Re: Prediction of radiological outcome in early RA--GINA

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the info, . Actually, I've been RF positive from the

very beginning, but my doctors were hesitant to dx ra at first, I

think, because I didn't have some of the typical symptoms. Before

last April, I didn't really have the morning stiffness, and I still

have never had hot, red joints. (My primary doctor seems to believe

that you can't have RA without having red joints. Thanks goodness I

go to a rheumy, too!) I had the anti-ccp in April, which was about

the same time I developed more " typical " symptoms (i.e., lots of

stiffness in the morning and more pain), so I'm sure that had as much

to do with my dx changing to RA as the anti-ccp test.

> Hello, !

>

> Many RA lab test results are affected by treatment. Several of the

tests

> may be used to monitor fluctuations in disease activity, but there

> usually isn't a need to use more than one for that purpose. Why

spend

> time on and money for two or more tests if together they won't

provide

> better information than one alone?

>

> For example, RF and sed rate values may correlate well with disease

> activity, but using both won't necessarily tell you more than using

just

> one of them. Usually the cheaper and easier to perform sed rate is

> sufficient. Some doctors use CRP instead of the sed rate.

>

> So, once the RA diagnosis is certain, it isn't necessary to repeat

the

> RF and/or anti-CCP test.

>

> Since the anti-CCP test is relatively new, we are still learning

about

> it, but the conclusion of some of the researchers involved in the

TIRA

> project did state:

>

> " A similar proportion of positive anti-CCP antibody results was

found 3

> years after the diagnosis of RA (59%) compared with baseline (64%),

but

> on average at a significantly decreased level. The number of

patients

> not treated with DMARDs during these years, however, was too small

to

> evaluate any influence of DMARD treatment on the levels of anti-CCP

> antibodies. "

>

> At the moment, one of the best uses of the anti-CCP test is in a

case

> such as yours - to help confirm RA in a person who is RF-negative.

>

>

>

>

> I'll tell you where to go!

>

> Mayo Clinic in Rochester

> http://www.mayoclinic.org/rochester

>

> s Hopkins Medicine

> http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org

>

>

> [ ] Re: Prediction of radiological outcome in

early

> RA: role of anti-CCP

>

>

> > , I have a related question. Do you know if the anti-CCP test

> > results are affected by treatment or lack of treatment (like

having

> > your sed rate decrease once you start treatment)? OR is it

something

> > you either have or don't have, so if your test comes back positive

> > there's really no reason to test again? I think the anti-ccp was

the

> > test that led my doctor to change my dx from some unidentified

> > arthritis to RA.

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the info, . Actually, I've been RF positive from the

very beginning, but my doctors were hesitant to dx ra at first, I

think, because I didn't have some of the typical symptoms. Before

last April, I didn't really have the morning stiffness, and I still

have never had hot, red joints. (My primary doctor seems to believe

that you can't have RA without having red joints. Thanks goodness I

go to a rheumy, too!) I had the anti-ccp in April, which was about

the same time I developed more " typical " symptoms (i.e., lots of

stiffness in the morning and more pain), so I'm sure that had as much

to do with my dx changing to RA as the anti-ccp test.

> Hello, !

>

> Many RA lab test results are affected by treatment. Several of the

tests

> may be used to monitor fluctuations in disease activity, but there

> usually isn't a need to use more than one for that purpose. Why

spend

> time on and money for two or more tests if together they won't

provide

> better information than one alone?

>

> For example, RF and sed rate values may correlate well with disease

> activity, but using both won't necessarily tell you more than using

just

> one of them. Usually the cheaper and easier to perform sed rate is

> sufficient. Some doctors use CRP instead of the sed rate.

>

> So, once the RA diagnosis is certain, it isn't necessary to repeat

the

> RF and/or anti-CCP test.

>

> Since the anti-CCP test is relatively new, we are still learning

about

> it, but the conclusion of some of the researchers involved in the

TIRA

> project did state:

>

> " A similar proportion of positive anti-CCP antibody results was

found 3

> years after the diagnosis of RA (59%) compared with baseline (64%),

but

> on average at a significantly decreased level. The number of

patients

> not treated with DMARDs during these years, however, was too small

to

> evaluate any influence of DMARD treatment on the levels of anti-CCP

> antibodies. "

>

> At the moment, one of the best uses of the anti-CCP test is in a

case

> such as yours - to help confirm RA in a person who is RF-negative.

