During development of rheumatoid arthritis, intermetatarsal bursitis may occur before clinical joint swelling: a large imaging study in patients with clinically suspect arthralgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Intermetatarsal bursitis (IMB) represents juxta-articular synovial inflammation of the intermetatarsal bursae. Recent MRI studies identified IMB as feature of early RA, but whether IMB already occurs in the pre-arthritic phase is unknown. We performed a large MRI study in clinically suspect arthralgia (CSA) to assess the occurrence and prognostic value of IMB. METHODS: A total of 577 consecutive CSA patients underwent contrast-enhanced MRI of the forefoot, metacarpophalangeal joints and wrist. MRIs were evaluated for subclinical synovitis/tenosynovitis/osteitis in line with the RA MRI scoring system (summed as RAMRIS inflammation) and for IMB. IMB was considered present if uncommon in the general population at the same location (i.e. size scored above the 95th percentile in age-matched symptom-free controls). The relation of IMB with other MRI-detected subclinical inflammation (synovitis/tenosynovitis/osteitis) was studied. Cox-regression assessed the association with clinical arthritis development during median 25 months follow-up. ACPA stratification was performed. RESULTS: At presentation with CSA, 23% had IMB. IMB was more frequent in ACPA-positive than ACPA-negative CSA (47% vs 19%, P < 0.001). Patients with IMB were more likely to also have subclinical synovitis [OR 3.4 (95% CI 1.8, 6.5)] and tenosynovitis [5.9(2.8, 12.6)]. IMB conferred higher risk of developing arthritis [HR 1.6(1.0-2.7) adjusted for other subclinical inflammation]. IMB-presence predicted arthritis development in ACPA-positive CSA [adjusted HR 2.2(1.0-4.7)], but not in ACPA-negative CSA-patients [0.8(0.4-1.7)]. CONCLUSION: Approximately a quarter of CSA patients have IMB, which is frequently accompanied by subclinical synovitis and tenosynovitis. IMB precedes development of clinical arthritis, particularly in ACPA-positive CSA. These results reinforce the notion that juxta-articular synovial inflammation is involved in the earliest phases of RA development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".