Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Explanatory power of the LPA solution for clinical and functional outcomes compared with the conventional threshold-based discordance definition. Explanatory.

Published byÁlvaro Castro Modified over 5 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Explanatory power of the LPA solution for clinical and functional outcomes compared with the conventional threshold-based discordance definition. Explanatory."— Presentation transcript:

1 Explanatory power of the LPA solution for clinical and functional outcomes compared with the conventional threshold-based discordance definition. Explanatory power of the LPA solution for clinical and functional outcomes compared with the conventional threshold-based discordance definition. Bar height represents the unique variance accounted in each outcome by the LPA and traditional discordance approaches after controlling for the effects of age, gender, RA duration, irreversible articular damage and fibromyalgia (incremental ∆R2). Error bars represent 95% CIs. DAS28-ESR, 28 joint-based disease activity index with ESR; ESR, erythrocyte sedimentation rate; HAQ-DI, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index; LPA, latent profile analysis; MDGA, physician global assessment of disease activity; PHQ9, nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire; PtGA, patient global assessment of disease activity; SF36-MCS, Short Form 36 mental component score; SF36-PCS, Short Form 36 physical component score; SJC, swollen joint count; TJC, tenderness joint count. George A Karpouzas et al. RMD Open 2018;4:e000695 Copyright © BMJ Publishing Group & EULAR. All rights reserved.

Download ppt "Explanatory power of the LPA solution for clinical and functional outcomes compared with the conventional threshold-based discordance definition. Explanatory."

Similar presentations

Table 1. Comparison between the provisional diagnosis based on the proforma versus final diagnosis Early arthritis 82 69 Rheumatoid arthritis 3 6 Psoriatic.

Table 1. Comparison between the provisional diagnosis based on the proforma versus final diagnosis Early arthritis Rheumatoid arthritis 3 6 Psoriatic.
Patients were considered not in MDA (MDA−) with a score of 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 points and in MDA (MDA+) with a score of 5, 6 or 7 points.

Patients were considered not in MDA (MDA−) with a score of 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 points and in MDA (MDA+) with a score of 5, 6 or 7 points.
Proportion of patients reporting scores ≥age-matched and gender-matched normative PRO values at baseline and 24 weeks in the (A) AMBITION and (B) ADACTA.

Proportion of patients reporting scores ≥age-matched and gender-matched normative PRO values at baseline and 24 weeks in the (A) AMBITION and (B) ADACTA.
Mean change from baseline in (A) DAS28-4(ESR), (B) CDAI and (C) HAQ-DI

Mean change from baseline in (A) DAS28-4(ESR), (B) CDAI and (C) HAQ-DI
Change in secondary endpoints over time: (A) LS mean change from baseline in DAS28-CRP through Week 32, (B) mean change from baseline in CRP through Week.

Change in secondary endpoints over time: (A) LS mean change from baseline in DAS28-CRP through Week 32, (B) mean change from baseline in CRP through Week.
Mean change in patient-reported outcomes from baseline to Week 25 with biweekly or monthly pegloticase compared with placebo. Mean change in patient-reported.

Mean change in patient-reported outcomes from baseline to Week 25 with biweekly or monthly pegloticase compared with placebo. Mean change in patient-reported.
(A) EULAR response based on DAS28 (ESR, otherwise CRP) and (B) Boolean remission, at 6 months in patients treated with abatacept as a first-line biologic.

(A) EULAR response based on DAS28 (ESR, otherwise CRP) and (B) Boolean remission, at 6 months in patients treated with abatacept as a first-line biologic.
Mean DAS (A), HAQ (B) and percentages in low disease activity, DAS remission and drug-free DAS remission (C) during 5 years in the DAS ≤2.4 steered (BeSt)

Mean DAS (A), HAQ (B) and percentages in low disease activity, DAS remission and drug-free DAS remission (C) during 5 years in the DAS ≤2.4 steered (BeSt)
Changes in evaluation indicators from baseline to 12 weeks per visit.

Changes in evaluation indicators from baseline to 12 weeks per visit.
Example choice set: DAS28, 28 joint disease activity score; EUR, Euro; QALY, quality-adjusted life year. * In the choice sets, changes of the individual.

Example choice set: DAS28, 28 joint disease activity score; EUR, Euro; QALY, quality-adjusted life year. * In the choice sets, changes of the individual.
Percentage of patients achieving EULAR response

Percentage of patients achieving EULAR response
Efficacy end points: the percentage of patients achieving an improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) of (A) 20% (ACR20), (B) 50% (ACR50)

Efficacy end points: the percentage of patients achieving an improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) of (A) 20% (ACR20), (B) 50% (ACR50)
Association of disease parameters at the time of methotrexate reinitiation during the OLE based on propensity score matching. Association of disease parameters.

Association of disease parameters at the time of methotrexate reinitiation during the OLE based on propensity score matching. Association of disease parameters.
Clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes following up to 3 years of open-label adalimumab as monotherapy after 2 years of adalimumab+methotrexate.

Clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes following up to 3 years of open-label adalimumab as monotherapy after 2 years of adalimumab+methotrexate.
Improvement in PROs, TJC, SJC and PGA at month 6 in patients achieving (A) ACR50, (B) CDAI LDA and (C) HAQ-DI

Improvement in PROs, TJC, SJC and PGA at month 6 in patients achieving (A) ACR50, (B) CDAI LDA and (C) HAQ-DI
Clinical and patient-reported outcomes for patients randomised to CZP 200 mg Q2W and CZP 400 mg Q4W to week 96. Clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

Clinical and patient-reported outcomes for patients randomised to CZP 200 mg Q2W and CZP 400 mg Q4W to week 96. Clinical and patient-reported outcomes.
Correlations between observed patient-reported outcomes and disease activity scores at week 24. Correlations between observed patient-reported outcomes.

Correlations between observed patient-reported outcomes and disease activity scores at week 24. Correlations between observed patient-reported outcomes.
The patient profiles presented to rheumatologists in the discrete choice experiment (DCE). aCCP, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide; DAS28, 28-joint Disease.

The patient profiles presented to rheumatologists in the discrete choice experiment (DCE). aCCP, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide; DAS28, 28-joint Disease.
Frequency of patients in flare at each time point over 3 months

Frequency of patients in flare at each time point over 3 months
Disease activities evaluated as a comparison between abatacept plus MTX and placebo plus MTX groups. Disease activities evaluated as a comparison between.

Disease activities evaluated as a comparison between abatacept plus MTX and placebo plus MTX groups. Disease activities evaluated as a comparison between.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google