Validity of the rheumatoid arthritis impact of disease (RAID) score and definition of cut-off points for disease activity states in a population-based European cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Salaffi, Fausto; Carlo, Marco Di; Vojinović, Jelena; Tincani, Anǵela; Sulli, Alberto; Soldano, Stefano; Andréoli, Laura; Dall’Ara, Francesca; Ionescu, Ruxandra; Pasalic, K. Simic; Balčune, Ineta; Ferraz-Amaro, Iván; Tłustochowicz, Małgorzata; Butrimienė, İrena; Punceviciene, Egle; Торопцова, Н. В.; Grazio, Simeon; Morović‐Vergles, Jadranka; Masaryk, P.; Otsa, Kati; Bernardes, Miguel; Boyadzhieva, Vladimira; Cutolo, Maurizio

doi:10.1016/j.jbspin.2017.05.020

Cited by 29 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…RAID shows good correlation with PGA, DAS28 and short-form (SF)-36 physical and mental components. It also demonstrates good reliability and sensitivity to change [ 38 ], and the ability to discriminate between active and non-active disease [ 39 ]. Finally, RAID offers the advantage of encompassing seven different PROs in one measure [ 25 ].…”

Section: Do Pros Provide Useful Additional Information Beyond Rheumatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Call for action: how to improve use of patient-reported outcomes to guide clinical decision making in rheumatoid arthritis

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) recommend early treatment and a treat-to-target goal of remission or low disease activity. Over the past decade, this approach has been extremely successful in reducing disease activity and joint damage in patients with RA. At the same time, however, overall patient perception of well-being appears to have decreased with respect to outcome measures considered important by patients themselves, such as pain, fatigue, physical function and quality of life. The timely and effective use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) could encourage physicians to focus more on the impact of RA on patients and how patients are feeling. This in turn would facilitate shared decision making between patients and physicians, ultimately leading to a more patient-centered approach and improved patient care. Indeed, PROs provide information about individual patients that complements information provided by physical assessment and composite scores, and can also be used to guide patient care, such as determining whether a clinic visit is needed or whether treatment modifications are necessary. This is particularly important for patients who do not achieve the aspirational target of remission or low disease activity with pharmacological treatment. A number of validated PRO questionnaires are available, but how and which PROs should be incorporated into rheumatology clinical practice as part of the decision-making process is still controversial. Combining PROs with technology, such as computer adaptive tests, electronic PRO systems, web-based platforms and patient dashboards, could further aid PRO integration into daily rheumatology clinical practice.

show abstract

Section: Do Pros Provide Useful Additional Information Beyond Rheumatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Call for action: how to improve use of patient-reported outcomes to guide clinical decision making in rheumatoid arthritis

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At 3 and 6 months, more than half of the patients reported a RAID score of 2 or less, which is the suggested PASS and also indicates remission as proposed by Salaffi et al . 12 In comparison, 48% and 62% of the ARCTIC population achieved DAS remission at 3 and 6 months of follow-up.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“… 10 Suggested cut-off values for levels of impact of disease are RAID ≤3 (remission), RAID >3 and ≤4 (low impact of disease), RAID >4 and ≤6 (moderate impact of disease), and RAID >6 (high impact of disease). 12 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analyses of responsiveness between the Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease score, other patient-reported outcomes and disease activity measures: secondary analyses from the ARCTIC study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo evaluate the responsiveness of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease (RAID) score compared with other patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), inflammatory markers and clinical disease activity measures in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsDisease-modifying antirheumatic drug–naïve patients with RA with short disease duration were included in the treat-to-target ARCTIC trial and followed for 24 months. The responsiveness of the RAID score was evaluated using standardised response mean (SRM) and relative efficiency (RE) with respect to tender joints by Ritchie Articular Index (RAI). SRMs and REs were also calculated for other PROMs, inflammatory markers and clinical outcome measures. An SRM with value above 0.80 was considered high.Results230 patients with RA were included. The mean±SD symptom duration was 7.1±5.4 months and the baseline mean±SD RAID score was 4.49±2.14. At 3 months of follow-up, the mean±SD change score for RAID was −2.25±1.98 and the SRM (95% CI) −1.13 (−1.33 to −0.96). The RAID score showed high responsiveness both at 3 and 6 months (SRM≥0.80) and was more sensitive in detecting change than the reference, tender joints assessed by RAI.ConclusionsThe RAID score proved to be highly responsive to change in patients with RA with short disease duration who followed a treat-to-target strategy. The RAID score was more efficient in detecting change than the reference (RAI) as well as most other PROMs.

