Buscar en
Revista Colombiana de Reumatología (English Edition)
Toda la web
Inicio Revista Colombiana de Reumatología (English Edition) Clinimetrics in Sjögren's syndrome
Journal Information
Vol. 26. Issue 4.
Pages 260-267 (October - December 2019)
Visits
403
Vol. 26. Issue 4.
Pages 260-267 (October - December 2019)
Review article
DOI: 10.1016/j.rcreue.2019.07.002
Full text access
Clinimetrics in Sjögren's syndrome
Clinimetría en el síndrome de Sjögren
Visits
...
Iván Posso-Osorioa, Tatiana Méndez-Rayob, Danny Sotob, Ivana Nieto-Aristizábala, Carlos A. Cañasa, Gabriel J. Tobóna,c,
Corresponding author
gtobon1@yahoo.com

Corresponding author.
a Grupo de Investigación en Reumatología, Autoinmunidad y Medicina Traslacional (GIRAT), Fundación Valle del Lili y Universidad Icesi, Cali, Colombia
b Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Icesi, Cali, Colombia
c Laboratorio de Inmunología, Fundación Valle del Lili, Cali, Colombia
Article information
Abstract
Full Text
Bibliography
Download PDF
Statistics
Figures (1)
Tables (2)
Table 1. Items evaluated by the clinimetric tools in pSS and how they are scored.
Table 2. Clinimetric tools in pSS.
Show moreShow less
Abstract
Introduction

Primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS) is an autoimmune disease that can affect quality of life, cause disability, including progression to systemic complications in patients. In order to evaluate these components, several clinimetric scales have been used in pSS.

Methods

In order to describe the most commonly used clinimetric scales in pSS, a systematic search of articles was carried out using Google Scholar, Scielo, Embase, Academic Search Ultimate, and Medline databases. Pubmed was used for the search in Medline, with the MeSH terms: ‘Clinimetry’; ‘Clinimetrics’; ‘Quality of life’; ‘Activity Index’; ‘Scales’; ‘Sjögren's syndrome’; linked with the Boolean connector AND. A total of 1081 articles published up to May 2018 were reduced to the 51 of the most relevant after application of inclusion criteria.

Results

The most commonly used clinimetric scales in the evaluation of systemic involvement and quality of life in patients with pSS are described.

Conclusion

Clinimetric methods are very useful from the point of view of follow-up, evaluation of response to treatment, perception of the disease by patients, and objective evaluation of clinical trials in pSS.

Keywords:
Sjögren's syndrome
Clinimetry
Evaluation scale
Quality of life
Systemic involvement
Resumen
Introducción

El síndrome de Sjögren primario (SSp) es una enfermedad autoinmune, cuyo compromiso se puede ver reflejado en la calidad de vida, incapacidad y progresión a complicaciones en los pacientes. Con el fin de evaluar estos componentes, diversas escalas clinimétricas se han utilizado en el SSp.

Métodos

Para describir las escalas de clinimetría más utilizadas en el SSp, se realizó una búsqueda de artículos en las bases de datos Google Scholar, Scielo, Embase, Academic Search Ultimate y Medline. Se empleó Pubmed para la búsqueda en Medline, con los términos MeSH: «Clinimetry»; «Clinimetrics»; «Quality of life»; «Activity index»; «Scales»; «Sjögren's syndrome»; enlazados con el conector booleano AND. Se incluyeron 1.081 artículos publicados hasta mayo de 2018, que luego de la aplicación de los criterios de inclusión, se redujeron a 51 con la mayor relevancia.

Resultados

Se describen las escalas de clinimetría más usadas en la evaluación del compromiso sistémico y de la calidad de vida en los pacientes con SSp.

Conclusión

Los métodos clinimétricos tienen gran utilidad desde el punto de vista de seguimiento, evaluación de respuesta a tratamiento, percepción de la enfermedad por parte de los pacientes y evaluación objetiva de ensayos clínicos en el SSp.

Palabras clave:
Síndrome de Sjögren
Clinimetría
Escala de evaluación
Calidad de vida
Compromiso sistémico
Full Text
Introduction

Primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS) is a systemic autoimmune disease, characterized by involvement mainly of the salivary and lacrimal glands, induced by lymphocytic and neuroendocrine inflammatory mechanisms, which leads to dysfunction and destruction of glandular tissue, resulting in the presentation of dry symptoms.1 However, this inflammatory process can occur in other organs, such as the kidneys, the lungs, the brain and the skin, among others. This syndrome is one of the most prevalent rheumatologic diseases, with a global incidence of 60.8 per 100,000 inhabitants.2 There are 2 forms of the disease, the pSS and the secondary. In the secondary Sjögren's syndrome, another disease coexists with it, especially systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (15–36%), rheumatoid arthritis (20–32%) and systemic sclerosis (20–32%), among others.3,4

