Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Ana Maria Orbai is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Ana Maria Orbai.


Arthritis & Rheumatism | 2012

Derivation and validation of the systemic lupus international collaborating clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus

Michelle Petri; Ana Maria Orbai; Graciela S. Alarcón; Caroline Gordon; Joan T. Merrill; Paul R. Fortin; Ian N. Bruce; David A. Isenberg; Daniel J. Wallace; Ola Nived; Gunnar Sturfelt; Rosalind Ramsey-Goldman; Sang-Cheol Bae; John G. Hanly; Jorge Sanchez-Guerrero; Ann E. Clarke; Cynthia Aranow; Susan Manzi; Murray B. Urowitz; Dafna D. Gladman; Kenneth C. Kalunian; Melissa Costner; Victoria P. Werth; Asad Zoma; Sasha Bernatsky; Guillermo Ruiz-Irastorza; Munther A. Khamashta; Søren Jacobsen; Jill P. Buyon; Peter Maddison

OBJECTIVE The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) group revised and validated the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria in order to improve clinical relevance, meet stringent methodology requirements, and incorporate new knowledge regarding the immunology of SLE. METHODS The classification criteria were derived from a set of 702 expert-rated patient scenarios. Recursive partitioning was used to derive an initial rule that was simplified and refined based on SLICC physician consensus. The SLICC group validated the classification criteria in a new validation sample of 690 new expert-rated patient scenarios. RESULTS Seventeen criteria were identified. In the derivation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (49 versus 70; P = 0.0082) and had greater sensitivity (94% versus 86%; P < 0.0001) and equal specificity (92% versus 93%; P = 0.39). In the validation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (62 versus 74; P = 0.24) and had greater sensitivity (97% versus 83%; P < 0.0001) but lower specificity (84% versus 96%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION The new SLICC classification criteria performed well in a large set of patient scenarios rated by experts. According to the SLICC rule for the classification of SLE, the patient must satisfy at least 4 criteria, including at least one clinical criterion and one immunologic criterion OR the patient must have biopsy-proven lupus nephritis in the presence of antinuclear antibodies or anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies.


Arthritis & Rheumatism | 2016

Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis 2015 Treatment Recommendations for Psoriatic Arthritis.

Laura C. Coates; Arthur Kavanaugh; Philip J. Mease; Enrique R. Soriano; Maria Laura Acosta-Felquer; April W. Armstrong; Wilson Bautista-Molano; Wolf-Henning Boehncke; Willemina Campbell; Alberto Cauli; Luis R. Espinoza; Oliver FitzGerald; Dafna D. Gladman; Alice B. Gottlieb; Philip S. Helliwell; M. Elaine Husni; Thorvardur Jon Love; Ennio Lubrano; Neil McHugh; Peter Nash; Alexis Ogdie; Ana Maria Orbai; Andrew Parkinson; Denis O'Sullivan; Cheryl F. Rosen; Sergio Schwartzman; Evan L. Siegel; Sergio Toloza; William Tuong; Christopher T. Ritchlin

To update the 2009 Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) treatment recommendations for the spectrum of manifestations affecting patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).


Lupus | 2015

Anti-C1q antibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus

Ana Maria Orbai; Lennart Truedsson; Gunnar Sturfelt; Ola Nived; Hong Fang; Graciela S. Alarcón; Caroline Gordon; Joan T. Merrill; Paul R. Fortin; Ian N. Bruce; Da Isenberg; Daniel J. Wallace; Rosalind Ramsey-Goldman; Sang-Cheol Bae; John G. Hanly; Jorge Sanchez-Guerrero; Ann E. Clarke; Cynthia Aranow; Susan Manzi; Murray B. Urowitz; Dafna D. Gladman; Kenneth C. Kalunian; Melissa Costner; Victoria P. Werth; Asad Zoma; Sasha Bernatsky; Guillermo Ruiz-Irastorza; Munther A. Khamashta; Søren Jacobsen; Jill P. Buyon

