The Challenges of Early Diagnosis and Therapeutic Prediction in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Jinxia Zhao,Z. Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1756-185x.13459

2018-01-01

International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases

Abstract:International Journal of Rheumatic DiseasesVolume 21, Issue 12 p. 2059-2062 EDITORIALFree Access The challenges of early diagnosis and therapeutic prediction in rheumatoid arthritis Jinxia Zhao, Jinxia Zhao orcid.org/0000-0002-8225-0921 Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorZhan-guo Li, Corresponding Author Zhan-guo Li [email protected] Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China Correspondence Zhan-guo Li, Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author Jinxia Zhao, Jinxia Zhao orcid.org/0000-0002-8225-0921 Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorZhan-guo Li, Corresponding Author Zhan-guo Li [email protected] Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China Correspondence Zhan-guo Li, Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author First published: 25 January 2019 https://doi.org/10.1111/1756-185X.13459Citations: 12AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by inflammation and destruction of the joints. Early diagnosis and treatment of the disease are important to prevent joint damage and physical disability. Drug-free remission is more likely to be achieved when initiating disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) at early stages of the disease.1 In recent years, progression has been made regarding the diagnosis of early RA, with the newly developed classification criteria for RA and new biomarkers helping to identify RA in the early stage.2-4 Moreover, studies focusing on preclinical RA have made rapid progress, and it is predictable that early modulation of immunological abnormalities may prevent RA development in the future.5 Here we highlight recent insights into the aspects of early RA, including classification criteria, diagnostic and predictive biomarkers, preclinical RA, and precision medicine in RA. 1 CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA OF EARLY RA There are no gold diagnostic criteria in RA. The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for RA has been widely used for diagnosis in clinical practice, but it is not sensitive for early diagnosis of RA. To improve the low diagnostic value in early RA of the 1987 ACR criteria, the ACR and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) developed new classification criteria for RA in 2010.2 These criteria has been validated in many studies and showed higher sensitivity than the former criteria, but the specificity is lower, leading to over-diagnosis.6, 7 In 2014, a new set of early RA (ERA) criteria was proposed with the items of morning stiffness, polyarthritis, arthritis of hand joints, positive rheumatoid factor (RF), and positive anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA).3 The ERA criteria showed better value for the early diagnosis of RA, and more feasible to use in clinical practice than the previous criteria (Table 1).8 The value of the ERA criteria in diagnosing early RA have been validated by a few large-scale clinical studies. Table 1. Comparison of different classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis Criteria Year of publication Items of criteria Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%) PPV(%) NPV (%) 1987 ACR 1988 7 items 39.1 92.4 84.0 59.7 2010 ACR/EULAR 2010 Scoring system 72.3 83.2 81.6 74.5 ERA 2014 5 items 72.3 87.8 85.9 75.5 ACR, American College of Rheumatology; EULAR, European League Against Rheumatism; ERA, early rheumatoid arthritis; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value. 2 BIOMARKERS OF EARLY RA RF and ACPA are the main serological markers for RA,9 which have been included in the classification criteria. Since RF can also be found in other connective tissue diseases and some chronic infectious diseases, it is not a specific diagnostic marker for RA. ACPA is more specific, and the presence of ACPA represents an independent risk factor for developing RA in those patients with undifferentiated arthritis or arthralgia.10 Specific citrullinated proteins/peptides recognized by ACPA have been described.11-15 In recent years, anti-carbamylated protein (anti-CarP) antibodies have been identified in both ACPA-positive and negative RA patients.16, 17 Triple positivity of ACPA, RF and anti-CarP antibodies is highly specific for very early identification of individuals at risk of developing RA.18 Meta-analysis confirms that anti-peptidylarginine deiminase (PAD) 4 antibodies are specific biomarkers in RA patients.19 Serum 14-3-3η protein has been considered as a novel biomarker for RA.20 More recently, serum connective tissue growth factor (CTGF) was found to be a promising biomarker for diagnosis of RA with high sensitivity and specificity.21 Table 2 lists the current diagnostic biomarkers for RA. Despite the clinical utility of these biomarkers, they do not present in all the RA patients. It is necessary to identify new biomarkers for better diagnosis of early RA, specifically in sero-negative patients. Recently, researchers developed an innovative approach to identify trace sulfated immunoglobulin G N-glycans as biomarkers for both sero-positive and sero-negative RA.22 Table 2. Diagnostic biomarkers for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) Biomarkers Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%) Features References RF 50-70 50-95 Associated with disease activity 10 Anti-CCP 60-70 95 Associated with erosive disease 10 ACF 55.8 92.6 Predictor of radiographic progression 11 Anti-cit-HPV47 41.2 92.3 Associated with disease activity and radiographic progression 12 Anti-CEP1 44 98 Biomarker for RA-associated ILD and erosive disease 13 Anti-MCV 68.6 94.2 Associated with bone erosion 14 Anti- cTNC5 47-51 98 Detected in 18% of pre-RA 15 Anti-CarP 44 89 Associated with radiographic progression 16 Anti-PAD4 38 96 Associated with radiographic progression 19 14-3-3η protein 77 93 Helpful in early RA 20 CTGF 86 92 Helpful in RA 21 ACF, anti-citrullinated fibrinogen; CarP, carbamylated protein; CCP, cyclic citrullinated peptide; CEP1, citrullinated α-enolase peptide 1; cit-HPV47, citrullinated human papilloma virus-47; CTGF, connective tissue growth factor; cTNC5, citrullinated tenascin-C 5; MCV, mutated citrullinated vimentin; PAD, peptidylarginine deiminase; RF, rheumatoid factor. During the last decade, new high-throughput omics technologies, including genomics, epigenomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics have emerged as powerful tools for the identification of molecular biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis and treatment response in RA.23, 24 These methodologies allow large-scale analyses that may help to identify a wide range of potential biomarkers of the disease in the sera, synovial fluid or other tissues, which might prove promising in the future. For example, five serum proteins have been discovered as candidate biomarkers for early diagnosis of RA using proteomics approaches.25 Besides the serological biomarkers, imaging techniques, such as ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging, are helpful in detecting subclinical synovitis and radiographically undetectable bone erosions. These methods may improve early diagnosis of RA, particularly in sero-negative patients.26 3 PREDICTION OF PRECLINICAL RA Multiple studies have demonstrated that RA develops in several phases, beginning with genetic risk and environmental insults, epigenetic modifications, and post-translational modifications, followed by preclinical asymptomatic autoimmunity and inflammation, and ultimately, clinically apparent arthritis.27 The current available data suggests that RA-related autoimmunity initially develops years prior to the first joint symptoms in the genetically predisposed population. RF and ACPA can be detected in the preclinical stage, and are highly associated with progression to clinical RA.28 There is an increase in the number of epitopes recognized over the period preceding RA onset, which is associated with the emergence of subclinical inflammatory biomarkers.29 However, subclinical inflammation of the synovium does not coincide with the appearance of autoantibodies during the preclinical RA stage, which suggests that the disease process may start at other sites in the body instead of the synovium.30 Emerging data suggest that RA-related autoimmunity may be initiated at mucosal sites including the lung, oral and gastrointestinal mucosa.31 Novel sequencing technologies have allowed investigations into the role of the oral and gut microbiomes in the development of RA.32, 33 But up to now, it remains unknown when synovial inflammation begins before the onset of RA. Future research should focus on how and when autoimmunity progresses to subclinical synovitis, then clinically arthritis. EULAR has defined clinically suspect arthralgia (CSA) by establishing a set of clinical characteristics for patients with arthralgia who may be suspect as progressing to RA.34 Up to now, several clinical trials using biological or conventional synthetic DMARDs for RA prevention have been completed or are currently enrolling patients.28 With further understanding of the pathogenesis of preclinical RA processes, it would be very possible to identify individuals at high risk who would obtain the benefits of prediction of the disease. 