Back to Search Start Over

A novel model to assess disease activity in Takayasu arteritis based on 18F-FDG-PET/CT: a Chinese cohort study.

Authors :
Ma LY
Wu B
Jin XJ
Sun Y
Kong XF
Ji ZF
Chen RY
Cui XM
Shi HC
Jiang LD
Source :
Rheumatology (Oxford, England) [Rheumatology (Oxford)] 2022 Apr 18; Vol. 61 (SI), pp. SI14-SI22.
Publication Year :
2022

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the utility of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG-PET/CT) in assessing disease activity in Takayasu arteritis (TA).<br />Methods: Ninety-one patients with TA were recruited from a Chinese cohort. Clinical data, acute-phase reactants and 18F-FDG-PET/CT findings were simultaneously recorded. The value of using 18F-FDG-PET/CT to identify active disease was evaluated, using ESR as a reference. Disease activity assessment models were constructed and concordance index (C-index), net reclassification index (NRI), and integrated discrimination index (IDI) were evaluated to compare the benefits of the new modes with ESR and the Kerr score.<br />Results: In total, 64 (70.3%) cases showed active disease. Higher levels of ESR and CRP, and lower IL-2 receptor (IL-2R) levels were observed in active cases. 18F-FDG-PET/CT parameters measured by determining the standard uptake value (SUV), including SUVmean, SUVratio1, SUVratio2, sum of SUVmean and sum of SUVmax, were significantly higher in active disease groups. The C-index threshold of ESR to indicate active disease was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69, 0.88). The new activity assessment model combining ESR, sum of SUVmean and IL-2R showed significant improvement in C-index over the ESR method (0.96 vs 0.78, P < 0.01; NRI 1.63, P < 0.01; and IDI 0.48, P < 0.01). The new model also demonstrated modest superiority to the Kerr score assessment (0.96 vs 0.87, P = 0.03; NRI 1.19, P < 0.01; and IDI 0.33, P < 0.01).<br />Conclusions: A novel 18F-FDG-PET/CT-based method that involves combining the sum of SUVmean with ESR score and IL-2R levels demonstrated superiority in identifying active TA compared with conventional methods.<br /> (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1462-0332
Volume :
61
Issue :
SI
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Rheumatology (Oxford, England)
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
34156465
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keab487