Rheumatology International

, Volume 30, Issue 9, pp 1205–1210 | Cite as

What is the relationship between disease activity, severity and damage in a large Canadian systemic sclerosis cohort? Results from the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group (CSRG)

  • Xiangning Fan
  • Janet PopeEmail author
  • The Canadian Scleroderma Research Group
  • Murray Baron
Original Article


We studied the relationships between physician-assessed damage, severity and activity in a large, multicentre systemic sclerosis (SSc, scleroderma) cohort. We hypothesized that there is a relationship between disease activity and severity and damage, but that severity would be more strongly related to damage. A total of 520 SSc patients (87% women, mean age 56 years, mean 8.6 years disease duration, 39% diffuse SSc) were studied. The correlations between physician's global assessments of damage, activity and severity were determined overall and in a subset of early, diffuse SSc (n = 74). The mean (SD) patient global health score was 3.6 (2.4) on a 0–10 scale. Physician-rated severity, activity and damage were 2.8 (2.2), 2.3 (2.0), and 3.4 (2.4) respectively. Damage was more strongly related to severity (r = 0.744, P < 0.001) than activity (r = 0.596, P < 0.001). Damage was not related to disease duration (r = 0.046, P = 0.3). In early diffuse SSc, the correlations were: damage and severity 0.771 (P < 0.001), damage and activity 0.596 (P < 0.001), severity and activity 0.809 (P < 0.001). The relationships vary in the overall cohort versus the early diffuse SSc subset where activity, severity and damage appear more strongly related. Thus, the exact nature of the relationship between damage, activity and severity will depend upon the characteristics of the population studied.


Systemic sclerosis Correlation Activity Severity Damage Canadian Scleroderma Research Group (CSRG) 



We thank the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Scleroderma Society of Canada for grant funding.