>

>

>

>

> I'll tell you where to go!

>

> Mayo Clinic in Rochester

> http://www.mayoclinic.org/rochester

>

> s Hopkins Medicine

> http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org

>

>

> [ ] Re: Prediction of radiological outcome in

early

> RA: role of anti-CCP

>

>

> > , I have a related question. Do you know if the anti-CCP test

> > results are affected by treatment or lack of treatment (like

having

> > your sed rate decrease once you start treatment)? OR is it

something

> > you either have or don't have, so if your test comes back positive

> > there's really no reason to test again? I think the anti-ccp was

the

> > test that led my doctor to change my dx from some unidentified

> > arthritis to RA.

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

That's a different story, ! Sorry for the incorrect assumption

about your RF.

RA is largely a clinical diagnosis, so I can understand the hesitation

on the part of your doctors if you didn't have any stiffness. I'm

assuming that you had swollen joints though. What about x-ray evidence

of RA?

Anti-CCP is more specific than RF, but the some RF tests are pretty

good. Was it the case where your RF was only barely positive?

I'll tell you where to go!

Mayo Clinic in Rochester

http://www.mayoclinic.org/rochester

s Hopkins Medicine

http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org

[ ] Re: Prediction of radiological outcome in early

RA--GINA

> Thanks for the info, . Actually, I've been RF positive from the

> very beginning, but my doctors were hesitant to dx ra at first, I

> think, because I didn't have some of the typical symptoms. Before

> last April, I didn't really have the morning stiffness, and I still

> have never had hot, red joints. (My primary doctor seems to believe

> that you can't have RA without having red joints. Thanks goodness I

> go to a rheumy, too!) I had the anti-ccp in April, which was about

> the same time I developed more " typical " symptoms (i.e., lots of

> stiffness in the morning and more pain), so I'm sure that had as much

> to do with my dx changing to RA as the anti-ccp test.

>

>

[Guest guest]

That's a different story, ! Sorry for the incorrect assumption

about your RF.

RA is largely a clinical diagnosis, so I can understand the hesitation

on the part of your doctors if you didn't have any stiffness. I'm

assuming that you had swollen joints though. What about x-ray evidence

of RA?

Anti-CCP is more specific than RF, but the some RF tests are pretty

good. Was it the case where your RF was only barely positive?

I'll tell you where to go!

Mayo Clinic in Rochester

http://www.mayoclinic.org/rochester

s Hopkins Medicine

http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org

[ ] Re: Prediction of radiological outcome in early

RA--GINA

> Thanks for the info, . Actually, I've been RF positive from the

> very beginning, but my doctors were hesitant to dx ra at first, I

> think, because I didn't have some of the typical symptoms. Before

> last April, I didn't really have the morning stiffness, and I still

> have never had hot, red joints. (My primary doctor seems to believe

> that you can't have RA without having red joints. Thanks goodness I

> go to a rheumy, too!) I had the anti-ccp in April, which was about

> the same time I developed more " typical " symptoms (i.e., lots of

> stiffness in the morning and more pain), so I'm sure that had as much

> to do with my dx changing to RA as the anti-ccp test.

>

>

[Guest guest]

From the beginning (April 2003), I had swelling on and off in my

hands, wrists, and later in my feet. My primary doctor tested me for

everything that could cause joint pain, I guess, and I had positive

results for both RA and Lupus. I'm thinking the RF result was about

59, does that sound right? My doctor told me, though, that that

didn't mean I had either disease, and that he was inclined to think

that I didn't because my symptoms didn't really match up. (Like I

said earlier, I didn't have red warm joints, just swelling that

looked like a sprain or something, and other than the joint pain, I

had nothing that looked like lupus.) He thought that the arthritis

might be a reaction to an infection or something like that and that

it might just go away. Which it almost seemed to be doing for a

while.

This year, though, it flared again in February and I did develop more

typical symptoms, like the morning stiffness. The only xray I've had

was done about 9 months ago and it showed no joint erosion at that

time.