Objective Anti-C1q has been associated with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and lupus nephritis in previous studies. We studied anti-C1q specificity for SLE (vs rheumatic disease controls) and the association with SLE manifestations in an international multicenter study. Methods Information and blood samples were obtained in a cross-sectional study from patients with SLE (n = 308) and other rheumatologic diseases (n = 389) from 25 clinical sites (84% female, 68% Caucasian, 17% African descent, 8% Asian, 7% other). IgG anti-C1q against the collagen-like region was measured by ELISA. Results Prevalence of anti-C1q was 28% (86/308) in patients with SLE and 13% (49/389) in controls (OR = 2.7, 95% CI: 1.8–4, p < 0.001). Anti-C1q was associated with proteinuria (OR = 3.0, 95% CI: 1.7–5.1, p < 0.001), red cell casts (OR = 2.6, 95% CI: 1.2–5.4, p = 0.015), anti-dsDNA (OR = 3.4, 95% CI: 1.9–6.1, p < 0.001) and anti-Smith (OR = 2.8, 95% CI: 1.5–5.0, p = 0.01). Anti-C1q was independently associated with renal involvement after adjustment for demographics, ANA, anti-dsDNA and low complement (OR = 2.3, 95% CI: 1.3–4.2, p < 0.01). Simultaneously positive anti-C1q, anti-dsDNA and low complement was strongly associated with renal involvement (OR = 14.9, 95% CI: 5.8–38.4, p < 0.01). Conclusions Anti-C1q was more common in patients with SLE and those of Asian race/ethnicity. We confirmed a significant association of anti-C1q with renal involvement, independent of demographics and other serologies. Anti-C1q in combination with anti-dsDNA and low complement was the strongest serological association with renal involvement. These data support the usefulness of anti-C1q in SLE, especially in lupus nephritis.


The Journal of Rheumatology | 2014

Establishing a Core Domain Set to Measure Rheumatoid Arthritis Flares: Report of the OMERACT 11 RA Flare Workshop

Vivian P. Bykerk; Elisabeth Lie; Susan J. Bartlett; Rieke Alten; Annelies Boonen; Robin Christensen; Daniel E. Furst; Sarah Hewlett; Amye L. Leong; Anne Lyddiatt; Lyn March; James E. May; Pam Montie; Ana Maria Orbai; Christoph Pohl; Marieke Voshaar; Thasia Woodworth; Clifton O. Bingham; Ernest Choy

Objective. The OMERACT Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) Flare Group (FG) is developing a data-driven, patient-inclusive, consensus-based RA flare definition for use in clinical trials, longterm observational studies, and clinical practice. At OMERACT 11, we sought endorsement of a proposed core domain set to measure RA flare. Methods. Patient and healthcare professional (HCP) qualitative studies, focus groups, and literature review, followed by patient and HCP Delphi exercises including combined Delphi consensus at Outcome Measures in Rheumatology 10 (OMERACT 10), identified potential domains to measure flare. At OMERACT 11, breakout groups discussed key domains and instruments to measure them, and proposed a research agenda. Patients were active research partners in all focus groups and domain identification activities. Processes for domain selection and patient partner involvement were case studies for OMERACT Filter 2.0 methodology. Results. A pre-meeting combined Delphi exercise for defining flare identified 9 domains as important (> 70% consensus from patients or HCP). Four new patient-reported domains beyond those included in the RA disease activity core set were proposed for inclusion (fatigue, participation, stiffness, and self-management). The RA FG developed preliminary flare questions (PFQ) to measure domains. In combined plenary voting sessions, OMERACT 11 attendees endorsed the proposed RA core set to measure flare with ≥ 78% consensus and the addition of 3 additional domains to the research agenda for OMERACT 12. Conclusion. At OMERACT 11, a core domain set to measure RA flare was ratified and endorsed by attendees. Domain validation aligning with Filter 2.0 is ongoing in new randomized controlled clinical trials and longitudinal observational studies using existing and new instruments including a set of PFQ.


PLOS ONE | 2015

Reliability and Validity of Selected PROMIS Measures in People with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Susan J. Bartlett; Ana Maria Orbai; Trisha Duncan; Elaine DeLeon; Victoria Ruffing; Katherine Clegg-Smith; Clifton O. Bingham

