Power-Doppler perfusion phenotype in RA patients is dependent on anti-citrullinated peptide antibody status, not on rheumatoid factor
- 89 Downloads
It is not known whether there are any consistent non-serological differences between seropositive and seronegative rheumatoid arthritis, and if any, whether they depend upon rheumatoid factor (RF), anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA), or both. In a pilot study, we showed that the two forms could be differentiated using power-Doppler sonography (PDS), and that the difference is ACPA dependent. This extended study explored whether the previous findings could be confirmed. 103 patients 51 ACPA positive (ACPA +), 52 ACPA negative (ACPA −) with active wrist arthritis were examined using PDS. By means of a temporal image series, pulsatility was evaluated over a 3–5-s period, maximum and minimum perfusion signal were determined using a computer program counting the number of coloured pixels for each frame. Maxima (Pmax) and minima (Pmin) were determined, and the standardized peak-to-peak amplitude sA was calculated (sA = (Pmax − Pmin)/Pmax). This parameter was then compared for ACPA + and ACPA- patients. In addition, a multivariate regression was performed, to determine which factors influence sA. sA differed significantly between ACPA + and ACPA- patients [20% (13–26) vs. 41% (32–57), p < 0. 0001]. In the multivariate analysis, age (t = 2.5, p = 0.02) and ACPA status (t = − 4.8, p < 0.0001) were independent predictors of sA. PDS perfusion patterns are different in seropositive and seronegative RA. The difference appears to be ACPA, not RF dependent. This suggests that the underlying pathophysiological process is different in ACPA-positive and ACPA-negative RA.
KeywordsPower-Doppler sonography ACPA-negative RA Perfusion pattern
The authors would like to thank Hans-Peter Tony MD, PhD for his input in drafting the manuscript, and Tobias Müller for assistance with performing the multivariate regression. No external writers were involved in manuscript drafting or preparation.
OG: underlying observation, study design, patient recruitment, sonographic examination, data analysis, data interpretation, and first draft; MF: patient recruitment, sonographic examination, and draft revision; TW: data preparation, data post-processing, and draft revision; ECS: study design, patient recruitment, sonographic examination, data interpretation, and draft revision.
No external funding was obtained for performing this study.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
OG: speaker’s fees from Abbvie, Chugai, Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, and Sanofi. Grants from Abbvie, Chugai, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, Novartis and Roche. Advisory board participation for Novartis. All outside the submitted work. MF: personal Fees from Abbvie, Chugai, Janssen-Cilag MSD, Pfizer, Roche and UCB. All outside the submitted work. TW: research grant from Siemens Healthcare. Outside the submitted work. ECS: speaker’s fees from Abbvie, Chugai, Jansen-Cilag, Lilly, Novartis and Shire. Grants from Abbvie, Celgene, Chugai, Novartis and Shire. All outside the submitted work.
Final approval by the ethics committee of the University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany 20.07.2018 (Protocol Number 22/18). All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
No application was submitted to the ethics commission of the University of Würzburg for permission to share the obtained data. Hence, the data cannot be made available for further analysis.
- 1.Combe B, Landewe R, Lukas C, Bolosiu HD, Breedveld F, Dougados M, Emery P, Ferraccioli G, Hazes JM, Klareskog L, Machold K, Martin-Mola E, Nielsen H, Smolen J, Yazici H (2007) EULAR recommendations for the management of early arthritis: report of a task force of the European Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutics (ESCISIT). Ann Rheum Dis 66:34–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Harris ED Jr, Firestein GS (2009) Clinical features of rheumatoid arthritis. In: Firestein GS, Budd RC, Harris ED Jr, McInnes IB, Ruddy S, Sergent JS (eds) Kelley’s textbook of rheumatology, 8th edn. Elsevier, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
- 6.Gottenberg JE, Courvoisier DS, Hernandez MV, Iannone F, Lie E, Canhão H, Pavelka K, Hetland ML, Turesson C, Mariette X, Finckh (2016) A brief report: association of rheumatoid factor and anti-citrullinated protein antibody positivity with better effectiveness of abatacept: results from the pan-european registry analysis. Arthritis Rheumatol 68(6):1346–1352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.Padyukov L, Seielstad M, Ong RT, Ding B, Rönnelid J, Seddighzadeh M, Alfredsson L, Klareskog L (2011) Epidemiological investigation of rheumatoid arthritis (EIRA) study group: a genome-wide association study suggests contrasting associations in ACPA-positive versus ACPA-negative rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 70:259–265CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Burgers LE, van Steenbergen HW, ten Brinck RM, Huizinga TW van der (2017) Helm-van Mil AH: Differences in the symptomatic phase preceding ACPA-positive and ACPA-negative RA: a longitudinal study in arthralgia during progression to clinical arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 76:1751–1754CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Aletaha D, Neogi T, Silman AJ, Funovits J, Felson DT, Bingham CO 3rd, Birnbaum NS, Burmester GR, Bykerk VP, Cohen MD, Combe B, Costenbader KH, Dougados M, Emery P, Ferraccioli G, Hazes JM, Hobbs K, Huizinga TW, Kavanaugh A, Kay J, Kvien TK, Laing T, Mease P, Ménard HA, Moreland LW, Naden RL, Pincus T, Smolen JS, Stanislawska-Biernat E, Symmons D, Tak PP, Upchurch KS, Vencovsky J, Wolfe F, Hawker G (2010) 2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Ann Rheum Dis 69:1580–1588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.D’Agostino M-A, Terslev L, Aegerter P, Backhaus M, Balint P, Bruyn GA, Filippucci E, Grassi W, Iagnocco A, Jousse-Jolin S, Kane D, Naredo E, Schmidt W, Szkudlarek M, Conaghan PG, Wakefield RJ (2017) Scoring ultrasound synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis: a EULAR-OMERACT ultrasound taskforce—part 1: definition and development of a standardised, consensus-based scoring system. RMD Open 11(1):e000428 3(CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Boeters D, Gaujoux-Viala C, Constantin A, van der Helm-van Mil AHM (2017) The 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria are not sufficiently accurate in the early identification of autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis: Results from the Leiden-EAC and ESPOIR cohorts. Semin Arthritis Rheum 47(2):170–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar