From the Department of Rheumatology, Hospital Nacional Guillermo Almenara Irigoyen, EsSalud, Lima.
J Clin Rheumatol. 2022 Mar 1;28(2):e397-e400. doi: 10.1097/RHU.0000000000001741.
To validate the new classification criteria for antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis in a real-life Peruvian cohort of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis patients.
We reviewed medical records from a Peruvian tertiary care center from January 1990 to December 2019. Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis was diagnosed based on the 1990 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria, the 2012 Chapel Hill Consensus Conference definitions, the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) algorithm, and the clinical acumen of the treating rheumatologists. We classified all patients using the "former criteria" (the 1990 ACR criteria for granulomatosis with polyangiitis [GPA] and eosinophilic GPA [EGPA] and the 1994 Chapel Hill Consensus Conference definition for microscopic polyangiitis [MPA]), the EMEA algorithm, and the "new criteria" (the 2017 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism Provisional Criteria). The level of agreement (using Cohen κ) was calculated using the clinical diagnosis as the criterion standard.
We identified 212 patients, 12 of whom were excluded. One hundred fifty-four (77%) had MPA, 41 (20.5%) GPA, and 5 (2.5%) EGPA. The new criteria performed well for MPA (κ = 0.713) and EGPA (κ = 0.659), whereas the EMEA algorithm performed well for GPA (κ = 0.938). In the overall population, the new criteria showed better agreement (κ = 0.653) than the EMEA algorithm (κ = 0.506) and the former criteria (κ = 0.305).
The 2017 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism Provisional Criteria showed better agreement for the clinical diagnosis of all the patients overall and had the best performance for MPA and EGPA. The EMEA algorithm had the best performance for GPA.
在秘鲁的抗中性粒细胞胞浆抗体相关性血管炎患者真实队列中验证新的抗中性粒细胞胞浆抗体相关性血管炎分类标准。
我们回顾了 1990 年 1 月至 2019 年 12 月秘鲁一家三级保健中心的病历。抗中性粒细胞胞浆抗体相关性血管炎的诊断基于 1990 年美国风湿病学会(ACR)标准、2012 年 Chapel Hill 共识会议定义、欧洲药品管理局(EMEA)算法和治疗风湿病学家的临床判断。我们使用“旧标准”(1990 年 ACR 用于肉芽肿性多血管炎[GPA]和嗜酸性粒细胞性 GPA[EGPA]的标准和 1994 年 Chapel Hill 共识会议用于显微镜下多血管炎[MPA]的定义)、EMEA 算法和“新标准”(2017 年 ACR/欧洲抗风湿病联盟临时标准)对所有患者进行分类。使用临床诊断作为标准,计算一致性(使用 Cohen κ)。
我们共确定了 212 名患者,其中 12 名被排除。154 名(77%)为 MPA,41 名(20.5%)为 GPA,5 名(2.5%)为 EGPA。新标准在 MPA(κ=0.713)和 EGPA(κ=0.659)方面表现良好,而 EMEA 算法在 GPA(κ=0.938)方面表现良好。在整个人群中,新标准的一致性(κ=0.653)优于 EMEA 算法(κ=0.506)和旧标准(κ=0.305)。
2017 年 ACR/欧洲抗风湿病联盟临时标准对所有患者的临床诊断具有更好的一致性,对 MPA 和 EGPA 的诊断性能最佳。EMEA 算法对 GPA 的诊断性能最佳。