Re-evaluation of nailfold capillaroscopy in discriminating primary from secondary Raynaud's phenomenon and in predicting systemic sclerosis: a randomised observational prospective cohort study.
Marta C Amaral, F Seguro Paula, Joana Caetano, Paul Rj Ames, J Delgado Alves
{"title":"Re-evaluation of nailfold capillaroscopy in discriminating primary from secondary Raynaud's phenomenon and in predicting systemic sclerosis: a randomised observational prospective cohort study.","authors":"Marta C Amaral, F Seguro Paula, Joana Caetano, Paul Rj Ames, J Delgado Alves","doi":"10.1080/1744666X.2024.2313642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Primary Raynaud's phenomenon (pRP) is difficult to distinguish from secondary (sRP). Although nailfold capillaroscopy (NFC) may detect early alterations, no universal criteria yet discriminate between pRP from sRP.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To create and validate two NFC scores that could distinguish pRP from sRP and that could predict systemic sclerosis (SSc), respectively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed NFC on two separate cohorts with isolated RP, and recorded number of capillaries per field, enlarged/giant capillaries, crossed/bizarre patterns, microhemorrhages, neoangiogenesis, rarefaction, edema, blood flow velocity, stasis. By multivariate regression analysis, we evaluated the adjusted prognostic role of these features in a derivation cohort of 656 patients. Results were used to construct algorithm-based prognostic scores (A and B). These scores were then tested on a confirmation cohort of 219 patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Score A was unable to discriminate sRP from pRP (low negative predictive values with high positive predictive values for any cut-point); score B was unable to discriminate progression to SSc or a SSc-spectrum disorder (low positive predictive values with high negative predictive values for lower cut-points).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>NFC patterns, believed as specific, showed low discriminatory power and on their own are unable to reliably discriminate sRP from pRP or predict evolution to SSc.</p>","PeriodicalId":12175,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Clinical Immunology","volume":" ","pages":"665-672"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Clinical Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1744666X.2024.2313642","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Primary Raynaud's phenomenon (pRP) is difficult to distinguish from secondary (sRP). Although nailfold capillaroscopy (NFC) may detect early alterations, no universal criteria yet discriminate between pRP from sRP.
Objectives: To create and validate two NFC scores that could distinguish pRP from sRP and that could predict systemic sclerosis (SSc), respectively.
Methods: We performed NFC on two separate cohorts with isolated RP, and recorded number of capillaries per field, enlarged/giant capillaries, crossed/bizarre patterns, microhemorrhages, neoangiogenesis, rarefaction, edema, blood flow velocity, stasis. By multivariate regression analysis, we evaluated the adjusted prognostic role of these features in a derivation cohort of 656 patients. Results were used to construct algorithm-based prognostic scores (A and B). These scores were then tested on a confirmation cohort of 219 patients.
Results: Score A was unable to discriminate sRP from pRP (low negative predictive values with high positive predictive values for any cut-point); score B was unable to discriminate progression to SSc or a SSc-spectrum disorder (low positive predictive values with high negative predictive values for lower cut-points).
Conclusion: NFC patterns, believed as specific, showed low discriminatory power and on their own are unable to reliably discriminate sRP from pRP or predict evolution to SSc.
期刊介绍:
Expert Review of Clinical Immunology (ISSN 1744-666X) provides expert analysis and commentary regarding the performance of new therapeutic and diagnostic modalities in clinical immunology. Members of the International Editorial Advisory Panel of Expert Review of Clinical Immunology are the forefront of their area of expertise. This panel works with our dedicated editorial team to identify the most important and topical review themes and the corresponding expert(s) most appropriate to provide commentary and analysis. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review, and the finished reviews provide an essential contribution to decision-making in clinical immunology.
Articles focus on the following key areas:
• Therapeutic overviews of specific immunologic disorders highlighting optimal therapy and prospects for new medicines
• Performance and benefits of newly approved therapeutic agents
• New diagnostic approaches
• Screening and patient stratification
• Pharmacoeconomic studies
• New therapeutic indications for existing therapies
• Adverse effects, occurrence and reduction
• Prospects for medicines in late-stage trials approaching regulatory approval
• Novel treatment strategies
• Epidemiological studies
• Commentary and comparison of treatment guidelines
Topics include infection and immunity, inflammation, host defense mechanisms, congenital and acquired immunodeficiencies, anaphylaxis and allergy, systemic immune diseases, organ-specific inflammatory diseases, transplantation immunology, endocrinology and diabetes, cancer immunology, neuroimmunology and hematological diseases.