Purpose To evaluate the reliability and validity of 11 PROMIS measures to assess symptoms and impacts identified as important by people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Consecutive patients (N = 177) in an observational study completed PROMIS computer adapted tests (CATs) and a short form (SF) assessing pain, fatigue, physical function, mood, sleep, and participation. We assessed test-test reliability and internal consistency using correlation and Cronbach’s alpha. We assessed convergent validity by examining Pearson correlations between PROMIS measures and existing measures of similar domains and known groups validity by comparing scores across disease activity levels using ANOVA. Results Participants were mostly female (82%) and white (83%) with mean (SD) age of 56 (13) years; 24% had ≤ high school, 29% had RA ≤ 5 years with 13% ≤ 2 years, and 22% were disabled. PROMIS Physical Function, Pain Interference and Fatigue instruments correlated moderately to strongly (rho’s ≥ 0.68) with corresponding PROs. Test-retest reliability ranged from .725–.883, and Cronbach’s alpha from .906–.991. A dose-response relationship with disease activity was evident in Physical Function with similar trends in other scales except Anger. Conclusions These data provide preliminary evidence of reliability and construct validity of PROMIS CATs to assess RA symptoms and impacts, and feasibility of use in clinical care. PROMIS instruments captured the experiences of RA patients across the broad continuum of RA symptoms and function, especially at low disease activity levels. Future research is needed to evaluate performance in relevant subgroups, assess responsiveness and identify clinically meaningful changes.


The Journal of Rheumatology | 2015

Feasibility and Domain Validation of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) Flare Core Domain Set: Report of the OMERACT 2014 RA Flare Group Plenary

Susan J. Bartlett; Vivian P. Bykerk; Roxanne Cooksey; Ernest H. Choy; Rieke Alten; Robin Christensen; Daniel E. Furst; Francis Guillemin; Serena Halls; Sarah Hewlett; Amy L. Leong; Anne Lyddiatt; Lyn March; Pamela Montie; Ana Maria Orbai; Christoph Pohl; Maria Johanna Helène Voshaar; Thasia Woodworth; Clifton O. Bingham

Objective. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) Flare Group was established to develop an approach to identify and measure RA flares. An overview of our OMERACT 2014 plenary is provided. Methods. Feasibility and validity of flare domains endorsed at OMERACT 11 (2012) were described based on initial data from 3 international studies collected using a common set of questions specific to RA flare. Mean flare frequency, severity, and duration data were presented, and domain scores were compared by flare status to examine known-groups validity. Breakout groups provided input for stiffness, self-management, contextual factors, and measurement considerations. Results. Flare data from 501 patients in an observational study indicated 39% were in flare, with mean (SD) severity of 6.0 (2.6) and 55% lasting > 14 days. Pain, physical function, fatigue, participation, and stiffness scores averaged ≥ 2 times higher (2 of 11 points) in flaring individuals. Correlations between flare domains and corresponding legacy instruments were obtained: r = 0.46 to 0.93. A combined definition (patient report of flare and 28-joint Disease Activity Score increase) was evaluated in 2 other trials, with similar results. Breakout groups debated specific measurement issues. Conclusion. These data contribute initial evidence of feasibility and content validation of the OMERACT RA Flare Core Domain Set. Our research agenda for OMERACT 2016 includes establishing duration/intensity criteria and developing criteria to identify RA flares using existing disease activity measures. Ongoing work will also address discordance between patient and physician ratings, facilitate application of flare criteria to clinical care, elucidate the role of self-management, and finalize recommendations for RA flare measurement.


The Journal of Rheumatology | 2014

Systematic Review of Treatment Effectiveness and Outcome Measures for Enthesitis in Psoriatic Arthritis

Ana Maria Orbai; Joshua Weitz; Evan L. Siegel; Stefan Siebert; Laura J. Savage; Sibel Zehra Aydin; Jolanda J. Luime; Ori Elkayam; Barbara Neerinckx; Slavo Urbancek; Kurt de Vlam; Christopher T. Ritchlin

Enthesitis is a characteristic feature of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and is important in disease pathogenesis and classification. Use of clinical outcome measures for enthesitis is heterogeneous, and only 1 measure has been specifically developed and validated in PsA. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging assessments of enthesitis may have advantages over clinical examination but are insufficiently studied. As part of an update of treatment recommendations by the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA), we performed a systematic literature review and identified randomized controlled trials with enthesitis outcomes in PsA. For each treatment agent we calculated treatment effect sizes (where applicable) and graded the level of evidence.


The Journal of Rheumatology | 2015

Enhanced Patient Involvement and the Need to Revise the Core Set — Report from the Psoriatic Arthritis Working Group at OMERACT 2014

William Tillett; Lihi Eder; Niti Goel; Maarten de Wit; Dafna D. Gladman; Oliver FitzGerald; Willemina Campbell; Philip S. Helliwell; L. Gossec; Ana Maria Orbai; Alexis Ogdie; V. Strand; N McHugh; Philip J. Mease

Objective. To discuss the need for revision of the “core set” of domains to be included for assessment in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) randomized controlled trials and longitudinal observational studies, review work undertaken since the 2012 meeting of Outcome Measures for Rheumatology 11 (OMERACT 11) to include patient perspectives in this revision, and reassess proposed composite measures in the context of new research data and the OMERACT Filter 2.0 framework. Methods. The OMERACT 12 (2014) PsA working group presented work completed over the last 2 years to incorporate patient involvement in PsA outcomes research, review the endorsed PsA core set based on the patient perspective as well as new research findings, and further develop PsA responder indices. Breakout groups then discussed 2 topics: (1) the need to revise the PsA core set, and opportunities to add, move, or merge existing domains to improve existing redundancy; and (2) how to incorporate the core set in a composite index. Breakout groups fed back to the working group before participant voting. Results. Meeting participants endorsed the need to revise the PsA core set according to the OMERACT Filter 2.0 framework (100%), and the inclusion of disease impact (94%) and fatigue (72%) in the inner circle. Breakout group feedback suggested the core set revision was an opportunity to consolidate pathophysiologic aspects such as arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, spondylitis as “inflammatory musculoskeletal disease,” and nail and skin psoriasis as “psoriasis activity.” Conclusion. Future work will focus on updating the PsA core set and development of responder indices with ongoing, meaningful involvement of patient research partners.


Arthritis Care and Research | 2014

“Stiffness Has Different Meanings, I Think, to Everyone”: Examining Stiffness From the Perspective of People Living With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Ana Maria Orbai; Katherine Clegg Smith; Susan J. Bartlett; Elaine De Leon; Clifton O. Bingham

Stiffness is a well‐recognized symptom of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It is frequently queried during clinic visits as an indicator of disease activity and was included in the 1961 and 1987 RA classification criteria. Little is known about how people with RA experience stiffness and its impact on their lives.


The Journal of Rheumatology | 2017

Updating the Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Domain Set: A Report from the PsA Workshop at OMERACT 2016

Ana Maria Orbai; Maarten de Wit; Philip J. Mease; Kristina Callis Duffin; Musaab Elmamoun; William Tillett; Willemina Campbell; Oliver FitzGerald; Dafna D. Gladman; Niti Goel; L. Gossec; Pil Hoejgaard; Ying-Ying Leung; Chris A. Lindsay; Vibeke Strand; Désirée van der Heijde; Bev Shea; Robin Christensen; Laura C. Coates; Lihi Eder; Neil McHugh; Umut Kalyoncu; Ingrid Steinkoenig; Alexis Ogdie

Objective. To include the patient perspective in accordance with the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.0 in the updated Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Domain Set for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and longitudinal observational studies (LOS). Methods. At OMERACT 2016, research conducted to update the PsA Core Domain Set was presented and discussed in breakout groups. The updated PsA Core Domain Set was voted on and endorsed by OMERACT participants. Results. We conducted a systematic literature review of domains measured in PsA RCT and LOS, and identified 24 domains. We conducted 24 focus groups with 130 patients from 7 countries representing 5 continents to identify patient domains. We achieved consensus through 2 rounds of separate surveys with 50 patients and 75 physicians, and a nominal group technique meeting with 12 patients and 12 physicians. We conducted a workshop and breakout groups at OMERACT 2016 in which findings were presented and discussed. The updated PsA Core Domain Set endorsed with 90% agreement by OMERACT 2016 participants included musculoskeletal disease activity, skin disease activity, fatigue, pain, patient’s global assessment, physical function, health-related quality of life, and systemic inflammation, which were recommended for all RCT and LOS. These were important, but not required in all RCT and LOS: economic cost, emotional well-being, participation, and structural damage. Independence, sleep, stiffness, and treatment burden were on the research agenda. Conclusion. The updated PsA Core Domain Set was endorsed at OMERACT 2016. Next steps for the PsA working group include evaluation of PsA outcome measures and development of a PsA Core Outcome Measurement Set.

Collaboration


Dive into the Ana Maria Orbai's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Alexis Ogdie

University of Pennsylvania

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

William Tillett

Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge