Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Takayasu Arteritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction We conducted a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) regarding quality of life, disability, mood abnormalities (anxiety, depression), fatigue, illness perceptions and fibromyalgia in Takayasu arteritis (TAK). Wherever available, comparisons with healthy controls, disease controls or longitudinal changes in PROMs were noted. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and Pubmed Central databases, major recent international rheumatology conference abstracts, clinical trial databases and the Cochrane library were searched for relevant articles. Wherever possible, outcome measures across studies were pooled using the restricted maximum likelihood model. Inter-group differences were pooled and compared using standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I-2 statistic. Quality of randomized controlled trials was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. For cross-sectional and cohort studies, the Joana Briggs Institute checklist and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used, respectively. GRADE methodology was used to determine the certainty of evidence for outcomes. Results Twenty-one studies (all but one observational) involving 1311 patients with TAK and 308 healthy controls were identified. Ten studies (559 TAK patients, 182 healthy controls were synthesized in a meta-analysis. Patients with TAK had worse quality of life (pooled SMD - 6.66, 95% CI - 10.08 to - 3.23 for individual domains; - 0.64, 95% CI - 1.19 to - 0.09 for pooled physical and mental component scores of 36-item Short Form Survey), depression (SMD 0.26, 95% 0.05-0.47) and anxiety (SMD 0.34, 95% CI - 0.06 to 0.75) scores and higher disability (SMD 0.64, 95% CI 0.43-0.84) than healthy controls. Patients with active TAK had worse quality of life, depression and work impairment when compared with those with inactive disease. Included studies were of moderate to high quality. Certainty of evidence for individual outcomes was low to very low. Conclusion Literature on PROMs in TAK, albeit sparse, appears to indicate worse scores in patients with TAK compared to healthy individuals. These results, however, require cautious interpretation. Development of a TAK-specific PROM is an important focus of the research agenda.