The main symptoms, which are found in approximately 80% of patients, are: on the one hand, exocrinopathy of lacrimal and salivary glands, which results in dry eye and dry mouth; and on the other hand, fatigue and pain, which are extraglandular manifestations of the disease that have a great impact on the patient's quality of life, as it has been described in the literature that fatigue can become disabling and is associated with loss or decrease of labor productivity.5 Clinically, the characteristics of the pSS can be divided into 2 groups: (1) the benign but disabling symptoms perceived by the patient, such as dryness, pain and fatigue; (2) systemic manifestations, which are potentially severe and affect 30–40% of patients.4

For all the above, it is necessary that the clinician objectively evaluate the involvement of the pathology. Clinimetrics, a basic branch of medicine which, through scales, is responsible for the identification, specification and measurement of the human clinical phenomenon, has been created for this purpose.6,7 In this way, it is possible to evaluate the disease activity, the response to treatment and the perception of the disease in patients with pSS.8,9 Given that the spectrum of affectation of pSS is broad, clinimetric methods that allow to address objectively each aspect have been created since 1996.10,11

This review aims to make a description of the most used instruments for the evaluation of the pSS in clinical practice, both of the activity and severity of the pathology and of the quality of life.

MethodsLiterature search

A search of articles was carried out in Google Scholar, Scielo, Embase, Academic Search Ultimate and Medline databases. Pubmed was used for the search in Medline, with the MeSH terms: «Clinimetry»; «Clinimetrics»; «Quality of life»; «Activity index»; «Scales»; «Sjögren's syndrome»; linked with the Boolean connector AND (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.

Selection of articles.

(0.14MB).
Article selection and information extraction

In the initial search 1081 articles were found, which were entered into an Excel database. After excluding duplicate articles and selecting those that met the inclusion criteria and that included the keywords in the title or in the abstract, 51 articles that were reviewed by 2 authors were considered relevant. The access to these articles was obtained with the help of the libraries of our University and University Hospital.

Inclusion criteria

Original articles, cohort studies, topic reviews; published until 2018; written in English or Spanish.

Exclusion criteria

Case reports; articles without access to full text.

Results

51 articles concerning Sjögren's syndrome, clinimetric instruments and their use or applicability in this disease were selected; from these, the following review is carried out.

Instruments that assess clinical/systemic commitmentSSDDI, SSDAI and SSDI

In 2007, 2 indexes were created: the Index of Disease Damage of the pSS (Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Damage Index [SSDDI]) and the Index of Disease Activity of the pSS (Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index [SSDAI]). For this purpose, data were collected in 12 clinical centers in Italy, from 2004 to 2006. The patients were analyzed to select the individual clinical variables and the combination of some of them that represent the most valid predictors of damage and disease activity. Each symptom, sign and test was precisely defined, as specified by the American College of Rheumatology.10,12

The SSDDI was constructed using variables selected through a multivariate linear regression model, where the score assigned to each element was derived from the weight that the corresponding variable had in the model. The maximum score of 16 points consists of 9 items that are taken into account as predictors of the level of damage of the disease.

The SSDAI consists of a multivariate linear regression model with 11 variables, where the dependent variable was the numerical score for the disease activity (0–10) assigned by the researcher, derived from the weight that the corresponding variable had in the model.

Finally, in the study, the variables of the SSDDI were not or were weakly correlated with the gold standard (Physician's global assessment [PhGA] of the disease status) for the disease activity, while the SSDAI correlated. A score ≥5 points in the SSDAI showed a sensitivity of 86.5% and a specificity of 87.6% to identify patients with active or very active disease, who would be candidates for a more intensive pharmacological therapy.

The geographic limitation (only one country) of the development of the SSDDI and the SSDAI raised doubts about their validity.10 These, like others that were developed later, used tools already validated for the evaluation of activity in other autoimmune diseases (mainly for SLE) based on the European Consensus Lupus Activity Measurement (ECLAM),13 given the systemic commitment observed in both of them. The last measure, however, presents marked disadvantages with respect to the SSDAI, since the characteristics score whether they are present, but it does not establish any distinction between what worsens, improves or is maintained; limiting its application in clinical practice.14

Subsequently, the Sjögren's Syndrome Damage Index (SSDI) was developed in 2008 to assess the longitudinal damage in patients with pSS, using variables similar to the cohort that was used for the SSDAI and the SSDDI. A total of 104 patients from 8 hospitals of the United Kingdom, who met the criteria of the American-European Consensus Group (AECG) of 2002 for pSS,12,15 were assessed by rheumatologists in the first visit and at 12 months. In each occasion, the data regarding damage, disease activity, in addition to biochemical, hematological and immunological tests (Anti-SSA/Ro and Anti-SSB/La) were collected. For this process, the questionnaires SF-36, Sjögren's Systemic Clinical Activity Index (SCAI) and the Profile of Fatigue and Discomfort-Sicca Symptoms Inventory (PROFAD-SSI) were completed.16

The index provided an objective and adequate evaluation of the progression of the disease, for the use either by personnel specialized or not. For example, and advantage of the SSDI over the SSDDI is that it recognizes cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and musculoskeletal diseases, with a methodology based on the damage indexes for SLE (SLICC/ACR).17 This tool consists of 10 domains with a maximum score of 27 points, which is taken into account as a predictor of the level of disease damage in the study population.

