2016 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism criteria for minimal, moderate, and major clinical response in adult dermatomyositis and polymyositis

To develop response criteria for adult dermatomyositis (DM) and polymyositis (PM). Expert surveys, logistic regression, and conjoint analysis were used to develop 287 definitions using core set measures. Myositis experts rated greater improvement among multiple pairwise scenarios in conjoint analysis surveys, where different levels of improvement in 2 core set measures were presented. The PAPRIKA (Potentially All Pairwise Rankings of All Possible Alternatives) method determined the relative weights of core set measures and conjoint analysis definitions. The performance characteristics of the definitions were evaluated on patient profiles using expert consensus (gold standard) and were validated using data from a clinical trial. The nominal group technique was used to reach consensus. Consensus was reached for a conjoint analysis-based continuous model using absolute per cent change in core set measures (physician, patient, and extramuscular global activity, muscle strength, Health Assessment Questionnaire, and muscle enzyme levels). A total improvement score (range 0–100), determined by summing scores for each core set measure, was based on improvement in and relative weight of each core set measure. Thresholds for minimal, moderate, and major improvement were ≥20, ≥40, and ≥60 points in the total improvement score. The same criteria were chosen for juvenile DM, with different improvement thresholds. Sensitivity and specificity in DM/PM patient cohorts were 85% and 92%, 90% and 96%, and 92% and 98% for minimal, moderate, and major improvement, respectively. Definitions were validated in the clinical trial analysis for differentiating the physician rating of improvement (p<0.001). The response criteria for adult DM/PM consisted of the conjoint analysis model based on absolute per cent change in 6 core set measures, with thresholds for minimal, moderate, and major improvement.

[1]  A. Ogdie,et al.  Development of Preliminary Remission Criteria for Gout Using Delphi and 1000Minds Consensus Exercises , 2016, Arthritis care & research.

[2]  C. Wouters,et al.  Prednisone versus prednisone plus ciclosporin versus prednisone plus methotrexate in new-onset juvenile dermatomyositis: a randomised trial , 2016, The Lancet.

[3]  A. Ogdie,et al.  2015 Gout classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative , 2015, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[4]  C. Oddis,et al.  Treatment of inflammatory myopathy: emerging therapies and therapeutic targets , 2015, Expert review of clinical immunology.

[5]  T. Schenk,et al.  Patient preferences for disease-modifying drugs in multiple sclerosis therapy: a choice-based conjoint analysis , 2014, Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders.

[6]  P. Lachenbruch,et al.  A Consensus Hybrid Definition Using a Conjoint Analysis Is the Proposed As Response Criteria for Minimal and Moderate Improvement for Adult Polymyositis and Dermatomyositis Clincal Trials. , 2014 .

[7]  M. Bottai,et al.  Progress report on development of classification criteria for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies , 2014, Pediatric Rheumatology.

[8]  M. Mayes,et al.  Multicriteria decision analysis methods with 1000Minds for developing systemic sclerosis classification criteria. , 2014, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[9]  A. Orbai,et al.  Patient-reported Outcomes and Adult Patients’ Disease Experience in the Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies. Report from the OMERACT 11 Myositis Special Interest Group , 2014, The Journal of Rheumatology.

[10]  M. Mayes,et al.  2013 classification criteria for systemic sclerosis: an American college of rheumatology/European league against rheumatism collaborative initiative , 2013, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[11]  M. Sormani,et al.  Validation of the Auto-Inflammatory Diseases Activity Index (AIDAI) for hereditary recurrent fever syndromes , 2013, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[12]  W. Taylor,et al.  Do Patient Preferences for Core Outcome Domains for Chronic Gout Studies Support the Validity of Composite Response Criteria? , 2013, Arthritis care & research.

[13]  C. Oddis,et al.  Patients with non-Jo-1 anti-tRNA-synthetase autoantibodies have worse survival than Jo-1 positive patients , 2013, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[14]  H. Rockette,et al.  Rituximab in the treatment of refractory adult and juvenile dermatomyositis and adult polymyositis: a randomized, placebo-phase trial. , 2013, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[15]  F. Miller,et al.  Laboratory Test Abnormalities are Common in Polymyositis and Dermatomyositis and Differ Among Clinical and Demographic Groups , 2012, The open rheumatology journal.

