Dataset Information

Comparison of cardiovascular risk algorithms in patients with vs without rheumatoid arthritis and the role of C-reactive protein in predicting cardiovascular outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The aims were to compare the performance of cardiovascular risk calculators, Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and QRISK2, in RA and matched non-RA patients and to evaluate whether their performance could be enhanced by the addition of CRP.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis, using a clinical practice data set linked to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data from the UK. Patients presenting with at least one RA diagnosis code and no prior cardiovascular events were matched to non-RA patients using disease risk scores. The overall performance of the FRS and QRISK2 was compared between cohorts, and assessed with and without CRP in the RA cohort using C-Index, Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and the net reclassification index (NRI).

Results

Four thousand seven hundred and eighty RA patients met the inclusion criteria and were followed for a mean of 3.8 years. The C-Index for the FRS in the non-RA and RA cohort was 0.783 and 0.754 (P < 0.001) and that of the QRISK2 was 0.770 and 0.744 (P < 0.001), respectively. Log[CRP] was positively associated with cardiovascular events, but improvements in the FRS and QRISK2 C-Indices as a result of inclusion of CRP were small, from 0.764 to 0.767 (P = 0.026) for FRS and from 0.764 to 0.765 (P = 0.250) for QRISK2. The NRI was 3.2% (95% CI: -2.8, 5.7%) for FRS and -2.0% (95% CI: -5.8, 4.5%) for QRISK2.

Conclusion

The C-Index for the FRS and QRISK2 was significantly better in the non-RA compared with RA patients. The addition of CRP in both equations was not associated with a significant improvement in reclassification based on NRI.

SUBMITTER: Alemao E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8344293 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionMisclassification of spondyloarthritis (SpA) as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may lead to delayed SpA diagnosis and suboptimal therapeutic outcomes. Here, we evaluate the literature on clinical manifestations in patients with SpA and RA, particularly seronegative RA, to understand the potential overlap, distinctions, and most reliable approaches to accurate diagnosis.MethodsIn this systematic literature review, conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, we searched key biomedical databases for English-language publications of original research articles (up to July 23, 2020) and rheumatology conference abstracts (January 1, 2018-July 31, 2020) reporting key SpA clinical presentations in patients with SpA or RA. Publications were assessed for eligibility by two independent reviewers; discrepancies were resolved by a third. Studies were evaluated for publication quality using the Downs and Black checklist.ResultsOf 4712 records retrieved, 79 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Of these, 54 included study populations with SpA and RA, and 25 with seropositive and/or seronegative RA. Entheseal abnormalities were more frequently reported among patients with SpA than RA and with seronegative vs. seropositive RA. Psoriasis, nail psoriasis, and dactylitis were exclusively seen in SpA vs. RA. In most publications (70 of 79), advanced imaging techniques allowed for more accurate distinction between SpA and RA. Overlapping clinical characteristics occur in SpA and RA, including inflammation and destruction of joints, pain, diminished functional ability, and increased risk for comorbidities. However, of 54 studies comparing SpA and RA populations, only seven concluded that no distinction can be made based on the SpA manifestations and outcomes examined.ConclusionsTypical SpA-related clinical symptoms and signs were observed in patients with RA, suggesting that misclassification could occur. Availability of advanced imaging modalities may allow for more prompt and comprehensive evaluation of peripheral manifestations in SpA and RA, reducing misclassification and delayed diagnosis.

Project description:To determine, using data from a real-world setting, the overall and sex-specific risk of cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with or without comorbid hyperlipidemia, relative to those in a non-RA cohort.This retrospective cohort study using claims data from a US commercial health plan (2005-2011) included patients with RA and a matched non-RA cohort. Cox proportional hazards regression model determined the hazard ratio (HR) for CV events (myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization procedures), using the presence of RA and hyperlipidemia as the independent variables, controlling for other covariates (age, sex, diabetes, and hypertension).The incidence of CV events per 1000 person-years was 10.19 for the RA cohort and 6.41 for the non-RA cohort (crude rate ratio [RR] =1.59). Within the RA cohort, incidence was 15.54 for patients with hyperlipidemia and 7.05 for patients without hyperlipidemia (crude RR=2.21); in the non-RA cohort, incidence was 10.55 and 3.82 for those with and without hyperlipidemia, respectively (crude RR=2.76). After controlling for covariates, the HR of CV events among RA patients was 1.68 (95% CI: 1.50, 1.87) relative to non-RA patients. After multivariable adjustment, hyperlipidemia conferred a significant risk of CV events in both RA and non-RA patients; the interaction between RA and hyperlipidemia was not significant (p=0.13).This real-world analysis demonstrates that patients with RA have an increased risk of CV events. Similar to a non-RA cohort, CV event rates were incrementally higher for those patients with hyperlipidemia.Cardiovascular disease is an increasingly visible topic of concern in the rheumatoid arthritis community. However, there are only limited data that informs both the absolute and relative rates of CVD events, and the contribution of various risk factors such as hyperlipidemia, compared to non-RA populationsThe 'lipid paradox' hypothesis in RA suggests that elevated LDL cholesterol has a negligible effect on CVD risk in RA, unlikely in the general population where it is a well-accepted CVD risk factorThe incidence of CVD events in RA patients was 10/1000 patient years, a 1.6 fold greater risk compared to non-RA patientsThe contribution of hyperlipidemia to CVD risk was associated with comparable or greater absolute increases in the rate of CV events compared to non RA patients, a finding that does not support the lipid paradox.