↓ Skip to main content

A single determination of C-reactive protein does not suffice to declare a patient with a diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis ‘CRP-negative’

Overview of attention for article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A single determination of C-reactive protein does not suffice to declare a patient with a diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis ‘CRP-negative’
Published in
Arthritis Research & Therapy, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13075-018-1707-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Landewé, Tommi Nurminen, Owen Davies, Dominique Baeten

Abstract

To be eligible to receive treatment with an anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF), non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) patients require either elevated levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) (CRP > upper limit of normal (ULN)) or magnetic resonance imaging assessment showing inflammation of the sacroiliac joints, in addition to meeting criteria for high disease activity. Many axSpA patients are classified as 'CRP-negative', or CRP normal, despite having levels close to the ULN, and are therefore formally ineligible for treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the likelihood of a CRP test indicating elevated levels in axSpA patients that have previously tested CRP normal. RAPID-axSpA (NCT01087762) enrolled patients who were either magnetic resonance imaging positive or had elevated CRP (> ULN: 7.9 mg/L). CRP data from the double-blind period for placebo-randomised patients until re-randomisation to certolizumab pegol (week 16 for ASAS20 non-responders/week 24 for ASAS20 responders) were analysed. CRP was assessed at screening, baseline, and nine time points to week 24. Linear mixed models were used to investigate time trends, variability, and correlations of CRP data. Of 106 placebo-randomised patients with baseline CRP assessments, 26 (25%) tested CRP normal at baseline, of whom 13 (50%) had ≥ 1 test indicating elevated CRP to week 16. Of 80/106 (75%) patients with elevated baseline CRP, 25 (31%) had ≥ 1 normal CRP test to week 16. Linear mixed models did not reveal changes in mean CRP across placebo patients from baseline to week 24. In axSpA patients with CRP < ULN the CRP test should be repeated after ≥ 4 weeks as there is a substantial chance of finding a positive result for elevated CRP at subsequent testing, thereby allowing the patient access to treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01087762 . Registered on 16 March 2010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 20 51%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 21 54%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 September 2018.
All research outputs
#2,064,014
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#344
of 3,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,051
of 348,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#8
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,075 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.