Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27603313›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Cut-Offs and Response Criteria for the Hospital Universitario La Princesa Index (HUPI) and Their Comparison to Widely-Used Indices of Disease Activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Isidoro González-Álvaro, Isabel Castrejón, Ana M Ortiz, Esther Toledano, Santos Castañeda, Alberto García-Vadillo, Loreto Carmona, EMECAR Study Group

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Isidoro González-ÁlvaroRheumatology Department, Hospital Universitario la Princesa, IIS-IP, Madrid, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9614-5199
Isabel CastrejónDivision of Rheumatology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America.
Ana M OrtizRheumatology Department, Hospital Universitario la Princesa, IIS-IP, Madrid, Spain.
Esther ToledanoRheumatology Department. Hospital Clínico San Carlos, IdISSC, Madrid, Spain.
Santos CastañedaRheumatology Department, Hospital Universitario la Princesa, IIS-IP, Madrid, Spain.
Alberto García-VadilloRheumatology Department, Hospital Universitario la Princesa, IIS-IP, Madrid, Spain.
Loreto CarmonaInstituto de Salud Musculoesquelética, Madrid, Spain.
EMECAR Study Group
Hospital Universitario de La Princesa · ESHospital Clínico San Carlos · ESInstituto de Salud Musculoesquelética · ESRush University Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo estimate cut-off points and to establish response criteria for the Hospital Universitario La Princesa Index (HUPI) in patients with chronic polyarthritis.

methodsTwo cohorts, one of early arthritis (Princesa Early Arthritis Register Longitudinal [PEARL] study) and other of long-term rheumatoid arthritis (Estudio de la Morbilidad y Expresión Clínica de la Artritis Reumatoide [EMECAR]) including altogether 1200 patients were used to determine cut-off values for remission, and for low, moderate and high activity through receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis. The areas under ROC (AUC) were compared to those of validated indexes (SDAI, CDAI, DAS28). ROC analysis was also applied to establish minimal and relevant clinical improvement for HUPI.

resultsThe best cut-off points for HUPI are 2, 5 and 9, classifying RA activity as remission if ≤2, low disease activity if >2 and ≤5), moderate if >5 and <9 and high if ≥9. HUPI's AUC to discriminate between low-moderate activity was 0.909 and between moderate-high activity 0.887. DAS28's AUCs were 0.887 and 0.846, respectively; both indices had higher accuracy than SDAI (AUCs: 0.832 and 0.756) and CDAI (AUCs: 0.789 and 0.728). HUPI discriminates remission better than DAS28-ESR in early arthritis, but similarly to SDAI. The HUPI cut-off for minimal clinical improvement was established at 2 and for relevant clinical improvement at 4. Response criteria were established based on these cut-off values.

conclusionsThe cut-offs proposed for HUPI perform adequately in patients with either early or long term arthritis.

Indexed as

Translational Research, BiomedicalAgedAntirheumatic AgentsArea Under CurveArthritis, RheumatoidBlood SedimentationC-Reactive ProteinErythrocytesFemaleGuidelines as TopicHospitals, UniversityHumansMaleMiddle AgedRemission InductionSeverity of Illness IndexAntirheumatic AgentsC-Reactive Protein

Identifiers

PMID27603313
PMCPMC5014307
OpenAlexW2508186389

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.