I started going to a rheumatologist in January, and it wasn't until

April or May that he started referring to it as RA.

You know, it used to be really important for me to believe that I had

some other type arthritis and not rheumatoid. What I know now is a)

I obviously have some type of autoimmune condition and b)methotrexate

helps it immensely. So I'm not so concerned about what they call it

anymore. :-)

> That's a different story, ! Sorry for the incorrect assumption

> about your RF.

>

> RA is largely a clinical diagnosis, so I can understand the

hesitation

> on the part of your doctors if you didn't have any stiffness. I'm

> assuming that you had swollen joints though. What about x-ray

evidence

> of RA?

>

> Anti-CCP is more specific than RF, but the some RF tests are pretty

> good. Was it the case where your RF was only barely positive?

>

>

>

>

> I'll tell you where to go!

>

> Mayo Clinic in Rochester

> http://www.mayoclinic.org/rochester

>

> s Hopkins Medicine

> http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org

>

>

> [ ] Re: Prediction of radiological outcome in

early

> RA--GINA

>

>

> > Thanks for the info, . Actually, I've been RF positive from

the

> > very beginning, but my doctors were hesitant to dx ra at first, I

> > think, because I didn't have some of the typical symptoms.

Before

> > last April, I didn't really have the morning stiffness, and I

still

> > have never had hot, red joints. (My primary doctor seems to

believe

> > that you can't have RA without having red joints. Thanks

goodness I

> > go to a rheumy, too!) I had the anti-ccp in April, which was about

> > the same time I developed more " typical " symptoms (i.e., lots of

> > stiffness in the morning and more pain), so I'm sure that had as

much

> > to do with my dx changing to RA as the anti-ccp test.

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

From the beginning (April 2003), I had swelling on and off in my

hands, wrists, and later in my feet. My primary doctor tested me for

everything that could cause joint pain, I guess, and I had positive

results for both RA and Lupus. I'm thinking the RF result was about

59, does that sound right? My doctor told me, though, that that

didn't mean I had either disease, and that he was inclined to think

that I didn't because my symptoms didn't really match up. (Like I

said earlier, I didn't have red warm joints, just swelling that

looked like a sprain or something, and other than the joint pain, I

had nothing that looked like lupus.) He thought that the arthritis

might be a reaction to an infection or something like that and that

it might just go away. Which it almost seemed to be doing for a

while.

This year, though, it flared again in February and I did develop more

typical symptoms, like the morning stiffness. The only xray I've had

was done about 9 months ago and it showed no joint erosion at that

time.

I started going to a rheumatologist in January, and it wasn't until

April or May that he started referring to it as RA.

You know, it used to be really important for me to believe that I had

some other type arthritis and not rheumatoid. What I know now is a)

I obviously have some type of autoimmune condition and b)methotrexate

helps it immensely. So I'm not so concerned about what they call it

anymore. :-)

> That's a different story, ! Sorry for the incorrect assumption

> about your RF.

>

> RA is largely a clinical diagnosis, so I can understand the

hesitation

> on the part of your doctors if you didn't have any stiffness. I'm

> assuming that you had swollen joints though. What about x-ray

evidence

> of RA?

>

> Anti-CCP is more specific than RF, but the some RF tests are pretty

> good. Was it the case where your RF was only barely positive?

>

>

>

>

> I'll tell you where to go!

>

> Mayo Clinic in Rochester

> http://www.mayoclinic.org/rochester

>

> s Hopkins Medicine

> http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org

>

>

> [ ] Re: Prediction of radiological outcome in

early

> RA--GINA

>

>

> > Thanks for the info, . Actually, I've been RF positive from

the

> > very beginning, but my doctors were hesitant to dx ra at first, I

> > think, because I didn't have some of the typical symptoms.

Before

> > last April, I didn't really have the morning stiffness, and I

still

> > have never had hot, red joints. (My primary doctor seems to

believe

> > that you can't have RA without having red joints. Thanks

goodness I

> > go to a rheumy, too!) I had the anti-ccp in April, which was about

> > the same time I developed more " typical " symptoms (i.e., lots of

> > stiffness in the morning and more pain), so I'm sure that had as

much

> > to do with my dx changing to RA as the anti-ccp test.

> >

> >