Key result
Qualitative testing of anti-CarP, RF, and ACPA yielded similar test characteristics (sensitivity 82.3%, specificity 71.6%, OR 11.8) compared to the original quantitative 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria.
Why the study?
Does qualitative testing of anti-CarP, RF, and ACPA yield similar diagnostic performance as quantitative testing of RF and ACPA for rheumatoid arthritis?
Does qualitative testing of anti-CarP, RF, and ACPA yield similar diagnostic performance as quantitative testing of RF and ACPA for rheumatoid arthritis?
Qualitative testing of anti-CarP, RF, and ACPA yields similar diagnostic performance to the quantitative testing of RF and ACPA in the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria for rheumatoid arthritis.
May simplify RA serologic testing; supports comparable performance in cohort data but leaves open prospective validation.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dijk et al. (2020) conducted a letter in Rheumatoid arthritis or undifferentiated arthritis (n=2,000). Modified criteria using qualitative results (presence) of anti-CarP, RF and ACPA vs. ACR/EULAR 2010 criteria incorporating quantitative results (levels) of ACPA and RF was evaluated on Odds ratio for predicting RA according to the 1987 criteria at 1 year (OR 11.8, 95% CI 9.5-14.6). Qualitative testing of anti-CarP, RF, and ACPA yielded similar test characteristics (sensitivity 82.3%, specificity 71.6%, OR 11.8) compared to the original quantitative 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: