Extended reports
Clinical trials in rheumatoid arthritis: methodological
suggestions for assessing radiographs arising from the GRISAR* study
a Novartis Farma, Medical Department, Milan,
Italy , b Institute of Radiology, Catholic University,
Rome, Italy , c Department of Radiology, S Giovanni Rotondo, Italy
, d Department of
Radiology, Treviso, Italy , e Chair of Rheumatology, Pisa, Italy , f Rheumatic Disease Unit, Department of Internal
Medicine, Udine, Italy , g Institute of Medical Statistics and Biometry, Milan,
Italy
Correspondence to: R Ferrara, Novartis Farma SpA, Medical Department, SS 233, km 20.5, I-21040 Origgio(VA), Italy.
Accepted for publication 1 July 1997
OBJECTIVES
The three x ray
assessors of the GRISAR study (blinded to treatment) gave consensual
erosion and damage scores to the baseline and 12 month radiographs of
284 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients using three different methods:
single readings (blinded as to patient and chronological sequence of
the x rays), paired readings (blinded as to sequence), and
chronologically ordered paired readings. The aim was to evaluate which
of these reading procedures is the most appropriate for clinical trials.
METHODS
The progression of the scores obtained
using each procedure was compared by means of descriptive statistics,
principal components analysis, and intra-patient correlation
coefficients of pairs of methods. Bootstrap estimates of the variance
of the difference in the means of two equally sized random samples were
calculated to evaluate the power of the statistical analysis performed
to assess the possible treatment effect for both paired and
chronological reading methods.
RESULTS
(a)The standard deviations of the paired
and chronological readings were similar, but that of the single
readings was higher. (b) The knowledge that two x rays were
of the same patient accounted for a sizeable proportion of the between
method variability. (c) Agreement was satisfactory between the paired
and chronological methods for both scores but, between them and the
single readings, it was modest for erosions and poor for damage. (d)
The bootstrap estimate of the variance of the difference was smaller
for the paired than the chronological method, possibly giving it
greater power to test treatment effect.
CONCLUSIONS
These results suggested that paired
readings were the most suitable for evaluating the progression of joint
damage in the GRISAR study.
* Gruppo Reumatologi Italiani Studio Artrite Reumatoide
© 1997 by Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Wanders, A, Landewe, R, Spoorenberg, A, de Vlam, K, Mielants, H, Dougados, M, van der Linden, S, van der Heijde, D
(2004). Scoring of radiographic progression in randomised clinical trials in ankylosing spondylitis: a preference for paired reading order. Ann Rheum Dis
63: 1601-1604
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Bruynesteyn, K, Landewe, R, van der Linden, S., van der Heijde, D
(2004). Radiography as primary outcome in rheumatoid arthritis: acceptable sample sizes for trials with 3 months' follow up. Ann Rheum Dis
63: 1413-1418
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Ory, P A
(2003). Interpreting radiographic data in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis
62: 597-604
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Boini, S, Guillemin, F
(2001). Radiographic scoring methods as outcome measures in rheumatoid arthritis: properties and advantages. Ann Rheum Dis
60: 817-827
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Auleley, G.-R., Giraudeau, B., Dougados, M., Ravaud, P.
(2000). Radiographic assessment of hip osteoarthritis progression: impact of reading procedures for longitudinal studies. Ann Rheum Dis
59: 422-427
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
van der Heijde, D., Boonen, A., Boers, M., Kostense, P., van der Linden, S.
(1999). Reading radiographs in chronological order, in pairs or as single films has important implications for the discriminative power of rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Rheumatology (Oxford)
38: 1213-1220
[Abstract] [Full Text]
Register for free content
The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.
Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.
