Validation of the Sarcoidosis Diagnostic Score in a Multicontinental Study.

Rationale: The Sarcoidosis Diagnostic Score (SDS) has been established to quantitate the clinical features consistent with sarcoidosis in a monocentric study. Objectives: We aimed to confirm the diagnostic value of SDS in a large, multicontinental study and to assess the utility of SDS in differentiating sarcoidosis from alternative diagnoses, including infectious and noninfectious granulomatous diseases. Methods: We included patients with biopsy-confirmed sarcoidosis at nine centers across the world. Patients without sarcoidosis seen at the same sites served as control patients. Using a modified World Association of Sarcoidosis and Other Granulomatous Disorders organ assessment instrument, we scored all patients for the presence of granuloma on biopsy, highly probable symptoms, and least probable symptoms for each area. Two sarcoidosis scores were generated: SDS Biopsy (with biopsy) and SDS Clinical (without biopsy). SDS Clinical and Biopsy were calculated for all patients. We calculated and compared the area under the curve (AUC) for SDS Clinical and Biopsy according to different diagnosis scenarios. Results: A total of 1,041 patients with sarcoidosis and 1,035 without sarcoidosis were included. The results for SDS Clinical (AUC, 0.888; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.874-0.902) and SDS Biopsy (AUC, 0.979; 95% CI, 0.973-0.985) according to AUC were good to excellent for differentiating sarcoidosis from alternative diagnosis. SDS Clinical was less discriminatory in males (P = 0.01) and in high tuberculosis prevalence centers (P < 0.001). However, SDS Clinical (AUC, 0.684; 95% CI, 0.602-0.766) and SDS Biopsy (AUC, 0.754; 95% CI, 0.673-0.835) were not sufficiently discriminative for noninfectious granulomatous diseases, but both SDSs could differentiate sarcoidosis from infectious granulomatous diseases. Algorithms were proposed for the SDS Clinical and SDS Biopsy to assist the clinician in the diagnostic process, and cutoff values were proposed for the SDS Clinical and SDS Biopsy, allowing the diagnosis of sarcoidosis to be safely confirmed or rejected in most cases except for noninfectious granulomatous disease. Conclusions: This multicontinental study confirms that both SDS Clinical and SDS Biopsy have good to excellent performance in discriminating sarcoidosis from alternative diagnoses. Differences in the AUC were seen for high tuberculosis prevalence versus low tuberculosis prevalence centers and for males versus females. Both SDSs had good discriminatory function for infectious granulomatous disease but failed in cases of noninfectious granulomatous disease such as berylliosis.

Sarcoidosis Diagnostic Score: A Systematic Evaluation to Enhance the Diagnosis of Sarcoidosis.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of sarcoidosis is made by the combination of clinical features and biopsy results. The clinical features of sarcoidosis can be quite variable. We developed a Sarcoidosis Diagnostic Score (SDS) to summarize the clinical features of patients with possible sarcoidosis. METHODS: Biopsy-confirmed patients with sarcoidosis seen during a 7-month period at the University of Cincinnati sarcoidosis clinic were prospectively identified. Patients with nonsarcoidosis seen at the same clinic were used as control patients. Using a modified World Association of Sarcoidosis and Other Granulomatous Disorders organ assessment instrument, we scored all patients for presence of biopsy, ≥1 highly probable symptom, and ≥1 at least probable symptom for each area. Two sarcoidosis scores were generated: SDS biopsy (with biopsy) and SDS clinical (without biopsy). RESULTS: The 980 evaluable patients were divided into two cohorts: an initial 600 patients (450 with biopsy-confirmed sarcoidosis, 150 control patients) to establish cutoff values for SDS biopsy and an SDS clinical and a validation cohort of 380 patients (103 biopsy-confirmed patients with sarcoidosis and 277 control patients). The best cutoff value for SDS biopsy was ≥ 6 (sensitivity, 99.3%; specificity, 100%). For the total the 980 patients, an SDS clinical ≥ 3 had a sensitivity of 90.6%, specificity of 88.5%, and a likelihood ratio of 7.9. An SDS clinical score ≥ 4 had a lower sensitivity of (76.9%) but higher specificity (98.6%). CONCLUSIONS: For sarcoidosis, the presence of specific clinical features, especially multiorgan involvement, can enhance the diagnostic certainty. The SDS scoring system quantitated the clinical features consistent with sarcoidosis.