936f53be6544ab2a083b9dca0feec40584c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkV1LXDEQhkOp1K3tX7CB3vTmaHKSk4_eLYutwoIi9Tok2Qmb5XzYJEfx3zfbtVK88maGYZ73ZZgXoS-UnFHKxLkdx7SFedjE3LSEslpYq_g7tKBcqDoJ8h4tCCGs4VrIY_Qx510diaLqAzpuWadbSckCpRtIYUqDHT3gKeCyBVwNCV6ubs8v7tbLW-x7m3MM0dsSpxH7FAukaHGV4b9H2DLFDbapbOsq5u_Y4vyUC9RF9Ljf47bMCXCChwiPn9BRsH2Gz8_9BN39uPi1umzW1z-vVst143hHStN6HbRW2kvvguTaauGU5AyYk51mInTMgeg4t661RDGnN96SAOA56RT37AR9O_jep-n3DLmYIWYPfW9HmOZs6qc6JTjlpKJfX6G7aU5jvc5QKaVSvBWqUvJA-TTlnCCY-xQHm54MJWYfi_kvFrOPxRxiqcrTZ__ZDbB50f3LoQLtAXDD7s2ufwCqcZy5</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1777884268</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performance of the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>BMJ Journals - NESLi2</source><creator>Radner, Helga ; Neogi, Tuhina ; Smolen, Josef S ; Aletaha, Daniel</creator><creatorcontrib>Radner, Helga ; Neogi, Tuhina ; Smolen, Josef S ; Aletaha, Daniel</creatorcontrib><description>Background The 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were developed to improve the identification of individuals for studies of RA. We aimed to summarise the performance of the criteria based on the published literature. Methods We performed a systematic literature search to identify all studies investigating the 2010 criteria and reporting data allowing to calculate sensitivity (SENS), specificity (SPEC), and positive and negative predictive values. Where possible, meta-analysis was performed. Results Seventeen full articles (total 6816 patients) and 17 meeting abstracts (total 4004 patients) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for RA (defined by different reference standards) were 0.82 (95% CI 0.79–0.84) and 0.61 (0.59–0.64). Results were comparable for different reference standards: for initiation of methotrexate pooled sensitivity was 0.85 (0.83–0.86) and specificity was 0.52 (0.49–0.54); for initiation of any disease modifying antirheumatic drug they were 0.80 (0.79–0.82) and 0.65 (0.61–0.68), respectively; and for expert opinion 0.88 (0.86–0.90) and 0.48 (0.35–0.52). No differences were observed for use of different types of joint counts. Eight studies and five meeting abstracts directly compared 1987 and 2010 criteria using different reference standards within different target populations showing higher overall sensitivity (+0.11 compared with 1987 criteria) at the cost of lower overall specificity (–0.04). Conclusions Two years after their publication, the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria have been widely tested in the community. They are sensitive to detect cases of RA among various target populations, independent of how the latter is referenced.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-4967</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2060</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203284</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23592710</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ARDIAO</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Limited</publisher><subject>Antirheumatic Agents - therapeutic use ; Arthritis, Rheumatoid - classification ; Arthritis, Rheumatoid - diagnosis ; Arthritis, Rheumatoid - drug therapy ; Classification ; Clinical trials ; Consensus ; Humans ; Literature reviews ; Quality standards ; Rheumatology - standards ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2014-01, Vol.73 (1), p.114-123</ispartof><rights>Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><rights>Copyright: 2014 Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b450t-2c9f9989c7cbf749a96b8743e3b75936f53be6544ab2a083b9dca0feec40584c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b450t-2c9f9989c7cbf749a96b8743e3b75936f53be6544ab2a083b9dca0feec40584c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://ard.bmj.com/content/73/1/114.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://ard.bmj.com/content/73/1/114.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>114,115,314,776,780,3183,23550,27901,27902,77343,77374</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23592710$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Radner, Helga</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Neogi, Tuhina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smolen, Josef S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aletaha, Daniel</creatorcontrib><title>Performance of the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review</title><title>Annals of the rheumatic diseases</title><addtitle>Ann Rheum Dis</addtitle><description>Background The 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were developed to improve the identification of individuals for studies of RA. We aimed to summarise the performance of the criteria based on the published literature. Methods We performed a systematic literature search to identify all studies investigating the 2010 criteria and reporting data allowing to calculate sensitivity (SENS), specificity (SPEC), and positive and negative predictive values. Where possible, meta-analysis was performed. Results Seventeen full articles (total 6816 patients) and 17 meeting abstracts (total 4004 patients) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for RA (defined by different reference standards) were 0.82 (95% CI 0.79–0.84) and 0.61 (0.59–0.64). Results were comparable for different reference standards: for initiation of methotrexate pooled sensitivity was 0.85 (0.83–0.86) and specificity was 0.52 (0.49–0.54); for initiation of any disease modifying antirheumatic drug they were 0.80 (0.79–0.82) and 0.65 (0.61–0.68), respectively; and for expert opinion 0.88 (0.86–0.90) and 0.48 (0.35–0.52). No differences were observed for use of different types of joint counts. Eight studies and five meeting abstracts directly compared 1987 and 2010 criteria using different reference standards within different target populations showing higher overall sensitivity (+0.11 compared with 1987 criteria) at the cost of lower overall specificity (–0.04). Conclusions Two years after their publication, the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria have been widely tested in the community. They are sensitive to detect cases of RA among various target populations, independent of how the latter is referenced.</description><subject>Antirheumatic Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - classification</subject><subject>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - diagnosis</subject><subject>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - drug therapy</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Consensus</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Quality standards</subject><subject>Rheumatology - standards</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0003-4967</issn><issn>1468-2060</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkV1LXDEQhkOp1K3tX7CB3vTmaHKSk4_eLYutwoIi9Tok2Qmb5XzYJEfx3zfbtVK88maGYZ73ZZgXoS-UnFHKxLkdx7SFedjE3LSEslpYq_g7tKBcqDoJ8h4tCCGs4VrIY_Qx510diaLqAzpuWadbSckCpRtIYUqDHT3gKeCyBVwNCV6ubs8v7tbLW-x7m3MM0dsSpxH7FAukaHGV4b9H2DLFDbapbOsq5u_Y4vyUC9RF9Ljf47bMCXCChwiPn9BRsH2Gz8_9BN39uPi1umzW1z-vVst143hHStN6HbRW2kvvguTaauGU5AyYk51mInTMgeg4t661RDGnN96SAOA56RT37AR9O_jep-n3DLmYIWYPfW9HmOZs6qc6JTjlpKJfX6G7aU5jvc5QKaVSvBWqUvJA-TTlnCCY-xQHm54MJWYfi_kvFrOPxRxiqcrTZ__ZDbB50f3LoQLtAXDD7s2ufwCqcZy5</recordid><startdate>20140101</startdate><enddate>20140101</enddate><creator>Radner, Helga</creator><creator>Neogi, Tuhina</creator><creator>Smolen, Josef S</creator><creator>Aletaha, Daniel</creator><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140101</creationdate><title>Performance of the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review</title><author>Radner, Helga ; Neogi, Tuhina ; Smolen, Josef S ; Aletaha, Daniel</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b450t-2c9f9989c7cbf749a96b8743e3b75936f53be6544ab2a083b9dca0feec40584c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Antirheumatic Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - classification</topic><topic>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - diagnosis</topic><topic>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - drug therapy</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Consensus</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Quality standards</topic><topic>Rheumatology - standards</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Radner, Helga</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Neogi, Tuhina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smolen, Josef S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aletaha, Daniel</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of the rheumatic diseases</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Radner, Helga</au><au>Neogi, Tuhina</au><au>Smolen, Josef S</au><au>Aletaha, Daniel</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performance of the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review</atitle><jtitle>Annals of the rheumatic diseases</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Rheum Dis</addtitle><date>2014-01-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>73</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>114</spage><epage>123</epage><pages>114-123</pages><issn>0003-4967</issn><eissn>1468-2060</eissn><coden>ARDIAO</coden><abstract>Background The 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were developed to improve the identification of individuals for studies of RA. We aimed to summarise the performance of the criteria based on the published literature. Methods We performed a systematic literature search to identify all studies investigating the 2010 criteria and reporting data allowing to calculate sensitivity (SENS), specificity (SPEC), and positive and negative predictive values. Where possible, meta-analysis was performed. Results Seventeen full articles (total 6816 patients) and 17 meeting abstracts (total 4004 patients) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for RA (defined by different reference standards) were 0.82 (95% CI 0.79–0.84) and 0.61 (0.59–0.64). Results were comparable for different reference standards: for initiation of methotrexate pooled sensitivity was 0.85 (0.83–0.86) and specificity was 0.52 (0.49–0.54); for initiation of any disease modifying antirheumatic drug they were 0.80 (0.79–0.82) and 0.65 (0.61–0.68), respectively; and for expert opinion 0.88 (0.86–0.90) and 0.48 (0.35–0.52). No differences were observed for use of different types of joint counts. Eight studies and five meeting abstracts directly compared 1987 and 2010 criteria using different reference standards within different target populations showing higher overall sensitivity (+0.11 compared with 1987 criteria) at the cost of lower overall specificity (–0.04). Conclusions Two years after their publication, the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria have been widely tested in the community. They are sensitive to detect cases of RA among various target populations, independent of how the latter is referenced.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Limited</pub><pmid>23592710</pmid><doi>10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203284</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-4967
ispartof Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2014-01, Vol.73 (1), p.114-123
issn 0003-4967
1468-2060
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1465864140
source MEDLINE; BMJ Journals - NESLi2
subjects Antirheumatic Agents - therapeutic use
Arthritis, Rheumatoid - classification
Arthritis, Rheumatoid - diagnosis
Arthritis, Rheumatoid - drug therapy
Classification
Clinical trials
Consensus
Humans
Literature reviews
Quality standards
Rheumatology - standards
Sensitivity and Specificity
Studies
title Performance of the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T22%3A55%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performance%20of%20the%202010%20ACR/EULAR%20classification%20criteria%20for%20rheumatoid%20arthritis:%20a%20systematic%20literature%20review&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20the%20rheumatic%20diseases&rft.au=Radner,%20Helga&rft.date=2014-01-01&rft.volume=73&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=114&rft.epage=123&rft.pages=114-123&rft.issn=0003-4967&rft.eissn=1468-2060&rft.coden=ARDIAO&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203284&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1465864140%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1777884268&rft_id=info:pmid/23592710&rfr_iscdi=true