Title |
Evaluation of treatments for sacroiliitis in spondyloarthropathy using the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium Canada scoring system
|
---|---|
Published in |
Arthritis Research & Therapy, February 2016
|
DOI | 10.1186/s13075-016-0916-2 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Yang Cui, Jinping Zheng, Xiao Zhang, Hui Zeng, Riqiang Luo |
Abstract |
In this study, the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium Canada (SPARCC) scoring method was used to compare treatment methods in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (SpA), a form of sacroiliitis. MRI abnormalities in bone marrow edema (BME) were compared before and after treatment in order to compare the efficacy of anti-TNF-α and DMARD, alone or in combination, as treatments for sacroiliitis. Fifty-six Chinese patients with axial SpA (mean age 22.6 years) were recruited. Patients were divided into three groups according to different treatments (anti-TNF-α alone vs. DMARDs alone vs. combined anti-TNF-α and DMARDs). MRI examinations were performed before and after treatment. The SPARCC score, clinically relevant AS Disease Activity (ASDAS) indices, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) were analyzed. After treatment, ASDAS and SPARCC scores, ESR, and CRP were significantly improved (P < 0.05) in the anti-TNF-α monotherapy and combination groups; however, there were no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) in clinical disease activity and radiological inflammation of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) in patients in the DMARDs alone group. SPARCC showed a correlation with ASDAS score pre-treatment, but not post-treatment. Furthermore, there were significant changes (P < 0.05) in these patients with axial SpA after only 3 months of treatment. Follow-up studies of patients who continued therapy for 4-6 months and 9-12 months revealed statistically significant differences from baseline (P < 0.05). SPARCC can be used to assess severity of disease pre-treatment. Anti-TNF-α treatment resulted in effective reduction of disease activity and BME of SIJ after 3 months of therapy. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 39 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 10 | 25% |
Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 13% |
Other | 4 | 10% |
Researcher | 4 | 10% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
Other | 7 | 18% |
Unknown | 7 | 18% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 43% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 10% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
Other | 4 | 10% |
Unknown | 9 | 23% |