RESUMEN
Objective:In general, patients with seropositive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are considered to show an aggressive disease course. However, the relationship between the two subgroups in disease severity is controversial. Our study is aimed to compare the clinical characteristics and prognosis of double-seropositive and seronegative RA in China through a real-world large scale study.Methods:RA patients who met the 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria or the 2010 ACR/European Anti-Rheumatism Alliance RA classification criteria, and who attended the 10 hospitals across the country from September 2015 to January 2020, were enrolled. According to the serological status, patients were divided into 4 subgroups [rheumatoid factor (RF)(-) anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) antibody (-), RF(+), RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+), anti-CCP antibody(+)] and compared the disease characteristics and treatment response. One-way analysis of variance was used for measurement data that conformed to normal distribution, Kruskal-Wallis H test was used for measurement data that did not conform to normal distribution; paired t test was used for comparison before and after treatment within the group if the data was normally distributed else paired rank sum test was used; χ2 test was used for count data. Results:① A total of 2 461 patients were included, including 1 813 RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+) patients (73.67%), 129 RF(+) patients (5.24%), 245 RF(-) anti-CCP antibody(-) patients (9.96%), 74 anti-CCP antibody(+) patients (11.13%). ② Regardless of the CCP status, RF(+) patients had an early age of onset [RF(-) anti-CCP antibody(-) (51±14) years old, anti-CCP antibody(+) (50±15) years old, RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+) (48±14) years old, RF(+)(48±13) years old, F=3.003, P=0.029], longer disease duration [RF(-) anti-CCP antibody(-) 50 (20, 126) months, anti-CCP antibody(+) 60(24, 150) months, RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+) 89(35, 179) months, RF(+) 83(25, 160) months, H=22.001, P<0.01], more joint swelling counts (SJC) [RF(-) anti-CCP antibody(-) 2(0, 6), Anti-CCP antibody(+) 2(0, 5), RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+) 2(0, 7), RF(+) 2(0, 6), H=8.939, P=0.03] and tender joint counts (TJC) [RF(-) anti-CCP antibody(-) 3(0, 8), anti-CCP antibody(+) 2(0, 6), RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+) 3(1, 9), RF(+) 2(0, 8), H=11.341, P=0.01] and the morning stiff time was longer [RF(-) anti-CCP antibody(-) 30(0, 60) min, anti-CCP antibody(+) 20(0, 60) min, RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+) 30(10, 60) min, RF(+) 30(10, 60) min, H=13.32, P<0.01]; ESR [RF(-) anti-CCP antibody(-) 17(9, 38) mm/1 h, anti-CCP antibody(+) 20(10, 35) mm/1 h, RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+) 26(14, 45) mm/1 h, RF(+) 28(14, 50) mm/1 h, H=37.084, P<0.01] and CRP [RF(-) anti-CCP antibody(-) 2.3 (0.8, 15.9) mm/L, Anti-CCP antibody(+) 2.7(0.7, 12.1) mm/L, RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+) 5.2(1.3, 17.2) mm/L, RF (+) 5.2(0.9, 16.2) mm/L, H=22.141, P<0.01] of the RF(+)patients were significantly higher than RF(-) patients, and RF(+) patients had higher disease severity(DAS28-ESR) [RF(-) anti-CCP antibody(-) (4.0±1.8), anti-CCP antibody(+) (3.8±1.6), RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+) (4.3±1.8), RF(+) (4.1±1.7), F=7.269, P<0.01]. ③ The RF(+) anti-CCP antibody(+) patients were divided into 4 subgroups, and it was found that RF-H anti-CCP antibody-L patients had higher disease severity [RF-H anti-CCP antibody-H 4.3(2.9, 5.6), RF-L anti-CCP antibody-L 4.5(3.0, 5.7), RF-H anti-CCP antibody-L 4.9(3.1, 6.2), RF-L anti-CCP antibody-H 2.8(1.8, 3.9), H=20.374, P<0.01]. ④ After 3-month follow up, the clinical characteristics of the four groups were improved, but there was no significant difference in the improvement of the four groups, indicating that the RF and anti-CCP antibody status did not affect the remission within 3 months. Conclusion:Among RA patients, the disease activity of RA patients is closely related to RF and the RF(+) patients have more severe disease than RF(-) patients. Patients with higher RF titer also have more severe disease than that of patients with low RF titer. After 3 months of medication treatment, the antibody status does not affect the disease remission rate.
RESUMEN
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To compare the effects between fast acupuncture and retaining acupuncture for the cervical type of cervical spondylosis.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Sixty patients were randomized into a fast acupuncture group and a retaining needle group, 30 cases in each one. The acupoints in the two groups were Fengchi (GB 20), Jiaji (EX-B 2, C, C, C) and Jianjing (GB 21), Jianjing 1 (Extra) and Jianjing 2 (Extra). The needles in the fast acupuncture group were out afterarrival, while those in the retaining needle group were retained for 30 min, three times a week, once the other day. One week was seen as a course and the treatment was given for 2 courses. The indices were observed before and after treatment, including Northwick Park neck pain questionnaire (NPQ), short-form McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ) [pain rating index (PRI), visual analogue scale (VAS) and present pain intensity (PPI)]. The effects were compared in the two groups.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>After treatment, the NPQ score was lower than that before treatment in the two groups (both<0.01), and that in the fast acupuncture group was better (<0.01). All the items of SF-MPQ decreased compared with those before treatment in the two groups (all<0.01), with the better results of PRI sensation score and PRI total score in the fast acupuncture group (both<0.05). The PRI feeling score, VAS score, and PPI score were not significantly different after treatment between the two groups (all>0.05). The total effective rate in the fast acupuncture group was 83.3% (25/30), not significantly different from 76.7% (23/30) in the retaining needle group (>0.05).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Fast acupuncture and retaining needle are both effective for the cervical type of cervical spondylosis, which can apparently improve the clinical symptoms. Fast acupuncture is superior to retaining acupuncture.</p>