4 PRECISION MEDICINE IN RA RA is a heterogeneous disease with a variable clinical spectrum, from mild and self-limiting to severe and progressive patterns. The therapeutic response to treatment differs greatly from patient to patient. There is no doubt that RA is one of the most appropriate conditions for the application of personalized medicine. The identification of biomarkers for the stratification of RA and to predict disease progression or treatment outcome could facilitate early intervention and individualized therapies. It is well known that a number of autoantibodies, such as anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies, and anti-CarP are associated with more severe radiographic progression in RA. These antibodies are not only important for early diagnosis of RA, but also in predicting the prognosis, which are indications for intensive treatment. In contrast, negative ACPA status, short symptom duration and being a non-smoker are factors associated with self-limiting arthritis in early arthritis patients.35 A prospective cohort study revealed Health Assessment Questionnaire score, ACPA, body mass index, 6-month cumulative erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and baseline Sharp/Van der Heijde modified score (SHS) as predictors of severe radiographic progression in patients with early RA.36 Besides these clinical biomarkers, multi-omics studies may lead to discovery of various biomarkers to be implemented into clinical practice in personalized treatment of RA.24, 37 Blood-based liquid biopsies comprising of cell-free DNA, immune circulating cells, and extracellular vesicles have been under investigations to identify cellular and molecular signatures as biomarkers of response to treatment in RA patients.38, 39 With the new scientific evidence of developing predicting biomarkers for RA, the existing EULAR recommendations on early arthritis will probably need amendment in the future.40 5 IN SUMMARY Early diagnosis is the key issue to ensure better control of RA with a treat-to-target therapy strategy. By using newly developed technologies, it is possible to find and incorporate more sensitive and specific biomarkers into clinical practice, not only for diagnosis of RA in the early stage, but also for better stratification of the disease. With further understanding of pathogenesis of preclinical RA, it is potentially possible to use biomarkers to identify the likelihood of RA onset. These research progresses will shed light on early intervention and trigger immune-modulatory therapies of RA. CONFLICT OF INTERESTS The authors declare there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper. REFERENCES 1Espinoza F, Fabre S, Pers YM. Remission-induction therapies for early rheumatoid arthritis: evidence to date and clinical implications. Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis. 2016; 8(4): 107- 118. 2Aletaha D, Neogi T, Silman AJ, et al. 2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Arthritis Rheum. 2010; 62(9): 2569- 2581. 3Zhao J, Su Y, Li R, et al. Classification criteria of early rheumatoid arthritis and validation of its performance in a multi-centre cohort. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2014; 32(5): 667- 673. 4Nakken B, Papp G, Bosnes V, et al. Biomarkers for rheumatoid arthritis: From molecular processes to diagnostic applications-current concepts and future perspectives. Immunol Lett. 2017; 189: 13- 18. 5Deane KD. Preclinical rheumatoid arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis prevention. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2018; 20(8): 50. 6Cader MZ, Filer A, Hazlehurst J, et al. Performance of the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: comparison with 1987 ACR criteria in a very early synovitis cohort. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011; 70(6): 949- 955. 7Kedar MP, Acharya RV, Prakashini K. Performance of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) criteria for classification of rheumatoid arthritis in an Indian population: An observational study in a single centre. Indian J Med Res. 2016; 144(2): 288- 292. 8Ye H, Su Y, Li R, et al. Comparison of three classification criteria of rheumatoid arthritis in an inception early arthritis cohort. Clin Rheumatol. 2016; 35(10): 2397- 2401. 9Didier K, Bolko L, Giusti D, et al. Autoantibodies associated with connective tissue diseases: what meaning for clinicians? Front Immunol. 2018; 9: 541. 10Conigliaro P, Chimenti MS, Triggianese P, et al. Autoantibodies in inflammatory arthritis. Autoimmun Rev. 2016; 15(7): 673- 683. 11Nielen MM, van der Horst AR, van Schaardenburg D, et al. Antibodies to citrullinated human fibrinogen (ACF) have diagnostic and prognostic value in early arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005; 64(8): 1199- 1204. 12Shi J, Sun X, Zhao Y, et al. Prevalence and significance of antibodies to citrullinated human papilloma virus-47 E2345–362 in rheumatoid arthritis. J Autoimmun. 2008; 31(2): 131- 135. 13Alunno A, Bistoni O, Pratesi F, et al. Anti-citrullinated alpha enolase antibodies, interstitial lung disease and bone erosion in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2018; 57(5): 850- 855. 14Lee YH, Bae SC, Song GG. Diagnostic accuracy of anti-MCV and anti-CCP antibodies in rheumatoid arthritis: A meta-analysis. Z Rheumatol. 2015; 74(10): 911- 918. 15Schwenzer A, Jiang X, Mikuls TR, et al. Identification of an immunodominant peptide from citrullinated tenascin-C as a major target for autoantibodies in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016; 75(10): 1876- 1883. 