  1. 1.
    Varga J, Abraham D (2007) Systemic sclerosis: a prototypic multisystem fibrotic disorder. J Clin Invest 117(3):557–567CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    LeRoy EC, Black C, Fleischmajer R et al (1988) Scleroderma (systemic sclerosis): classification, subsets and pathogenesis. J Rheumatol 15(2):202–205PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Symmons DP (1995) Disease assessment indices: activity, damage and severity. Baillieres Clin Rheumatol 9:267–285CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Medsger TA Jr (2000) Assessment of damage and activity in systemic sclerosis. Curr Opin Rheumatol 12:545–548CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Guillemin F (2003) Assessment of disease activity. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 17:415–426CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vonk MC, van den Hoogen FHJ, van Riel PLCM, Valentini G (2007) What does the clinician need to improve patient care in systemic sclerosis? Ann Rheum Dis 66:1129–1131CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hudson M, Steele R, Baron M (2007) Update on indices of disease activity in systemic sclerosis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 37(2):93–98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Valentini G, Matucci Cerinic M (2007) Disease-specific indicators, guidelines and outcome measures in scleroderma. Clin Exp Rheumatol 25(Suppl 47):S159–S162Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ruof J, Bruhlmann P, Michel BA, Stucki G (1999) Development and validation of a self-administered systemic sclerosis questionnaire (SySQ). Rheumatology (Oxford) 38:535–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Valentini G, Della Rossa A, Bombardieri S et al (2001) European multicentre study to define disease activity criteria for systemic sclerosis. II. Identification of disease activity variables and development of preliminary activity indexes. Ann Rheum Dis 60:592–598CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Merkel PA, Herlyn K, Martin RW et al (2002) Measuring disease activity and functional status in patients with scleroderma and Raynaud’s phenomenon. Arthritis Rheum 46:2410–2420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rodnan GP, Lipinski E, Luksick J (1979) Skin thickness and collagen content in progressive systemic sclerosis and localized scleroderma. Arthritis Rheum 22:130–144CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clements PJ, Lachenbruch PA, Ng SC, Simmons M, Sterz M, Furst DE (1990) Skin score: a semiquantitative measure of cutaneous involvement that improves prediction of prognosis in systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum 33:1256–1263PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Steen V, Medsger TA Jr (1997) The value of the Health Assessment Questionnaire and special patient-generated scales to demonstrate change in systemic sclerosis patients over time. Arthritis Rheum 40:1984–1991CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Medsger TA Jr, Silman AJ, Steen VD et al (1999) A disease severity scale for systemic sclerosis. Development and testing. J Rheumatol 26:2159–2167PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Geirsson AJ, Wollheim FA, Akesson A (2001) Disease severity of 100 patients with systemic sclerosis over a period of 14 years: using a modified Medsger scale. Ann Rheum Dis 60:1117–1122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gelber AC, Wigley FM (2002) Disease severity as a predictor of outcome in scleroderma. Lancet 359:277–279CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Arkachaisri T, Pino S (2008) Localized scleroderma severity index and global assessments: a pilot study of outcome instruments. J Rheumatol 35:650–657CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS II) (2001) URL
  20. 20.
    Ostojic P, Damjanov N (2006) The Scleroderma Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ). A new self-assessment questionnaire for evaluation of disease status in patients with systemic sclerosis. Z Rheumatol 65:168–175CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Clements PJ, Seibold JR, Furst DE et al (2004) High-dose versus low-dose D-penicillamine in early diffuse systemic sclerosis trial: lessons learned. Semin Arthritis Rheum 33:249–263CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Poole JL, Steen VD (1991) The use of the health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) to determine physical disability in systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Care Res 4:27–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Subcommittee for Scleroderma Criteria of the American Rheumatism Association Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee (1980) Preliminary criteria for the classification of systemic sclerosis (scleroderma). Arthritis Rheum 23:581–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Valentini G, Bencivelli W, Bombardieri S et al (2003) European Scleroderma Study Group to define disease activity criteria for systemic sclerosis. III. Assessment of the construct validity of the preliminary activity criteria. Ann Rheum Dis 62:901–903CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Clements PJ (2000) Systemic sclerosis (scleroderma) and related disorders: clinical aspects. Baillieres Clin Rheumatol 14:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Derk CT, Jimenez SA (2003) Systemic sclerosis: current views of its pathogenesis. Autoimmun Rev 2:181–191CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Denton CP, Black CM (2004) Scleroderma—clinical and pathological advances. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 18:271–290PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Johnson SR, Carette S, Dunne JV (2006) Scleroderma: health services utilization from patients’ perspective. J Rheumatol 33(6):1123–1127PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Steen VD, Medsger TA Jr, Osial TA, Ziegler GL, Shapiro AP, Rodnan GP (1984) Factors predicting the development of renal involvement in progressive systemic sclerosis. Am J Med 76:779–786CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Steen VD, Conte C, Owens GR, Medsger TA Jr (1994) Severe restrictive lung disease in systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum 37:1283–1289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ioannidis JPA, Vlachoyiannopoulos PG, Haidich A-B et al (2005) Mortality in systemic sclerosis: an international meta-analysis of individual patient data. Am J Med 118:2–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Steen VD, Medsger TA Jr (2007) Changes in causes of death in systemic sclerosis, 1972–2002. Ann Rheum Dis 66:940–944CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Henness S, Wigley FM (2007) Current drug therapy for scleroderma and secondary Raynaud’s phenomenon: evidence-based review. Curr Opin Rheumatol 19:611–618CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Matucci-Cerinic M, Steen VD, Furst DE, Seibold JR (2007) Clinical trials in systemic sclerosis: lessons learned and outcomes. Arthritis Res Ther 9(Suppl):S7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiangning Fan
    • 1
  • Janet Pope
    • 1
    Email author
  • The Canadian Scleroderma Research Group
  • Murray Baron
    • 2
  1. 1.St. Joseph’s Health Care LondonThe University of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  2. 2.McGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations