Validation exercise of the Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study (ASAS) group response criteria in ankylosing spondylitis patients treated with biologics

M A Stone, R D Inman, J G Wright, A Maetzel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  • 29 Citations

Abstract

Objectives. To define what expert clinicians consider a dramatic response in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients treated with biologic therapies based on patient and physician assessments of global disease activity. To compare this expert clinician-derived criteria to the Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study (ASAS) Group criteria for improvement. Methods. Forty consecutive AS patients were treated in a 1-year open-label protocol with infliximab. Response to treatment at week 52 was defined using ASAS response criteria. For the purpose of this exercise, improvement using ASAS criteria was defined by consensus among experts as good with 50% improvement from baseline (ASAS(50)) and dramatic with 70% improvement from baseline (ASAS(70)). Experts established separate criteria for improvement in disease activity as good or dramatic based on patient and physician global assessment of disease activity. Results. Twelve of 40 patients met the ASAS(70) criteria, however, only, 8 met the expert definition of a dramatic improvement based on physician global scores and 5 met the expert definition of a dramatic improvement based on patient global assessment of disease activity. Agreement was poor between ASAS(50) or ASAS(70) and expert definition of improvement based on physician global scores (kappa < 0.3), but agreement was moderate to good between ASAS(50) or ASAS(70) and expert definition of improvement based on patient global scores, (kappa = 0.6-0.7). Conclusions. Differential response experienced by AS patients treated with infliximab was adequately captured by the ASAS composite improvement criteria. Overall, this study demonstrates the validity of the ASAS criteria for the detection of improvement in AS patients treated with biologics. However, the patient global assessment of disease activity may be sufficient to monitor changes in disease activity in these patients.
LanguageEnglish
Pages316-320
Number of pages5
JournalArthritis & Rheumatism
Volume51
Issue number3
DOIs
StatusPublished - 2004

Fingerprint

Ankylosing Spondylitis
Biological Products
Exercise
Physicians
Biological Therapy

Cite this

Validation exercise of the Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study (ASAS) group response criteria in ankylosing spondylitis patients treated with biologics. / Stone, M A; Inman, R D; Wright, J G; Maetzel, A.

In: Arthritis & Rheumatism, Vol. 51, No. 3, 2004, p. 316-320.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c16ca3bfbf1a4ea28b6563483933dd1f,
title = "Validation exercise of the Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study (ASAS) group response criteria in ankylosing spondylitis patients treated with biologics",
abstract = "Objectives. To define what expert clinicians consider a dramatic response in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients treated with biologic therapies based on patient and physician assessments of global disease activity. To compare this expert clinician-derived criteria to the Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study (ASAS) Group criteria for improvement. Methods. Forty consecutive AS patients were treated in a 1-year open-label protocol with infliximab. Response to treatment at week 52 was defined using ASAS response criteria. For the purpose of this exercise, improvement using ASAS criteria was defined by consensus among experts as good with 50{\%} improvement from baseline (ASAS(50)) and dramatic with 70{\%} improvement from baseline (ASAS(70)). Experts established separate criteria for improvement in disease activity as good or dramatic based on patient and physician global assessment of disease activity. Results. Twelve of 40 patients met the ASAS(70) criteria, however, only, 8 met the expert definition of a dramatic improvement based on physician global scores and 5 met the expert definition of a dramatic improvement based on patient global assessment of disease activity. Agreement was poor between ASAS(50) or ASAS(70) and expert definition of improvement based on physician global scores (kappa < 0.3), but agreement was moderate to good between ASAS(50) or ASAS(70) and expert definition of improvement based on patient global scores, (kappa = 0.6-0.7). Conclusions. Differential response experienced by AS patients treated with infliximab was adequately captured by the ASAS composite improvement criteria. Overall, this study demonstrates the validity of the ASAS criteria for the detection of improvement in AS patients treated with biologics. However, the patient global assessment of disease activity may be sufficient to monitor changes in disease activity in these patients.",
author = "Stone, {M A} and Inman, {R D} and Wright, {J G} and A Maetzel",
note = "ID number: ISI:000221920200005",
year = "2004",
doi = "10.1002/art.20414",
language = "English",
volume = "51",
pages = "316--320",
journal = "Arthritis & Rheumatism",
issn = "0004-3591",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validation exercise of the Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study (ASAS) group response criteria in ankylosing spondylitis patients treated with biologics