16Shi J, van Steenbergen HW, van Nies J, et al. The specificity of anti-carbamylated protein antibodies for rheumatoid arthritis in a setting of early arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2015; 17: 339. 17Ajeganova S, van Steenbergen HW, Verheul MK, et al. The association between anti-carbamylated protein (anti-CarP) antibodies and radiographic progression in early rheumatoid arthritis: a study exploring replication and the added value to ACPA and rheumatoid factor. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017; 76(1): 112- 118. 18Verheul MK, Böhringer S, van Delft M, et al. The combination of three autoantibodies, ACPA, RF and anti-CarP antibodies is highly specific for rheumatoid arthritis: implications for very early identification of individuals at risk to develop rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018; 70(11): 1721- 1731. 19Ren J, Sun L, Zhao J. Meta-analysis: diagnostic accuracy of antibody against peptidylarginine deiminase 4 by ELISA for rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Rheumatol. 2017; 36(11): 2431- 2438. 20Zeng T, Tan L. 14-3-3η protein: a promising biomarker for rheumatoid arthritis. Biomark Med. 2018; 12(8): 917- 925. 21Yang X, Lin K, Ni S, et al. Serum connective tissue growth factor is a highly discriminatory biomarker for the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2017; 19(1): 257. 22Wang JR, Gao WN, Grimm R, et al. A method to identify trace sulfated IgG N-glycans as biomarkers for rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Commun. 2017; 8(1): 631. 23Bhattacharjee M, Balakrishnan L, Renuse S, et al. Synovial fluid proteome in rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Proteomics. 2016; 13: 12. 24Tasaki S, Suzuki K, Kassai Y, et al. Multi-omics monitoring of drug response in rheumatoid arthritis in pursuit of molecular remission. Nat Commun. 2018; 9(1): 2755. 25Lee J, Mun S, Kim D, et al. Proteomics analysis for verification of rheumatoid arthritis biomarker candidates using multiple reaction monitoring. Proteomics Clin Appl. 2018; e1800011. https://doi.org//10.1002/prca.201800011. [Epub ahead of print] 26Mathew AJ, Danda D, Conaghan PG. MRI and ultrasound in rheumatoid arthritis. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2016; 28(3): 323- 329. 27Gerlag DM, Raza K, van Baarsen LG, et al. EULAR recommendations for terminology and research in individuals at risk of rheumatoid arthritis: report from the Study Group for Risk Factors for Rheumatoid Arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012; 71(5): 638- 641. 28Smolen JS, Aletaha D, Barton A, et al. Rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2018; 4: 18001. 29Sokolove J, Bromberg R, Deane KD, et al. Autoantibody epitope spreading in the pre-clinical phase predicts progression to rheumatoid arthritis. PLoS ONE. 2012; 7(5): e35296. 30van de Sande MG, de Hair MJ, van der Leij C, et al. Different stages of rheumatoid arthritis: features of the synovium in the preclinical phase. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011; 70(5): 772- 777. 31Demoruelle MK, Deane KD, HolersVM. When and where does inflammation begin in rheumatoid arthritis? Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2014; 26(1): 64- 71. 32Zhang X, Zhang D, Jia H, et al. The oral and gut microbiomes are perturbed in rheumatoid arthritis and partly normalized after treatment. Nat Med. 2015; 21(8): 895- 905. 33Maeda Y, Takeda K. Role of gut microbiota in rheumatoid arthritis. J Clin Med. 2017; 6(6): 60. 34van Steenbergen HW, Aletaha D, Beaart-van de Voorde LJ, et al. EULAR definition of arthralgia suspicious for progression to rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017; 76(3): 491- 496. 35Norli ES, Brinkmann GH, Kvien TK, et al. Self-limiting arthritis among patients fulfilling the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis in a very early arthritis cohort. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2016; 46(3): 272- 278. 36Joo YB, Bang SY, Ryu JA, Lee S, Lee HS, Bae SC. Predictors of severe radiographic progression in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: A Prospective observational cohort study. Int J Rheum Dis. 2017; 20(10): 1437- 1446. 37Kim K, Bang SY, Lee HS, Bae SC. Update on the genetic architecture of rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2017; 13(1): 13- 24. 38Hashimoto T, Yoshida K, Hashimoto N, et al. Circulating cell free DNA: a marker to predict the therapeutic response for biological DMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis. Int J Rheum Dis. 2017; 20(6): 722- 730. 39Coras R, Narasimhan R, Guma M. Liquid biopsies to guide therapeutic decisions in rheumatoid arthritis. Transl Res. 2018; 5244(18): 1- 12. 40Combe B, Landewe R, Daien CI, et al. 2016 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of early arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017; 76(6): 948- 959. Citing Literature Volume21, Issue12December 2018Pages 2059-2062 ReferencesRelatedInformation