Spoorenberg A, van der Heijde D, de Klerk E, Dougados M, de Vlam K, Mielants H, van der Tempel H, van der Linden S
Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Maastricht, The Netherlands.
J Rheumatol. 1999 Apr;26(4):980-4.
Our aim was to determine whether C-reactive protein (CRP) or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is more appropriate in measuring disease activity in ankylosing spondylitis (AS). We studied 191 consecutive outpatients with AS in The Netherlands, France, and Belgium. Patients were attending secondary and tertiary referral centers. The external criterion for disease activity was: physician and patient assessment of disease activity on a visual analog scale (VAS) and the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI). In each measure we defined 3 levels of disease activity: no activity, ambiguous activity, and definite disease activity. The patients with AS (modified New York criteria) were divided into 2 groups: those with spinal involvement only (n=149) and those who also had peripheral arthritis and/or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (n=42). For each criterion of disease activity, the patients with no activity and with definite activity were included in receiver operator curves and used to determine cutoff values with the highest sensitivity and specificity. We also calculated Spearman correlations. The median CRP and ESR were 16 mg/l and 13 mm/h, respectively, in the spinal group and 25 mg/l and 21 mm/h, respectively, in the peripheral/IBD group. In both groups the Spearman correlation coefficients between CRP and ESR were around 0.50. There was moderate to poor correlation between CRP, ESR, and the 3 disease activity variables (0.06-0.48). Sensitivity for both ESR and CRP was 100% for physician assessment and between 44 and 78% for patient assessment of disease activity and the BASDAI, while specificity was between 44 and 84% for all disease activity measures. The positive predictive values of CRP and ESR in our setting were low (0.15-0.69). We conclude that neither CRP nor ESR is superior to assess disease activity.
我们的目的是确定C反应蛋白(CRP)或红细胞沉降率(ESR)在测量强直性脊柱炎(AS)疾病活动度方面是否更合适。我们研究了荷兰、法国和比利时的191例连续性AS门诊患者。这些患者均在二级和三级转诊中心就诊。疾病活动度的外部标准为:医生和患者采用视觉模拟量表(VAS)及巴氏强直性脊柱炎疾病活动指数(BASDAI)对疾病活动度进行评估。在每项测量中,我们定义了3个疾病活动度水平:无活动、活动度不明确和明确的疾病活动。符合AS(改良纽约标准)的患者被分为2组:仅累及脊柱者(n = 149)和同时患有外周关节炎和/或炎性肠病(IBD)者(n = 42)。对于每个疾病活动度标准,将无活动和有明确活动的患者纳入受试者操作曲线,并用于确定具有最高敏感性和特异性的临界值。我们还计算了Spearman相关性。脊柱组CRP和ESR的中位数分别为16 mg/l和13 mm/h,外周/IBD组分别为25 mg/l和21 mm/h。在两组中,CRP和ESR之间的Spearman相关系数均约为0.50。CRP、ESR与3个疾病活动度变量之间的相关性为中度至低度(0.06 - 0.48)。对于医生评估,ESR和CRP的敏感性均为100%,对于患者评估疾病活动度和BASDAI,敏感性在44%至78%之间,而所有疾病活动度测量的特异性在44%至84%之间。在我们的研究中,CRP和ESR的阳性预测值较低(0.15 - 0.69)。我们得出结论,CRP和ESR在评估疾病活动度方面均无优势。