show abstract

“…Weights were obtained from international studies, as follows: pain 0.21; functional disability 0.16; fatigue 0.15; and sleep problems, emotional well-being, physical well-being, and coping all 0.12 8,10 . The RAID scale has been psychometrically validated at an international level 8,10,12,24 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was previously defined by different techniques using data from 108 patients receiving TNF inhibitor treatment for active RA, who were evaluated at screening and baseline, then after 4 and 12 weeks of treatment 11 . The reliability of the overall RAID score, and various possible improvement thresholds proposed in the rheumatology scientific literature [e.g., improvements of at least 1, 2, or 3 points in total RAID score (total range 0-10 points), and relative changes ≥ 20%, 30%, and 50% from baseline] 24,25 were evaluated. The reliability of the RAID score between screening and baseline was found to be high [intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.85 (95% CI 0.79-0.90)], with smallest detectable difference of 1.8 and smallest detectable change of 1.3.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Sarilumab on Rheumatoid Arthritis as Reported by Patients Using the Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease Scale

Gossec

Strand²,

Proudfoot³

et al. 2019

J Rheumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective.We evaluated the effect of sarilumab on patient-perceived impact of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using the 7-domain RA Impact of Disease (RAID) scale.Methods.Two phase III, randomized, controlled trials of sarilumab in patients with active, longstanding RA were analyzed: (1) sarilumab 150 mg and 200 mg every 2 weeks plus conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (+csDMARD) versus placebo + csDMARD [TARGET (NCT01709578)]; and (2) sarilumab 200 mg versus adalimumab (ADA) 40 mg monotherapy [MONARCH (NCT02332590)]. Least-squares mean (LSM) differences in RAID total score (range 0–10) and 7 key RA symptoms, including pain and fatigue (baseline to Weeks 12 and 24), were compared. “Responders” by RAID total score were defined by improvements from baseline ≥ minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and ≥ patient-acceptable symptom-state (PASS) at endpoint.Results.Sarilumab 150 mg and 200 mg + csDMARD were nominally superior (p < 0.05) versus placebo + csDMARD and 200 mg sarilumab versus ADA 40 mg in LSM differences for RAID total score at weeks 12 (−0.93 and −1.13; −0.49, respectively) and 24 (−0.75 and −1.01; −0.78), and all effects of RA (except functional impairment in MONARCH Week 12). Effects were greater in physical domains (e.g., pain) than mental domains (e.g., emotional well-being). More patients receiving sarilumab versus placebo or ADA reported improvements ≥ MCID and PASS in total RAID scores at both assessments.Conclusion.Based on the RAID, sarilumab + csDMARD or as monotherapy reduced the effect of RA on patients’ lives to a greater extent than placebo + csDMARD or ADA monotherapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01709578 and NCT02332590)

show abstract

Validity of the rheumatoid arthritis impact of disease (RAID) score and definition of cut-off points for disease activity states in a population-based European cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Cited by 29 publications

References 33 publications

Call for action: how to improve use of patient-reported outcomes to guide clinical decision making in rheumatoid arthritis

Call for action: how to improve use of patient-reported outcomes to guide clinical decision making in rheumatoid arthritis

Comparative analyses of responsiveness between the Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease score, other patient-reported outcomes and disease activity measures: secondary analyses from the ARCTIC study

Effects of Sarilumab on Rheumatoid Arthritis as Reported by Patients Using the Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease Scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About