AU - Stone,M A

AU - Inman,R D

AU - Wright,J G

AU - Maetzel,A

N1 - ID number: ISI:000221920200005

PY - 2004

Y1 - 2004

N2 - Objectives. To define what expert clinicians consider a dramatic response in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients treated with biologic therapies based on patient and physician assessments of global disease activity. To compare this expert clinician-derived criteria to the Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study (ASAS) Group criteria for improvement. Methods. Forty consecutive AS patients were treated in a 1-year open-label protocol with infliximab. Response to treatment at week 52 was defined using ASAS response criteria. For the purpose of this exercise, improvement using ASAS criteria was defined by consensus among experts as good with 50% improvement from baseline (ASAS(50)) and dramatic with 70% improvement from baseline (ASAS(70)). Experts established separate criteria for improvement in disease activity as good or dramatic based on patient and physician global assessment of disease activity. Results. Twelve of 40 patients met the ASAS(70) criteria, however, only, 8 met the expert definition of a dramatic improvement based on physician global scores and 5 met the expert definition of a dramatic improvement based on patient global assessment of disease activity. Agreement was poor between ASAS(50) or ASAS(70) and expert definition of improvement based on physician global scores (kappa < 0.3), but agreement was moderate to good between ASAS(50) or ASAS(70) and expert definition of improvement based on patient global scores, (kappa = 0.6-0.7). Conclusions. Differential response experienced by AS patients treated with infliximab was adequately captured by the ASAS composite improvement criteria. Overall, this study demonstrates the validity of the ASAS criteria for the detection of improvement in AS patients treated with biologics. However, the patient global assessment of disease activity may be sufficient to monitor changes in disease activity in these patients.

AB - Objectives. To define what expert clinicians consider a dramatic response in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients treated with biologic therapies based on patient and physician assessments of global disease activity. To compare this expert clinician-derived criteria to the Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Study (ASAS) Group criteria for improvement. Methods. Forty consecutive AS patients were treated in a 1-year open-label protocol with infliximab. Response to treatment at week 52 was defined using ASAS response criteria. For the purpose of this exercise, improvement using ASAS criteria was defined by consensus among experts as good with 50% improvement from baseline (ASAS(50)) and dramatic with 70% improvement from baseline (ASAS(70)). Experts established separate criteria for improvement in disease activity as good or dramatic based on patient and physician global assessment of disease activity. Results. Twelve of 40 patients met the ASAS(70) criteria, however, only, 8 met the expert definition of a dramatic improvement based on physician global scores and 5 met the expert definition of a dramatic improvement based on patient global assessment of disease activity. Agreement was poor between ASAS(50) or ASAS(70) and expert definition of improvement based on physician global scores (kappa < 0.3), but agreement was moderate to good between ASAS(50) or ASAS(70) and expert definition of improvement based on patient global scores, (kappa = 0.6-0.7). Conclusions. Differential response experienced by AS patients treated with infliximab was adequately captured by the ASAS composite improvement criteria. Overall, this study demonstrates the validity of the ASAS criteria for the detection of improvement in AS patients treated with biologics. However, the patient global assessment of disease activity may be sufficient to monitor changes in disease activity in these patients.

U2 - 10.1002/art.20414

DO - 10.1002/art.20414

M3 - Article

VL - 51

SP - 316

EP - 320

JO - Arthritis & Rheumatism

T2 - Arthritis & Rheumatism

JF - Arthritis & Rheumatism

SN - 0004-3591

IS - 3

ER -