Search

Objective: To perform a systematic literature review on definitions and instruments used to measure remission, relapse, and disease activity in polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR), to inform an OMERACT project to endorse instruments for these outcomes., Methods: A search of Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Epistemonikos was performed May 2021 and updated August 2023. Qualitative and quantitative studies published in English were included if they recruited people with isolated PMR regardless of treatment. Study selection and data extraction was performed independently by two investigators and disagreement was resolved through discussion. Data extracted encompassed definitions of disease activity, remission and relapse, and details regarding the instruments used to measure these outcomes., Results: From the 5,718 records, we included 26 articles on disease activity, 36 on remission, and 53 on relapse; 64 studies were observational and 15interventional, and none used qualitative methods. Some heterogeneity was found regarding definitions and instruments encompassing the domains pain, stiffness, fatigue, laboratory markers (mainly acute phase reactants), and patient and physician global assessment of disease activity. However, instruments for clinical signs were often poorly described. Whilst measurement properties of the polymyalgia rheumatica activity score (PMR-AS) have been assessed, data to support its use for measurement of remission and relapse is limited., Conclusion: Remission, relapse, and disease activity have been defined heterogeneously in clinical studies. Instruments to measure these disease states still need to be validated. Qualitative research is needed to better understand the concepts of remission and relapse in PMR., Review Registration: PROSPERO identification: CRD42021255925., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: The Simple Erosion Narrowing Score (SENS) is a simplification of the Sharp/van der Heijde score (SHS). Previous studies found SENS and SHS to have very similar measurement properties, but suggest that SENS has a lower discriminative ability that may result in reduced power. Therefore, we aimed to quantify the effect of using SENS rather than SHS on the power to show between-group differences in radiographic progression., Methods: Using data from two clinical trials in rheumatoid arthritis (DRESS and BeSt), SENS was derived from the SHS. Criterion validity of the SENS in relation to the SHS was assessed by calculating the Spearman correlation. The power of both scores to show a difference between groups was compared using bootstrapping to generate 10.000 replications of each study. Then, the number of replications with a significant difference in progression (using ANCOVA adjusted for baseline scores) were compared., Results: Correlations between SENS and SHS were all >0.9, indicating high criterion validity of SENS compared with SHS as a reference standard. There was one exception, the DRESS study showed a somewhat lower correlation for the change score at 18 months (0.787). The loss in power of SENS over SHS was limited to at most 19% (BeSt year 5). In addition, the difference in power between SENS and SHS is smaller at higher levels of power., Conclusion: SENS appears to be a reasonable alternative to SHS, with only a limited loss of power to show between-group differences in radiographic progression., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)