ArticleRheumatology and therapy2022
Usage of C-Reactive Protein Testing in the Diagnosis and Monitoring of Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA): Results from a Real-World Survey in the USA and Europe.
Article in Rheumatology and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Earlier clinical response predicts low rates of radiographic progression in biologic-naïve patients with active psoriatic arthritis receiving guselkumab treatment.Clinical rheumatology · 2024Trial
- Cross-platform clinical proteomics using the Charité open standard for plasma proteomics (OSPP).Nature communications · 2025Article
- Clinical and ultrasound features of a cohort of psoriasis patients without musculoskeletal symptoms: a prospective and multicentre study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Observational
- A Rare Case of Juvenile Psoriatic Arthritis.Cureus · 2024Article
- Disabling foot pain and its impact on daily living among people with psoriatic arthritis in Singapore: a cross-sectional observational investigation.BMC rheumatology · 2024Article
- Axial Spondyloarthritis Treatment Recommendations and Disease Activity Monitoring in Clinical Practice: Results of an Online Survey.The Journal of rheumatology · 2024Article
- Psoriatic arthritis in psoriasis: optimizing the current screening system for psoriatic arthritis based on serum data from U.S. and Chinese populations.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- C-Reactive Protein: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, False Test Results and a Novel Diagnostic Algorithm for Clinicians.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Inhibition of Interleukin-17 in Patients with Oligoarticular Psoriatic Arthritis.Rheumatology and therapy · 2023Article
- Normal C-reactive protein in active psoriatic arthritis: results from real-world clinical practice.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionC-reactive protein (CRP) is an important non-specific marker of both acute and chronic inflammation and can be elevated in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). However, the use of CRP testing in the management of PsA can vary. This study investigated how CRP testing is implemented in real-world clinical practice for disease management of PsA.
methodsA point-in-time survey of rheumatologists and dermatologists and their next six consulting patients with PsA was conducted in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK (EU5), and the USA between June and August 2018. Use of CRP testing was obtained by asking the physician to state (yes/no) whether CRP was used to aid PsA diagnosis and/or to monitor the patient's disease activity. The number of CRP tests conducted in the last 12 months for each patient enrolled was provided.
resultsData were collected for 2270 patients (USA, n = 595; EU5, n = 1675). In the EU5, CRP testing was conducted to aid diagnosis in 78.7% of patients (vs. 43.4% in USA) and CRP was used to monitor disease activity in 72.0% (vs. 34.6% in USA). The majority (80.9%) of patients in the EU5 had at least one CRP test in the last 12 months compared to 42.9% in the USA. Patients treated by rheumatologists (vs. dermatologists) were at least 50% more likely to have CRP tested for monitoring purposes, this difference being most pronounced in the USA. In the EU5, CRP testing was conducted a mean ± standard deviation of 2.7 ± 1.7 times during the last 12 months, versus 2.0 ± 1.4 in the USA.
conclusionsCRP was more commonly used for the diagnosis and monitoring of PsA in Europe compared to the USA and was more commonly ordered by rheumatologists than dermatologists. In the absence of a better serum biomarker of inflammation, more data are needed to understand how CRP testing should be used in the diagnosis and management PsA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.