ACPA-positive versus ACPA-negative rheumatoid arthritis: two distinct erosive disease entities on radiography and ultrasonography.

Rheumatology international 2020 Apr

filter terms:

The objective of this study is to assess the prevalence, localization, and severity of bone erosions on radiography (RX) and ultrasonography (US) according to ACPA status in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). 78 patients with ACPA-positive (ACPA+) RA and 30 patients with ACPA-negative (ACPA-) RA fulfilling the ACR 1987 and/or ACR/EULAR 2010 criteria were consecutively included. On RX, a modified Sharp erosion score (SHSe) was evaluated by two blinded readers and one adjudicator for discordant cases (number of eroded joints ≤ three). On US, erosions were scored on six bilateral joints (MCP2, 3, 5; MTP2, 3, 5) with a four-point scale to calculate the total US score for erosions (USSe). The mean total SHSe and USSe were 3.7 and 4.4 times higher in the ACPA+ group than in the ACPA- group, respectively (P < 0.001). On both RX and US, the most discriminating joint between the two groups was MTP5, especially in cases with bilateral erosion. Based on multivariate analyses, ACPA + status was associated with erosive RA on RX according to the EULAR 2013 definition criteria [OR 4.4 (95% CI 1.2-16.4)], and on US according to the following two definitions: the presence of at least two eroded joint facets [OR 3.7 (95% CI 1.4-9.9)] or at least one grade 2 joint facet erosion [OR 9.0 (95% CI 2.8-28.4)]. Compared to ACPA- RA, ACPA + RA is associated independently with more severe erosive disease on RX and US. Both US and RX bilateral erosions in MTP5 joints are highly discriminant for ACPA + RA patients (97.8% in US and 100% in RX).

Citation

Julien Grosse, Edem Allado, Camille Roux, Audrey Pierreisnard, Marion Couderc, Isabelle Clerc-Urmes, Thomas Remen, Éliane Albuisson, Marcelo De Carvalho-Bittencourt, Isabelle Chary-Valckenaere, Damien Loeuille. ACPA-positive versus ACPA-negative rheumatoid arthritis: two distinct erosive disease entities on radiography and ultrasonography. Rheumatology international. 2020 Apr;40(4):615-624