Comparison of disease activities and extent measurements for anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic autoantibody-associated vasculitis.
- Author:
Sheng Guang LI
1
;
Qing ZHANG
2
;
Hui Qiong ZHOU
2
Author Information
1. Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing 102206, China.
2. Department of Rheumatology, Fouth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100048, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis/diagnosis*;
Antibodies, Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic;
Autoantibodies;
Biomarkers/analysis*;
Humans;
Microscopic Polyangiitis;
Neutrophils
- From:
Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences)
2018;50(6):1022-1026
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To investigate the significance of a set of seven disease activities and extension measurements and their correlations between one and another for anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic autoantibody associated vasculitis (AAV).
METHODS:A total of 121 patients from Peking University International Hospital and Fouth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital with confirmed diagnoses of AAV clinically were enrolled in the study, including 15 cases of eosinophilic granulomatous with polyangiitis (EGPA), 59 cases of granulomatous with polyangiitis (GPA) and 47 cases of microscopic polyangiitis (MPA). A hundred and twenty-one AAV patients were divided into death group and survival group according to their survival conditions. A set of seven disease assessment scales including Birmingham vasculitis activity score (BVAS)-1994, BVAS-2003, as well as BVAS/GPA, vasculitis damage index (VDI), disease extent index (DEI), five factor score (FFS)-1996, and FFS-2009 were measured and scored one by one, and their relationships which were represented by Spearman correlation coefficient were compared between one and another.
RESULTS:BVAS-1994, BVAS-2003, as well as BVAS/GPA, VDI, DEI, and FFS, all of those seven evaluation indexes of the AAV patients in the death group were significantly higher than those in the survival group (P<0.05). Except for BVAS/GPA, all those above indicators in the patients with EGPA were lower than those in the patients with GPA and those in the patients with MPA, and those in all of the AAV patients as a whole group. There were high correlations among BVAS-2003, BVAS-1994 and BVAS/GPA (r values were 0.9 and 0.7, respectively); BVAS-1994 was fairly correlated with BVAS/GPA (r=0.69); FFS-1996 and FFS-2009 were highly correlated (r=0.73) with each other; BVAS-1994, BVAS-2003 and BVAS/GPA were fairly correlated with DEI (with r values of 0.62, 0.65, and 0.62, respectively); VDI was also fairly correlated with BVAS-1994 and with BVAS-2003 (r values were 0.49 and 0.52, respectively).
CONCLUSION:All of those seven AAV assessment indicators above can be used as indicators of disease activity and prognosis in AAV patients, most of which were relevant within one and another. There were high correlations among BVAS-2003, BVAS-1994 and BVAS/GPA, and besides, there were also high correlations between FFS-1996 and FFS-2009.
