Evidence Hub

Four-month metacarpal bone mineral density loss predicts radiological joint damage progression after 1 year in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: exploratory analyses from the IMPROVED study

Wevers-de Boer KV, Heimans L, Visser K, Kälvesten J, Goekoop RJ, van Oosterhout M, Harbers JB, Bijkerk C et al.

Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2015

610 participants

Abstract

AIM: To assess whether in early (rheumatoid) arthritis (RA) patients, metacarpal bone mineral density (BMD) loss after 4 months predicts radiological progression after 1 year of antirheumatic treatment.

METHODS: Metacarpal BMD was measured 4 monthly during the first year by digital X-ray radiogrammetry (DXR-BMD) in patients participating in the IMPROVED study, a clinical trial in 610 patients with recent onset RA (2010 criteria) or undifferentiated arthritis, treated according to a remission (disease activity score<1.6) steered strategy. With Sharp/van der Heijde progression ≥0.5 points after 1 year (yes/no) as dependent variable, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS: Of 428 patients with DXR-BMD results and progression scores available, 28 (7%) had radiological progression after 1 year. Independent predictors for radiological progression were presence of baseline erosions (OR (95% CI) 6.5 (1.7 to 25)) and early DXR-BMD loss (OR (95% CI) 1.5 (1.1 to 2.0)). In 366 (86%) patients without baseline erosions, early DXR-BMD loss was the only independent predictor of progression (OR (95% CI) 2.0 (1.4 to 2.9)).

CONCLUSIONS: In early RA patients, metacarpal BMD loss after 4 months of treatment is an independent predictor of radiological progression after 1 year. In patients without baseline erosions, early metacarpal BMD loss is the main predictor of radiological progression.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, 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: 610 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