Evidence Hub

POS0730 prognostic factors and efficacy of dmard USE in GCA: results from the prospective, longitudinal,multi-centre HAS-GCA study

B. Dasgupta, K. V. D. van der Geest, A. Tomelleri, P. Macchioni, G. Klinowski, C. Salvarani, A. Kayani, M. Tariq et al.

Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 2023

229 participants

Abstract

GCA is a critically ischemic large vessel vasculitis, varying in extent, severity and outcomes, hence requires disease stratification using clinical, laboratory and imaging parameters, for targeted management. Although DMARDs are used, the effectiveness in real life, such adjuvants remain un-elucidated. We performed a prospective, multi centre cohort study of new GCA stratified into remitting, relapsing, refractory, ischemic disease.We assessed prognostic factors and compared critical outcomes such as remission with glucocorticoid (GC) monotherapy versus GC plus DMARDs in the first 12 months.HAS GCA study (1) recruited consecutive patients with new onset GCA from 7 centres (UK, Italy, Spain, Netherlands). diagnosis was confirmed used a modified GiACTA criteria at 6 months follow up. All underwent ultrasound (bilateral common, parietal, frontal temporal arteries, and axillary arteries) using accepted standard cut-off values [2]. GCA patients had US at baseline,1,3,6,12 months and halo count (HC) and Halo score (Temporal TAHS, axillary AAHS, total THS) assessed [3]. The primary outcome- remission at 12 months (absence of signs/symptoms, CRP<5 mg/dl, prednisolone < 5 mg daily). Results are reported as descriptive statistics.229 participants included in the study (GCA- 84 (36.68 %) (Figure 1). Study recruited during Covid pandemic,73 completed,11 lost to follow-up (died -7, withdrawn-4). The deceased/withdrawn patients (compared to completers) were older (80 v74 yrs, p=0.018),…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 229 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free