The 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: Phase 2 methodological report

Tuhina Neogi(Boston University), Daniel Aletaha(Medical University of Vienna), Alan J. Silman, Raymond L. Naden, David T. Felson, Rohit Aggarwal, Clifton O. Bingham(Johns Hopkins University), Neal S. Birnbaum(University of California, San Francisco), Gerd R Burmester(Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin), Vivian P. Bykerk(Mount Sinai Hospital), Marc D. Cohen(National Jewish Health), Bernard Combe, Karen H. Costenbader, Maxime Dougados(Délégation Paris 5), Paul Emery(University of Leeds), Gianfranco Ferraccioli(Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore), Johanna M. W. Hazes(Erasmus MC), Kathryn Hobbs(University of Colorado Denver), T. Huizinga, Arthur Kavanaugh(University of California, San Francisco), Jonathan Kay, Dinesh Khanna, Tore K. Kvien, Timothy Laing(University of Michigan), Katherine P. Liao, Philip J. Mease, Henri A. Ménard, Larry W. Moreland, Raj Nair(University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), Theodore Pincus(New York University Langone Orthopedic Hospital), Sarah Ringold(Seattle Children's Hospital), Josef S Smolen(Medical University of Vienna), Ewa Stanisławska‐Biernat(Institute of Cardiology), Deborah Symmons(University of Manchester), Paul P. Tak(University of Amsterdam), Katherine S. Upchurch, Jiří Vencovský(Institute of Rheumatology), Frederick Wolfe(University of Kansas), Gillian Hawker
Arthritis & Rheumatism
August 10, 2010
Cited by 336Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism have developed new classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of Phase 2 of the development process was to achieve expert consensus on the clinical and laboratory variables that should contribute to the final criteria set. METHODS: Twenty-four expert RA clinicians (12 from Europe and 12 from North America) participated in Phase 2. A consensus-based decision analysis approach was used to identify factors (and their relative weights) that influence the probability of "developing RA," complemented by data from the Phase 1 study. Patient case scenarios were used to identify and reach consensus on factors important in determining the probability of RA development. Decision analytic software was used to derive the relative weights for each of the factors and their categories, using choice-based conjoint analysis. RESULTS: The expert panel agreed that the new classification criteria should be applied to individuals with undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis in whom at least 1 joint is deemed by an expert assessor to be swollen, indicating definite synovitis. In this clinical setting, they identified 4 additional criteria as being important: number of joints involved and site of involvement, serologic abnormality, acute-phase response, and duration of symptoms in the involved joints. These criteria were consistent with those identified in the Phase 1 data-driven approach. CONCLUSION: The consensus-based, decision analysis approach used in Phase 2 complemented the Phase 1 efforts. The 4 criteria and their relative weights form the basis of the final criteria set.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis