Computer-based diagnostic expert systems in rheumatology: where do we stand in 2014?

Background. The early detection of rheumatic diseases and the treatment to target have become of utmost importance to control the disease and improve its prognosis. However, establishing a diagnosis in early stages is challenging as many diseases initially present with similar symptoms and signs. Expert systems are computer programs designed to support the human decision making and have been developed in almost every field of medicine. Methods. This review focuses on the developments in the field of rheumatology to give a comprehensive insight. Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched. Results. Reports of 25 expert systems with different design and field of application were found. The performance of 19 of the identified expert systems was evaluated. The proportion of correctly diagnosed cases was between 43.1 and 99.9%. Sensitivity and specificity ranged from 62 to 100 and 88 to 98%, respectively. Conclusions. Promising diagnostic expert systems with moderate to excellent performance were identified. The validation process was in general underappreciated. None of the systems, however, seemed to have succeeded in daily practice. This review identifies optimal characteristics to increase the survival rate of expert systems and may serve as valuable information for future developments in the field.

Outcome measurements in scleroderma: results from a delphi exercise.

OBJECTIVE: To obtain a consensus on the minimal clinically relevant treatment effect in various scleroderma disease outcome measures to be used in future clinical trials. METHODS: A Delphi consensus building exercise using a survey was sent out to members of the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium (SCTC). The 65 SCTC members were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 was informed, in a cover letter, of the usual American College of Rheumatology 20% response results in randomized trials using effective biologic treatments for rheumatoid arthritis, while Group 2 was not. The first round of the exercise presented the scleroderma experts with a survey composed of 95 questions/clinical scenarios divided into 8 categories. These included situations where the treatment group improved, or worsened, or where some outcome measures improved, while others worsened. From the responses of this first round, a mean, mode, median, and range of responses for each of the 95 questions was obtained. This information was sent out, in the second round of the Delphi exercise, only to those respondents who answered the first round. The respondent's previous answer and the mean and range from the first round were provided for each question. It gave respondents the option to change any of their initial responses. The median of their responses in the second round was used to calculate the values for the minimal clinically relevant treatment effect. RESULTS: Thirty-two of the 65 SCTC members returned the first round of the Delphi exercise. Twenty-eight members returned the second round. Intraclass correlation coefficients between responses to round 1 and 2 were calculated for the questions. These varied from 0.99 (excellent agreement) to 0.02 (poor agreement). The p value was under 0.09 for 9 questions and under 0.19 for 20 questions. Standard deviations (SD) were calculated and were found to be lesser for each of the questions in round 2 when compared to the SD in responses from round 1, thus indicating a movement towards a consensus by the second round. An average of 33% of the responses were changed by the respondents in the second round of the Delphi exercise to a value closer to the median/average of the first round's responses. A range in required values for the minimal clinically relevant treatment effect for Modified Rodnan skin score is 3 to 7.5 units, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) 0.2 to 0.25 units, HAQ pain 0.2 to 0.3 units, MD global (100 mm visual analog scale) 8 to 13, patient global assessment 10 to 12, and diffusing capacity (percentage predicted) 9 to 10. The scenarios were especially weighted towards overall disease modification, thus organ-specific measures, such as 6 minute walk time (which has been used in many pulmonary artery hypertension trials), forced vital capacity, and a dyspnea rating (which may be important in scleroderma lung trials), were not included in the survey. CONCLUSION: Our study begins to address the current deficiency in our knowledge of appropriate values for the minimal clinically relevant treatment effect in various scleroderma disease outcome measures. A consensus could be achieved, or at least a range of minimal clinically relevant treatment effect values could be found for several outcome measurements. Of course, this consensus statement will be modified by evidence as it accrues in each consensus area.

Chondroitins 4 and 6 sulfate in osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether chondroitin sulfate (CS) is effective in inhibiting cartilage loss in knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 300 patients with knee OA were recruited from an outpatient clinic, from private practices, and through advertisements. Study patients were randomly assigned to receive either 800 mg CS or placebo once daily for 2 years. The primary outcome was joint space loss over 2 years as assessed by a posteroanterior radiograph of the knee in flexion; secondary outcomes included pain and function. RESULTS: Of 341 patients screened, 300 entered the study and were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. The 150 patients receiving placebo had progressive joint space narrowing, with a mean +/- SD joint space loss of 0.14 +/- 0.61 mm after 2 years (P = 0.001 compared with baseline). In contrast, there was no change in mean joint space width for the 150 patients receiving CS (0.00 +/- 0.53 mm; P not significant compared with baseline). Similar results were found for minimum joint space narrowing. The differences in loss of joint space between the two groups were significant for mean joint space width (0.14 +/- 0.57 mm; P = 0.04) and for minimum joint space width (0.12 +/- 0.52 mm; P = 0.05). CS was well tolerated, with no significant differences in rates of adverse events between the two groups. CONCLUSION: While there was no significant symptomatic effect in this study, long-term treatment with CS may retard radiographic progression in patients with OA of the knee. However, the clinical relevance of the observed structural results has to be further evaluated, and further studies are needed to confirm the structural effects of CS.