MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

POS0155 PERIPHERAL JOINT AND ENTHESIS INVOLVEMENT IN NEWLY DIAGNOSED PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE (IBD): SYMPTOMS, CLINICAL AND ULTRASONOGRAPHIC FINDINGS

2023· article· en· W4379521445 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nora Vladimirova, Lene Terslev, Mohamed Attauabi, Gorm Roager Madsen, Viktoria Fana, Charlotte Wiell, Uffe Møller Døhn, J. Jørgensen, Flemming Bendtsen, Jakob Benedict Seidelin, Johan Burisch, Mikkel Østergaard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersZonMwArthritis SocietyNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekDutch Arthritis SocietyPfizerBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsMedicineEnthesitisEnthesisAnkylosing spondylitisSynovitisInternal medicineFibromyalgiaPopulationInflammatory bowel diseaseBASFIQuality of life (healthcare)RheumatologyReactive arthritisPhysical therapyCohortPsoriatic arthritisDiseaseArthritisSurgeryBASDAI

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Peripheral musculoskeletal (MSK) symptoms are the most common extra intestinal manifestations (EIMs) in IBD patients, with substantial impact on quality of life. IBD related spondyloarthritis (IBD-SpA) often requires a multidisciplinary evaluation to enable optimal choice of treatment and patient care, but systematic rheumatological characterisation of this population is scarce [1]. Characterisation of IBD-SpA is challenged by the variety of MSK involvement (from arthralgia to ankylosing spondylitis), the co-existence of osteoarthritis, overuse enthesopathies or fibromyalgia, and by the heterogeneity in methodologies used to describe the SpA features. Recently developed recommendations for endpoints for EIMs in IBD trials [2] were applied in the present study. Objectives To determine the prevalence and distribution of inflammatory lesions in peripheral joints and entheses in newly diagnosed IBD patients, assessed for presence of MSK symptoms, and by rheumatological and ultrasound (US) evaluation. Methods Patients from the IBD prognosis inception cohort (IBD-Pro) were consecutively included [2]. They reported MSK symptoms using a validated questionnaire (IBD-TASQ). A clinical examination was performed by rheumatologist, as was US examination (grey scale (GS) and colour Doppler (CD)) of 38 peripheral joints and 14 entheses, applying OMERACT-EULAR definitions and scoring systems for synovitis and enthesitis [3]. Synovitis was defined as GS score ≥2 and/or CD≥1 and entheseal inflammation was defined as presence of hypoechogenicity/thickening and/or CD score ≥1. Further, OMERACT-EULAR sum score (GLOESS) was calculated (0-114). Results 110 newly diagnosed IBD patients (mean age 42, 39% male) were included (34% Crohn’s disease, 59% ulcerative colitis (UC), 5% unclassified IBD). The IBD disease activity scores indicated mild activity in UC patients (Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index mean (SD) 6.7 (3.6) - max score 19, and low in Crohn (Harvey-Bradshaw Index for Chron’s disease 4.5 (2.9)- max score 18). Four patients received systemic glucocorticoids (2%) or biologics (2%) at the time of rheumatological evaluation. History of psoriasis was reported in 2% and uveitis in 5% of the patients. 40% of the patients reported positive history for ≥1 MSK symptom (Figure 1, A1); joint pain and swelling were the most common complaints (30%), followed by heel enthesitis (17%) and dactylitis in 20%. Patient pain VAS was low, mean (SD) 13(25). Clinical examination revealed 53% of all patients having arthritis and/or enthesitis and fulfilled ASAS classification criteria for peripheral SpA (25% ≥1 tender joint, 12% ≥1 swollen joint, 46% ≥1 tender enthesis, 38% both ≥1 tender/swollen joint and ≥1 tender enthesis). Figure 1 (part A2a, A2b) shows joint and enthesis involvement. US found inflammation in ≥1 joint or enthesis in 47% of the IBD patients - synovitis in 30%, mean GLOESS sum score 5.2 SD (4.6) and entheseal inflammation in 33% (US enthesitis sum, mean (SD) 2.6(2). (Figure 1, part A3a, A3b). Among those patients reporting entheseal pain, 71% had ≥1 tender enthesis at clinical evaluation and 64% had entheseal inflammation by US. Among those reporting joint pain, 55% had ≥1 tender or swollen joint, and 41% US synovitis. Figure 1 (part B1, B2) displays the overlap between patient-reported symptoms, clinical and US findings. In the asymptomatic patients (60 %) 59% of the patients with clinical signs of arthritis and 79% of those with enthesitis were asymptomatic. US enthesitis and synovitis were also observed in 69% and 58%, respectively, of the asymptomatic patients. Conclusion At the time of IBD diagnosis 53% fulfilled ASAS classification criteria for peripheral SpA and 47% had objectively verified synovitis and/or enthesitis by US indicating that SpA may be underdiagnosed among IBD patients. References [1]Schwartzman M et al., RMD Open 2022 [2]Guillo L et al., Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022 [3]Bruyn GA et al., The Journal of Rheumatology 2019 [4]Attauabi M, et al., BMJ Open 2022 Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank all participating patients, physicians, study nurses and secretaries who contributed to this study. Disclosure of Interests Nora Vladimirova Speakers bureau: MSD, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Lene Terslev Speakers bureau: Speakers fees from Janssen, Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, GE and Eli-Lilly, Consultant of: consultancy fee from Janssen and UCB, Mohamed Attauabi: None declared, Gorm Madsen Speakers bureau: Bristol Myers Squibb and Tillots Pharma., Viktoria Fana: None declared, Charlotte Wiell: None declared, Uffe Møller Døhn: None declared, Jacob Jørgensen: None declared, Flemming Bendtsen Grant/research support from: Ferring and Tillotts, Jakob Seidelin Grant/research support from: Research grants from Takeda and the Capital Region Denmark, national coordinator of studies from AbbVie, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Ely Lilly, and Boehringer Ingelheim., Johan Burisch Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, MSD, Pfizer, Takeda, Tillots Pharma, Samsung Bioepis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Ferring, Galapagos, Grant/research support from: Janssen-Cilag, MSD, Pfizer, Takeda, Tillots Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novo Nordisk, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB., Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB., Grant/research support from: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments→French-language works237,207→