[16]  Mandy Ryan,et al.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. , 2012, Health economics.

[17]  Raj Nair,et al.  Methods of formal consensus in classification/diagnostic criteria and guideline development. , 2011, Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism.

[18]  K. Latinis.  A randomized, pilot trial of etanercept in dermatomyositis , 2011, Annals of neurology.

[19]  J. Singh,et al.  Bringing It All Together: A Novel Approach to the Development of Response Criteria for Chronic Gout Clinical Trials , 2011, The Journal of Rheumatology.

[20]  P. Tugwell,et al.  American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Provisional Definition of Remission in Rheumatoid Arthritis for Clinical Trials , 2011, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[21]  A. Martini,et al.  Networking in paediatrics: the example of the Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation (PRINTO) , 2011, Archives of Disease in Childhood.

[22]  F. Miller,et al.  Deciphering the clinical presentations, pathogenesis, and treatment of the idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. , 2011, JAMA.

[23]  A. Silman,et al.  The 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: Phase 2 methodological report. , 2010, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[24]  A. Bagga,et al.  EULAR/PRINTO/PRES criteria for Henoch-Schönlein purpura, childhood polyarteritis nodosa, childhood Wegener granulomatosis and childhood Takayasu arteritis: Ankara 2008. Part I: Overall methodology and clinical characterisation , 2010, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[25]  S. Prahalad,et al.  Health-related quality of life of patients with juvenile dermatomyositis: results from the Pediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation multinational quality of life cohort study. , 2009, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[26]  M. Ryan,et al.  Using discrete choice experiments to value health and health care , 2008 .

[27]  A. Martini,et al.  Consensus procedures and their role in pediatric rheumatology , 2008, Current rheumatology reports.

[28]  P. Hansen,et al.  A new method for scoring additive multi‐attribute value models using pairwise rankings of alternatives , 2008 .

[29]  Michel Fischbach,et al.  The provisional Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation/American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Disease activity core set for the evaluation of response to therapy in juvenile dermatomyositis: a prospective validation study. , 2008, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[30]  Désirée van der Heijde,et al.  A proposed revision to the ACR20: the hybrid measure of American College of Rheumatology response. , 2007, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[31]  B. Engelen,et al.  Anti-signal recognition particle autoantibodies: marker of a necrotising myopathy , 2006, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[32]  P. Lachenbruch,et al.  International consensus on preliminary definitions of improvement in adult and juvenile myositis. , 2004, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[33]  P. Lachenbruch,et al.  Defining Clinical Improvement in Adult and Juvenile Myositis. , 2003, The Journal of rheumatology.

[34]  L. Rider.  Outcome assessment in the adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. , 2002, Rheumatic diseases clinics of North America.

[35]  D. Isenberg,et al.  Proposed preliminary core set measures for disease outcome assessment in adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. , 2001, Rheumatology.

[36]  S. Cavuto,et al.  Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation of the Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ) and the Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ) in 32 countries. Review of the general methodology. , 2001, Clinical and experimental rheumatology.

[37]  J J Anderson,et al.  American College of Rheumatology. Preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1995, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[38]  C. Metz.  Basic principles of ROC analysis. , 1978, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[39]  David H. Gustafson,et al.  Group Techniques for Program Planning: A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi Processes , 1976 .

[40]  A. Ogdie,et al.  Gout Classification Criteria An American College of Rheumatology / European League Against Rheumatism Collaborative Initiative , 2015 .

[41]  M. Mayes,et al.  An American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Collaborative Initiative , 2013 .

[42]  Mandy Ryan,et al.  Discrete choice experiments in a nutshell , 2008 .

[43]  J. Ware.  SF-36 health survey: Manual and interpretation guide , 2003 .

[44]  H. Holman,et al.  Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. , 1980, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[45]  A. Bohan,et al.  Polymyositis and dermatomyositis (first of two parts). , 1975, The New England journal of medicine.