The SSDDI and the SSDI are chronicity indexes that, although can be used in clinical practice, they have limitations such as low external validity and cross-validation; since they are indexes that were developed in cohorts of a single nationality, and therefore they may not completely cover the broad spectrum of the pSS.18 In addition, despite the SSDAI had the advantage of being very simplified, the lack of exhaustiveness caused patients with certain degrees of disease activity to be underestimated.19

SCAI

Previously there were no tools to evaluate the systemic commitment of the pSS, and treatment for severe presentations of the disease was performed empirically with high doses of corticosteroids. Given the need for evaluation tools in clinical trials, the SCAI was created in 2007 using the principles of the BILAG (British Isles Lupus Activity Group) index for SLE, modified for pSS.

This index consists of 8 domains that include: fatigue, constitutional symptoms, arthritis, muscular, cutaneous/vascular, pulmonary, hematologic and glandular inflammation. The majority of items are scored as 0 when it is absent, 1 when there is an improvement, 2 when it remains the same, 3 when it gets worse, or 4 when it appears new, during the last 4 weeks compared with the previous disease activity.

The findings of the study that allowed its implementation suggest that this index is useful in therapeutic studies of pSS.20 However, being extremely exhaustive, it is difficult to apply in daily clinical practice.19

ESSDAI

The ESSDAI (EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index) was developed in 2009 by the consensus of a group of European and North American experts, supported by the EULAR (European League Against Rheumatism),21 with the purpose of obtaining a standardized instrument for the evaluation of the systemic disease activity, both in clinical practice and in clinical trials. This index has been validated in multiple studies, being confirmed that it is reproducible.22–24 Its use is increasingly prevalent, to the point that it is currently considered the gold standard for measuring the disease activity. In addition, it has been observed correlation with biomarkers of activity of B lymphocytes,22 as well as with the risk of lymphoma.25,26 Indeed, the decisions regarding the follow-up, treatment and prognosis of patients with a greater degree of disease activity at the time of diagnosis of the pSS are based on the ESSDAI,26 since its wide range of values allows to discriminate between patients with active and inactive disease.27

The ESSDAI includes 12 domains, which make reference to the systems affected by the disease (cutaneous, respiratory, renal, articular, muscular, central nervous, peripheral nervous, hematological, glandular, constitutional, lymphatic and biological) and each is divided into 3 or 4 degrees of activity.28 To ensure a correct score, another pathology different from pSS should be ruled out as the cause of the signs and symptoms, and the characteristics of damage that are irreversible (present for 12 months or more) should also be excluded.

The follow-up of patients with pSS who are clinically stable has a limited clinical value with this tool.29 However, its cumulative use has been described, that is, when applied in these patients, the clinical value is added when describing the severity of the disease and it is calculated by adding the maximum score per domain that the individual has reached at any time of his/her life.29

Although it has been seen that the biological domain is affected in two thirds of patients24,26,30 and that the high scores on the scale correlate with this domain and not with the other manifestations of activity, this falsely induces the association between these 2 aspects. For this reason, in 2017 was created the ClinESSDAI, in which the biological domain was eliminated,31 and it was determined that it is capable of detecting the changes with a sensitivity close to that of the ESSDAI, and therefore it provides an accurate evaluation of the disease activity independent of the biomarkers of activation of the B lymphocytes.31,32

Instruments that evaluate the symptoms perceived by the patientPhGA

PhGA is a scoring system performed by the specialist to compile data on the clinical results and estimate the severity of the disease.33 It is part of the basic set of measures of the disease activity of the American College of Rheumatology, including both the Patient Global Assessment (PGA/PtGA) and the PhGA.34

In clinical studies, the physicians evaluate the patients using the PhGA in 2 scales: one numerical and other nominal. For the first, each patient receives a score for the damage and disease activity from 0 (no damage or activity) to 10 (maximum damage or disease activity). For the second, the change in disease activity is evaluated, answering questions such as: «Compared with the previous visit, how is the activity of the pSS of this patient now?». The answers are classified into 5 categories (inactive disease, low, moderate, high and very high activity) and the evaluation process is carried out in at least 2 visits at 3 or 6 months.10,24,21

It has been evidenced that the opinion of the physician regarding the disease state may differ from the opinion of the patient,35,36 leading to a low correlation between PhGA and PGA, where it becomes apparent that the variables that are important for the physicians are not the same as those that are important for the patients.37

Assuming that PhGA or PGA can represent the “gold standard” for assessing an aspect of the disease, such as damage or activity, can introduce several methodological biases since, regardless of how the questions are formulated, it always implicitly incorporates his/her own opinion in the evaluation of the systemic activity and the symptoms of the patient.38

PGA

EULAR constantly insists on the need to work together with patients, particularly in rheumatic diseases;39 this is why PGA arises as a measure to reduce bias in scales that are only evaluated by clinicians.40

As with the PhGA, the PGA is assessed by means of numerical scales of 0–10 points or with visual analog scales where higher results indicate a worse disease status. However, other PGA formulations that are frequently used in the consultation are: “How do you calculate the activity of your disease today?” and are classified and evaluated in the same way as the PhGA.36

Different studies have compared the effectiveness of these evaluations in diseases other than pSS, finding significant discrepancies in the variables considered to establish the overall evolution of the disease by patients and physicians41–43; however, the evidence in pSS is limited.

For example, patients with prolonged disability may report a good quality of life (despite what may seem externally paradoxical) due to factors such as adaptability to disability, which contributes to the physician-patient discordance.36

PROFAD-SSI

Fatigue in pSS is considered a highly disabling symptom, present in up to 75% of patients and with the ability to substantially affect the quality of life.44 Therefore, the Profile of Fatigue and Discomfort – Sicca Symptoms Inventory (PROFAD-SSI) and the most recent: EULARSjögren's Syndrome Patients Reported Index (ESSPRI) were created.45,46

In 2004 was published the PROFAD-SSI; for which data were collected of patients with a diagnosis of pSS who met the AECG classification criteria,12 recruited from different rheumatology clinics in the United Kingdom.47 It was created as a self-report of the patients about their symptoms of fatigue, discomfort and pain.48,49

This score consists of 64 questions scored on an 8-point Likert scale (0–7). Its disadvantage is that being so long it becomes difficult for patients, particularly when used as an evaluation of results in clinical trials. For this reason, the PROFAD-SSI-SF (SF: short form), which consists of 19 questions grouped into the same 8 domains with a score for the PROFAD and another for the SSI was developed.18 Thus, the PROFAD has 9 elements divided into 4 domains: physical fatigue, mental fatigue, arthralgia and vascular; and the SSI has 10 elements divided into 4 domains: ocular, oral, vaginal and cutaneous dryness. Its advantage is the distinction between physical and mental fatigue, as well as of the sites of dryness, which not always appear concomitantly and with the same intensity.49 When used together in several studies, a profile that captures the symptomatic component of the pSS is established.14

ESSPRI

The EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index (ESSPRI) was developed in 2011 with a multinational collaboration of patients from countries of Europe, North America and South America.47 To carry out the study, the PGA, the gold standard at this time, was used as comparator index. It was developed with the purpose of evaluating the characteristics of dryness, fatigue and pain that affect the quality of life; and to be used both in clinical trials and in routine clinical practice.

It consists of 3 domains: dryness, pain or discomfort and fatigue. Dryness includes 6 components that afflict the patient with pSS: ocular, oral, cutaneous, nasal, tracheal and vaginal. Each one is rated from 0 to 10, according to severity.47

Compared with previous clinimetric methods, ESSPRI is a short and easy to use tool that allows measuring the severity of each symptom without losing the validity. In addition, it takes into account the sicca features in order of importance since in their study oral and ocular dryness are more important than nasal, tracheal or vaginal.47,50 It has a sensitivity to detect changes much higher than other questionnaires on quality of life, such as SSI and PROFAD. Table 1 shows the clinimetric tools most commonly used in pSS and the items that each one evaluates. Table 2 summarizes the scales.

Table 1.

Items evaluated by the clinimetric tools in pSS and how they are scored.

  SSDDI  SSDAI  SSDI  PROFAD-SSI-SF  ESSDAI  ESSPRI 
EVALUATED DOMAINSLymphoproliferative disease  Constitutional symptoms  Ocular domain  Need for rest  Constitutional domain  Dryness 
Renal damage  Articular symptoms  Oral domain  Difficulty to start an activity  Domain of lymphadenopathy and lymphoma  Fatigue 
Ocular damage  Hematological characteristics  Systemic domain  Difficulty to continue an activity  Glandular domain  Pain 
Oral/salivary damage  Pleuropulmonary symptoms    Difficulties due to lack of muscle strength or feeling or weakness  Articular domain   
Lung damage  Leukopenia/lymphopenia    Difficulties to think clearly or to concentrate  Cutaneous domain   
Neurological damage  Vasculitis changes    Difficulties due to forgetting things of making mistakes  Lung domain   
  Active renal involvement    Limbs discomfort  Renal domain   
  Peripheral neuropathy    Discomfort in fingers or wrists  Muscular domain   
      Discomfort due to cold hands  Domain of the peripheral nervous system   
      Discomfort due to dry skin  Domain of the central nervous system   
      Difficulties due to vaginal dryness  Hematological domain   
      Difficulties due to sensitive eyes  Biological domain   
      Difficulties due to irritable eyes     
      Visual discomfort     
      Feeding difficulties     
      Discomfort due to dry throat or nose     
      Discomfort due to bad breath     
      Need for liquids to moisten the mouth     
      Discomfort from other problems     
SCORE  It consists of 6 domains and 9 items distributed among them. Each item has a specific score of 1, 2 or 5 according to the corresponding weight.  It consists of 8 domains and 11 items distributed among them. Each item has a specific score of 1, 2, 3 or 4 according to the corresponding weight.  It consists of 27 items that are scored as 0 if it is absent or 1 if it is present.  Each question is scored from 1 to 10, the result is an average.  Each domain has different scores depending on the degree of activity. In turn, each domain has a specific weight. The result is obtained by multiplying the degree of activity by the weight of each domain.  Each question is scored from 1 to 10, the result is an average. 

ESSDAI: EULARSjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index; ESSPRI: Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index; EULAR: European League Against Rheumatism; PROFAD-SSI-SF: Profile of Fatigue and Discomfort-Sicca Symptoms Inventory Short Form; SSDAI: Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index; SSDDI: Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Damage Index; SSDI: Sjögren's Syndrome Damage Index; pSS: Primary Sjögren's syndrome.

Table 2.

Clinimetric tools in pSS.

Scale initials  Name in English  Year  Country  Number of items  Evaluation 
PhGA  Physician Global Assessment scale  1977  United Kingdom51  Activity 
PGA  Patient Global disease Activity  1977  United Kingdom51  Activity 
SCAI  Sjögren's systemic Clinical Activity Index  2007  United Kingdom  14  Activity 
SSDAI  Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index  2007  Italy  11  Activity 
ESSDAI  The EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index  2009  European continent  12  Activity 
PROFAD-SSI-SF  Profile of Fatigue and Discomfort-Sicca Symptoms Inventory-Short Form  2004  United Kingdom  22  Symptoms/quality of life 
ESSPRI  EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index  2011  European continent  Symptoms/quality of life 
SSDDI  Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Damage Index  2007  Italy  Damage 

EULAR: European League Against Rheumatism; pSS: primary Sjögren's syndrome.

Discussion

For several years work has been done to develop clinimetric tools that allow to make a global assessment of patients with pSS regarding their pathology and that at the same time are valid, replicable and easy to perform. Within these approaches, the clinimetric methods for pSS have been divided into 2 large groups: those that evaluate the clinical component of the disease as damage or activity and those that evaluate the quality of life of the patient, which implies the use of at least 2 questionnaires for the comprehensive evaluation of the patient in medical controls and in research studies.

However, in clinical practice one of the big limitations for the regular use of these scales is the time it takes their completion, as in the case of the SCAI,19,20 for this reason, many of them have been used only in the research context.

From a practical point of view, the main interest of the clinician during the follow-up of patients with pSS should be the objective evaluation of the disease activity. For this, the ESSDAI behaves as a rigorous tool, which covers the manifestations of the disease in a systemic and detailed way by subdividing each domain evaluated in different degrees of activity, which makes the result for each individual a true reflection of the behavior of the disease at the time of assessment.28 Although it is reliable, it is extensive and the qualification of each item is subject to a series of conditions that must be taken into account,22 in order to facilitate its application in the clinic and without the need for laboratory results, the ClinESSDAI modification, which allows to obtain interpretations similar to the ESSDAI in relation to the disease activity was made.31 The importance of the ESSDAI in clinical practice has led to include in research studies aimed at finding effective treatments for pSS, only patients with ESSDAI above 5 and below 14, indicating an active disease.32

On the other hand, it is common in clinical practice that there is a discrepancy between the objective findings, given by the commitment of organs or immunological findings (complement consumption, lymphopenia, among others) and the symptoms expressed by the patient, where fatigue can be one of the main complaints. Given this aspect, it is essential to evaluate at the same time the impact of the disease on the quality of life of the patient, being the ESSPRI a questionnaire that is easy to apply in the medical consultation and that facilitates a specific focus on aspects of the pSS (fatigue, dryness and pain),47 unlike others such as PROFAD, in which there are questions that could be attributed to causes other than this syndrome.18

In this regard, for an objective assessment, the ESSDAI is a very useful scale; while from the subjective point of view, the ESSPRI, self-applied by the patient, is a very useful tool due to its easy completion and the information of interest on the aspects to be improved with medical interventions.

Conclusion

It is important to know the usefulness of these tools and the need to reduce the limitations of each one, since their application facilitates and guarantees the comprehensive study of patients with pSS.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare they do not have any conflict of interest.

WARNING in_array() expects parameter 2 to be array, null given (includes_ws_v2/librerias/html/item.php[209])
WARNING in_array() expects parameter 2 to be array, null given (includes_ws_v2/librerias/html/item.php[209])
WARNING in_array() expects parameter 2 to be array, null given (includes_ws_v2/librerias/html/item.php[209])
References
[1]
H.M. Moutsopoulos.
Sjögren's syndrome: autoimmune epithelitis.
Clin Immunol Immunopathol, 72 (1994), pp. 162-165
[2]
B. Qin, J. Wang, Z. Yang, M. Yang, N. Ma, F. Huang, et al.
Epidemiology of primary Sjögren's syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ann Rheum Dis, 74 (2015), pp. 1983-1989
[3]
A.-L. Stefanski, C. Tomiak, U. Pleyer, T. Dietrich, G.R. Burmester, T. Dörner.
The diagnosis and treatment of Sjögren's syndrome.
Dtsch Aerzteblatt Online, 114 (2017), pp. 354-361
[4]
X. Mariette, L.A. Criswell.
Primary Sjögren's syndrome.
N Engl J Med, 378 (2018), pp. 931-939
[5]
J.M. Meijer, P.M. Meiners, J.J.R. Huddleston Slater, F.K.L. Spijkervet, C.G.M. Kallenberg, A. Vissink, et al.
Health-related quality of life, employment and disability in patients with Sjögren's syndrome.
Rheumatology (Oxford), 48 (2009), pp. 1077-1082
[6]
G.L. Engel.
From biomedical to biopsychosocial.
Psychother Psychosom, 66 (1997), pp. 57-62
[7]
G.A. Fava, E. Tomba, N. Sonino.
Clinimetrics: the science of clinical measurements.
Int J Clin Pract, 66 (2012), pp. 11-15
[8]
J. Pijpe, G.W. van Imhoff, F.K.L. Spijkervet, J.L.N. Roodenburg, G.J. Wolbink, K. Mansour, et al.
Rituximab treatment in patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome: an open-label phase II study.
Arthritis Rheum, 52 (2005), pp. 2740-2750
[9]
V. Devauchelle-Pensec, Y. Pennec, J. Morvan, J.O. Pers, C. Daridon, S. Jousse-Joulin, et al.
Improvement of Sjögren's syndrome after two infusions of rituximab (anti-CD20).
Arthritis Rheum, 57 (2007), pp. 310-317
[10]
C. Vitali, G. Palombi, C. Baldini, M. Benucci, S. Bombardieri, M. Covelli, et al.
Sjögren's syndrome disease damage index and disease activity index: scoring systems for the assessment of disease damage and disease activity in Sjögren's syndrome, derived from an analysis of a cohort of Italian patients.
Arthritis Rheum, 56 (2007), pp. 2223-2231
[11]
N. Sutcliffe, T. Stoll, S. Pyke, D.A. Isenberg.
Functional disability and end organ damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), SLE and Sjögren's syndrome (SS), and primary SS.
J Rheumatol, 25 (1998), pp. 63-68
[12]
C. Vitali, S. Bombardieri, R. Jonsson, H.M. Moutsopoulos, E.L. Alexander, S.E. Carsons, et al.
Classification criteria for Sjögren's syndrome: a revised version of the European criteria proposed by the American-European Consensus Group.
Ann Rheum Dis, 61 (2002), pp. 554-558
[13]
C. Vitali, W. Bencivelli, D.A. Isenberg, J.S. Smolen, M.L. Snaith, M. Sciuto, et al.
Disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus: report of the Consensus Study Group of the European Workshop for Rheumatology Research. II. Identification of the variables indicative of disease activity and their use in the development of an activity score. The European Consensus Study Group for Disease Activity in SLE.
Clin Exp Rheumatol, 10 (1992), pp. 541-547
[14]
A. Campar, D.A. Isenberg.
Primary Sjögren's syndrome activity and damage indices comparison.
Eur J Clin Invest, 40 (2010), pp. 636-644
[15]
A.V. Goules, A.G. Tzioufas, H.M. Moutsopoulos.
Classification criteria of Sjögren's syndrome.
J Autoimmun, 48–49 (2014), pp. 42-45
[16]
R.J. Barry, N. Sutcliffe, D.A. Isenberg, E. Price, F. Goldblatt, M. Adler, et al.
The Sjögren's Syndrome Damage Index – a damage index for use in clinical trials and observational studies in primary Sjögren's syndrome.
Rheumatology (Oxford), 47 (2008), pp. 1193-1198
[17]
D. Gladman, E. Ginzler, C. Goldsmith, P. Fortin, M. Liang, J. Sánchez-Guerrero, et al.
The development and initial validation of the systemic lupus international collaborating clinics/American College of Rheumatology damage index for systemic lupus erythematosus.
Arthritis Rheum, 39 (1996), pp. 363-369
[18]
G. Hernández-Molina, T. Sánchez-Hernández.
Clinimetric methods in Sjögren's syndrome.
Semin Arthritis Rheum, 42 (2013), pp. 627-639
[19]
R. Seror, E. Theander, H. Bootsma, S.J. Bowman, A. Tzioufas, J.E. Gottenberg, et al.
Outcome measures for primary Sjögren's syndrome: a comprehensive review.
J Autoimmun, 51 (2014), pp. 51-56
[20]
S.J. Bowman, N. Sutcliffe, D.A. Isenberg, F. Goldblatt, M. Adler, E. Price, et al.
Sjögren's Systemic Clinical Activity Index (SCAI) – a systemic disease activity measure for use in clinical trials in primary Sjögren's syndrome.
Rheumatology (Oxford), 46 (2007), pp. 1845-1851
[21]
R. Seror, P. Ravaud, S.J. Bowman, G. Baron, A. Tzioufas, E. Theander, et al.
EULAR Sjögren's syndrome disease activity index: development of a consensus systemic disease activity index for primary Sjögren's syndrome.
Ann Rheum Dis, 69 (2010), pp. 1103-1109
[22]
R. Seror, S.J. Bowman, P. Brito-Zeron, E. Theander, H. Bootsma, A. Tzioufas, et al.
EULAR Sjögren's syndrome disease activity index (ESSDAI): a user guide.
RMD Open, 1 (2015), pp. 1-9
[23]
R. Seror, X. Mariette, S. Bowman, G. Baron, J.E. Gottenberg, H. Boostma, et al.
Accurate detection of changes in disease activity in primary Sjögren's syndrome by the European League Against Rheumatism Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken), 62 (2010), pp. 551-558
[24]
R. Seror, E. Theander, J.G. Brun, M. Ramos-Casals, V. Valim, T. Dörner, et al.
Validation of EULAR primary Sjögren's syndrome disease activity (ESSDAI) and Patient indexes (ESSPRI).
Ann Rheum Dis, 74 (2015), pp. 859-866
[25]
L. Quartuccio, S. Salvin, M. Fabris, M. Maset, E. Pontarini, M. Isola, et al.
BLyS upregulation in Sjögren's syndrome associated with lymphoproliferative disorders, higher ESSDAI score and B-cell clonal expansion in the salivary glands.
Rheumatology (Oxford), 52 (2013), pp. 276-281
[26]
P. Brito-Zerón, B. Kostov, R. Solans, G. Fraile, C. Suárez-Cuervo, A. Casanovas, et al.
Systemic activity and mortality in primary Sjögren syndrome: predicting survival using the EULAR-SS Disease Activity Index (ESSDAI) in 1045 patients.
Ann Rheum Dis, 75 (2016), pp. 348-355
[27]
R. Seror, J.E. Gottenberg, V. Devauchelle-Pensec, J.J. Dubost, V. Le Guern, G. Hayem, et al.
European League against Rheumatism Sjögren's syndrome disease activity index and European League against Rheumatism Sjögren's syndrome patient-reported index: a complete picture of primary Sjögren's syndrome patients.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken), 65 (2013), pp. 1358-1364
[28]
R. Seror, P. Ravaud, X. Mariette, H. Bootsma, E. Theander, A. Hansen, et al.
EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index (ESSPRI): development of a consensus patient index for primary Sjögren's syndrome.
Ann Rheum Dis, 70 (2011), pp. 968-972
[29]
A.P. Risselada, A.A. Kruize, J.W.J. Bijlsma.
Clinical applicability of the EULAR Sjögren's syndrome disease activity index: a cumulative ESSDAI score adds in describing disease severity.
[30]
J.-E. Gottenberg, R. Seror, C. Miceli-Richard, J. Benessiano, V. Devauchelle-Pensec, P. Dieude, et al.
Serum levels of beta2-microglobulin and free light chains of immunoglobulins are associated with systemic disease activity in primary Sjögren's syndrome. Data at enrollment in the prospective ASSESS cohort.
[31]
R. Seror, P. Meiners, G. Baron, H. Bootsma, S.J. Bowman, C. Vitali, et al.
Development of the ClinESSDAI: a clinical score without biological domain. A tool for biological studies.
Ann Rheum Dis, 75 (2016), pp. 1945-1950
[32]
A. Dumusc, W.-F. Ng, K. James, B. Griffiths, E. Price, C. Pease, et al.
Comparison of ESSDAI and ClinESSDAI in potential optimisation of trial outcomes in primary Sjögren's syndrome: examination of data from the UK Primary Sjögren's Syndrome Registry.
Swiss Med Wkly, 148 (2018), pp. w14588
[33]
V.L. Pascoe, M. Enamandram, K.C. Corey, C.E. Cheng, E.J. Javorsky, S.M. Sung, et al.
Using the physician global assessment in a clinical setting to measure and track patient outcomes.
JAMA Dermatol, 151 (2015), pp. 375-381
[34]
D.T. Felson, J.J. Anderson, M. Boers, C. Bombardier, M. Chernoff, B. Fried, et al.
The American College of Rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. The Committee on Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials.
Arthritis Rheum, 36 (1993), pp. 729-740
[35]
Y. Kaneko, T. Takeuchi, Z. Cai, M. Sato, K. Awakura, C. Gaich, et al.
Determinants of Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a post hoc analysis of overall and Japanese results from phase 3 clinical trials.
