Litcius/Paper detail

ANCA Status or Clinical Phenotype — What Counts More?

Martin Windpessl, Erica L. Bettac, Philipp Gauckler, Jae Il Shin, Duvuru Geetha, Andreas Kronbichler

2021Current Rheumatology Reports27 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is ongoing debate concerning the classification of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis. That is, whether classification should be based on the serotype (proteinase 3 (PR3)- or myeloperoxidase (MPO)-ANCA) or on the clinical phenotype (granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) or microscopic polyangiitis (MPA)). To add clarity, this review focused on integration of the most recent literature. RECENT FINDINGS: Large clinical trials have provided evidence that a serology-based risk assessment for relapses is more predictive than distinction based on the phenotype. Research conducted in the past decade indicated that a serology-based approach more closely resembles the genetic associations, the clinical presentation (i.e., lung involvement), biomarker biology, treatment response, and is also predicting comorbidities (such as cardiovascular death). Our review highlights that a serology-based approach could replace a phenotype-based approach to classify ANCA-associated vasculitides. In future, clinical trials and observational studies will presumably focus on this distinction and, as such, translate into a "personalized medicine."

Topics & Concepts

MedicineMicroscopic polyangiitisProteinase 3SerologyGranulomatosis with polyangiitisBiomarkerInternal medicineClinical trialVasculitisRheumatologyObservational studyAnti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodyPhenotypePathologyImmunologyIntensive care medicineDiseaseAntibodyBiochemistryGeneChemistryVasculitis and related conditionsCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and AngioedemaSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity Research
ANCA Status or Clinical Phenotype — What Counts More? | Litcius