Giant cell arteritis and its mimics: A comparison of three patient cohorts

Development of a diagnostic prediction model for giant cell arteritis by sequential application of Southend Giant Cell Arteritis Probability Score and ultrasonography: a prospective multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Giant cell arteritis is a critically ischaemic disease with protean manifestations that require urgent diagnosis and treatment. European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) recommendations advocate ultrasonography as the first investigation for suspected giant cell arteritis. We developed a prediction tool that sequentially combines clinical assessment, as determined by the Southend Giant Cell Arteritis Probability Score (SGCAPS), with results of quantitative ultrasonography.

METHODS

This prospective, multicentre, inception cohort study included consecutive patients with suspected new onset giant cell arteritis referred to fast-track clinics (seven centres in Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and UK). Final clinical diagnosis was established at 6 months. SGCAPS and quantitative ultrasonography of temporal and axillary arteries with three scores (ie, halo count, halo score, and OMERACT GCA Score [OGUS]) were performed at diagnosis. We developed prediction models for diagnosis of giant cell arteritis by multivariable logistic regression analysis with SGCAPS and each of the three ultrasonographic scores as predicting variables. We obtained intraclass correlation coefficient for inter-rater and intra-rater reliability in a separate patient-based reliability exercise with five patients and five observers.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 1, 2019, and June 30, 2022, we recruited and followed up 229 patients (150 [66%] women and 79 [34%] men; mean age 71 years [SD 10]), of whom 84 were diagnosed with giant cell arteritis and 145 with giant cell arteritis mimics (controls) at 6 months. SGCAPS and all three ultrasonographic scores discriminated well between patients with and without giant cell arteritis. A reliability exercise showed that the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability was high for all three ultrasonographic scores. The prediction model combining SGCAPS with the halo count, which was termed HAS-GCA score, was the most accurate model, with an optimism-adjusted C statistic of 0·969 (95% CI 0·952 to 0·990). The HAS-GCA score could classify 169 (74%) of 229 patients into either the low or high probability groups, with misclassification observed in two (2%) of 105 patients in the low probability group and two (3%) of 64 of patients in the high probability group. A nomogram for easy application of the score in daily practice was created.

INTERPRETATION

A prediction tool for giant cell arteritis (the HAS-GCA score), combining SGCAPS and the halo count, reliably confirms and excludes giant cell arteritis from giant cell arteritis mimics in fast-track clinics. These findings require confirmation in an independent, multicentre study.

FUNDING

Royal College of Physicians of Ireland, FOREUM.

Predictive Factors for Biopsy-Negative Giant Cell Arteritis and Alternative Diagnoses in a Neuro-Ophthalmology Context

Giant cell arteritis is a challenging diagnosis for patients given the high prevalence of negative temporal artery biopsies (TAB). Despite the lack of histopathological evidence of giant cell arteritis in the TAB, patients can still have TAB-negative giant cell arteritis. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the predictors for TAB-negative giant cell arteritis and the alternative diagnosis of biopsy-negative patients without a giant cell arteritis diagnosis. A retrospective electronic database review of all TABs performed at the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital from February 2015 to May 2020. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictive factors for a diagnosis of TAB-negative giant cell arteritis. In all cases, a clinical diagnosis of TAB-negative giant cell arteritis was determined by a neuro-ophthalmologist. Alternative diagnoses for negative TABs were identified and explored. A total of 368 TABs were analysed with 287 (78%) negative for histopathological evidence of GCA. Twenty-seven (9.4%) patients were diagnosed and treated as TAB-negative giant cell arteritis. The clinical predictors of a TAB-negative giant cell arteritis diagnosis were the presence of jaw claudication (OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.10-6.98) and CRP (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.03). Alternative diagnoses included non-specific headache, non-arteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy, retinal vessel occlusions, and ocular nerve palsies. Predictive factors for a diagnosis of TAB-negative giant cell arteritis were jaw claudication and an elevated CRP. Several alternative diagnoses can be considered for patients with a negative TAB in a neuro-ophthalmology context.

Quality standards for the care of people with giant cell arteritis in secondary care

OBJECTIVE

GCA is the commonest primary systemic vasculitis in adults, with significant health economic costs and societal burden. There is wide variation in access to secondary care GCA services, with 34% of hospitals in England not having any formal clinical pathway. Quality standards provide levers for change to improve services.

METHODS

The multidisciplinary steering committee were asked to anonymously put forward up to five aspects of service essential for best practice. Responses were qualitatively analysed to identify common themes, subsequently condensed into domain headings, and ranked in order of importance. Quality standards and metrics for each domain were drafted, requiring a minimum 75% agreement.

RESULTS

13 themes were identified from the initial suggestions. Nine quality standards with auditable metrics were developed from the top 10 themes. Patient Access, glucocorticoid use, pathways, ultrasonography, temporal artery biopsy, PET scan access, rheumatology/ophthalmology expertise, education, multidisciplinary working have all been covered in these quality standards. Access to care is a strand that has run through each of the developed standards. An audit tool was developed as part of this exercise.

CONCLUSION

These are the first consensus auditable quality standards developed by clinicians from rheumatology and ophthalmology, nursing representatives and involvement of a patient charity. We hope that these standards will be adopted by commissioning bodies to provide levers for change from the improvement of patient care of individuals with GCA.

Disease stratification in GCA and PMR: state of the art and future perspectives

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) and polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) are closely related conditions characterized by systemic inflammation, a predominant IL-6 signature, an excellent response to glucocorticoids, a tendency to a chronic and relapsing course, and older age of the affected population. This Review highlights the emerging view that these diseases should be approached as linked conditions, unified under the term GCA-PMR spectrum disease (GPSD). In addition, GCA and PMR should be seen as non-monolithic conditions, with different risks of developing acute ischaemic complications and chronic vascular and tissue damage, different responses to available therapies and disparate relapse rates. A comprehensive stratification strategy for GPSD, guided by clinical findings, imaging and laboratory data, facilitates appropriate therapy and cost-effective use of health-economic resources. Patients presenting with predominant cranial symptoms and vascular involvement, who usually have a borderline elevation of inflammatory markers, are at an increased risk of sight loss in early disease but have fewer relapses in the long term, whereas the opposite is observed in patients with predominant large-vessel vasculitis. How the involvement of peripheral joint structures affects disease outcomes remains uncertain and understudied. In the future, all cases of new-onset GPSD should undergo early disease stratification, with their management adapted accordingly.