Mod Rheumatol, 28 (2018), pp. 960-967
[36]
C. Desthieux, A. Hermet, B. Granger, B. Fautrel, L. Gossec.
Patient–physician discordance in global assessment in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review with meta-analysis.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken), 68 (2016), pp. 1767-1773
[37]
E. Nikiphorou, H. Radner, K. Chatzidionysiou, C. Desthieux, C. Zabalan, Y. van Eijk-Hustings, et al.
Patient global assessment in measuring disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis: a review of the literature.
Arthritis Res Ther, 18 (2016), pp. 251
[38]
S.W. Chung, J. Hur, Y.-J. Ha, E.H. Kang, J.Y. Hyon, H.-J. Lee, et al.
Impact of sleep quality on clinical features of primary Sjögren's syndrome.
Korean J Intern Med, (2018),
[39]
P. Brito-Zerón, E. Theander, C. Baldini, R. Seror, S. Retamozo, L. Quartuccio, et al.
Early diagnosis of primary Sjögren's syndrome: EULAR-SS task force clinical recommendations.
Expert Rev Clin Immunol, 12 (2016), pp. 137-156
[40]
J.G. Yanzi, O.L. Cerda, M. Landi, C.A. Zaffarana, E.E. Schneeberger, G. Citera.
Factores que influyen en las diferencias entre la evaluación global de la actividad de la enfermedad por el paciente y por el médico en pacientes con artritis psoriásica.
Rev Arg Reum, 27 (2016), pp. 10-14
[41]
S.W.H. Dandorfer, J. Rech, B. Manger, G. Schett, M. Englbrecht.
Differences in the patient's and the physician's perspective of disease in psoriatic arthritis.
Semin Arthritis Rheum, 42 (2012), pp. 32-41
[42]
G. Nicolau, M.M. Yogui, T.L. Vallochi, R.J. Gianini, I.M.M. Laurindo, G.S. Novaes.
Sources of discrepancy in patient and physician global assessments of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity.
J Rheumatol, 31 (2004), pp. 1293-1296
[43]
J.L. Barton, J. Imboden, J. Graf, D. Glidden, E.H. Yelin, D. Schillinger.
Patient-physician discordance in assessments of global disease severity in rheumatoid arthritis.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken), 62 (2010), pp. 857-864
[44]
S.J. Bowman, J. Hamburger, A. Richards, R.J. Barry, S. Rauz.
Patient–reported outcomes in primary Sjögren's syndrome: comparison of the long and short versions of the Profile of Fatigue and Discomfort – Sicca Symptoms Inventory.
Rheumatology (Oxford), 48 (2008), pp. 140-143
[45]
M. Tishler, I. Yaron, I. Shirazi, M. Yaron.
Hydroxychloroquine treatment for primary Sjögren's syndrome: its effect on salivary and serum inflammatory markers.
Ann Rheum Dis, 58 (1999), pp. 253-256
[46]
S.T. Miyamoto, M.A. Paganotti, Serrano ÉV, R.A. Giovelli, V. Valim.
Avaliação da fadiga e da secura na síndrome de Sjögren primária: versão brasileira do “Profile of Fatigue and Discomfort – Sicca Symptoms Inventory (short form) (Profad-SSI-SF)”.
Rev Bras Reumatol, 55 (2015), pp. 113-122
[47]
S.J. Bowman, D.A. Booth, R.G. Platts.
Measurement of fatigue and discomfort in primary Sjögren's syndrome using a new questionnaire tool.
Rheumatology (Oxford), 43 (2004), pp. 758-764
[48]
K. Bjerrum, J.U. Prause.
Primary Sjögren's syndrome: a subjective description of the disease.
Clin Exp Rheumatol, 8 (1990), pp. 283-288
[49]
M.A. Paganotti, V. Valim, É.V. Serrano, S.T. Miyamoto, R.A. Giovelli, M.C.L.F.S. Santos.
Validação e propriedades psicométricas do Eular Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index (ESSPRI) para a língua portuguesa.
Rev Bras Reumatol, 55 (2015), pp. 439-445
[50]
S.J. Bowman, D.A. Booth, R.G. Platts, A. Field, J. Rostron.
Validation of the Sicca Symptoms Inventory for clinical studies of Sjögren's syndrome.
J Rheumatol, 30 (2003), pp. 1259-1266
[51]
J.K. Anderson, L. Zimmerman, L. Caplan, K. Michaud.
Measures of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity: Patient (PtGA) and Provider (PrGA) Global Assessment of Disease Activity, Disease Activity Score (DAS) and Disease Activity Score with 28-Joint Counts (DAS28), Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI).
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken), 63 (2011), pp. 14-36

Please cite this article as: Posso-Osorio I, Méndez-Rayo T, Soto D, Nieto-Aristizábal I, Cañas CA, Tobón GJ, et al. Clinimetría en el síndrome de Sjögren. Rev Colomb Reumatol. 2019;26:262–269.

Copyright © 2019. Asociación Colombiana de Reumatología
Article options
Tools