Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The challenges of determining RA disease activity and remission in clinical practice

  • Viewpoint
  • Published:

From Nature Clinical Practice Rheumatology

View current issue Sign up to alerts

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Neogi T and Felson DT (2008) Composite versus individual measures of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 35: 185–187

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. van der Heijde DM et al. (1993) Development of a disease activity score based on judgment in clinical practice by rheumatologists. J Rheumatol 20: 579–581

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Aletaha D and Smolen JS (2007) The Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) to monitor patients in standard clinical care. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 21: 663–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Wolfe F et al. (2005) A composite disease activity scale for clinical practice, observational studies, and clinical trials: the patient activity scale (PAS/PAS-II). J Rheumatol 32: 2410–2415

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Pincus T et al. (2008) An index of only patient-reported outcome measures, routine assessment of patient index data 3 (RAPID3), in two abatacept clinical trials: similar results to disease activity score (DAS28) and other RAPID indices that include physician-reported measures. Rheumatology (Oxford) 47: 345–349

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Shaver TS et al. (2008) The problem of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity and remission in clinical practice. J Rheumatol 35: 1015–1022

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Leeb BF et al. (2007) Disease activity score-28 values differ considerably depending on patient's pain perception and sex. J Rheumatol 34: 2382–2387

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wells GA et al. (2005) Minimal disease activity for rheumatoid arthritis: a preliminary definition. J Rheumatol 32: 2016–2024

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wyrwich KW (2004) Minimal important difference thresholds and the standard error of measurement: is there a connection? J Biopharm Stat 14: 97–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. F Wolfe is the Director of the National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases, and Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of Kansas School of Medicine, Wichita, KS, USA.,

    Frederick Wolfe

  2. K Michaud is a Research Scientist at the National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases, Wichita, KS, USA, and an Assistant Professor of Medicine at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.,

    Kaleb Michaud

Authors
  1. Frederick Wolfe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kaleb Michaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frederick Wolfe.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wolfe, F., Michaud, K. The challenges of determining RA disease activity and remission in clinical practice. Nat Rev Rheumatol 4, 462–463 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncprheum0859

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncprheum0859

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation