Regression Models of the Ultrasound Score of Madrid Sonographic Enthesis Index in Patients with Spondyloarthritis

Authors

  • David Castro-Corredor Department of Rheumatology, Hospital General Universitario, Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real 13005, Spain
  • Luis Á. Calvo-Pascual Department of Quantitative Methods, ICADE, Universidad Pontificia de Comillas, Madrid 28015, Spain
  • Marco A. Ramírez-Huaranga Department of Rheumatology, Hospital General Universitario, Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real 13005, Spain
  • Marcos A. Paulino-Huertas Department of Rheumatology, Hospital General Universitario, Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real 13005, Spain

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17140/ORHOJ-4-120

Keywords:

Machine learning; Ultrasounds; MASEI; Spondyloarthritis (SpA).

Abstract

BackgroundMachine learning regression models are built by minimizing the generalization error in the prediction while avoiding overfitting. These techniques enhance the models and forecasts of earlier medical research by achieving greater accuracy than traditional econo-metric techniques.ObjectivesTo predict the Madrid Sonographic Enthesis Index (MASEI) in spondyloarthritis (SpA) patients using the best predictor variables, including disease activity and other factors.MethodsThere were cross-sectional, descriptive, and observational investigations conducted. We gathered data from 24 SpA patients who received treatment in our clinics from May 2021 to September 2021 and underwent musculoskeletal ultrasonography utilizing the MASEI. Using F-tests and mutual information, we narrowed down the variables to the most important ones. Finally, we used machine learning to estimate a few regression models.ResultsThe predictor variables with higher values in the feature selection tests explaining the MASEI are activity, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS), corticosteroids, enthesophytes, and male sex. The most accurate regression model was the Sup-port Vector Machine model (R-squared=0.81 in validation). Since this model is a black box, we also computed a classical linear re-gression (R-Squared=0.60 in validation) because it provides an explicit model given by: MASEI=-4.02+2,75 Enthesofites+4.838 ASDAS.ConclusionTo date, the correlation between MASEI and disease activity in patients with SpA were known. In order to further examine this relationship, we predicted two regressive models to forecast the MASEI index: a classical linear regression model and a Support Vector Machine model with the lowest estimated Root Mean Square Error among 32 alternative machine learning models.

References

Zhang H, Liang J, Qiu J, Wang F, Sun L. Ultrasonographic evalu-ation of enthesitis in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. J Biomed Res. 2017; 31(2): 162-169. doi: 10.7555/JBR.31.20160088

Groves C, Chandramohan M, Chew NS, Aslam T, Helliwell PS. Clinical examination, ultrasound and MRI imaging of the painful elbow in psoriatic arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: Which is bet-ter, ultrasound or MR, for imaging enthesitis? Rheumatol Ther. 2017; 4(1): 71-84. doi: 10.1007/s40744-017-0053-7

Mata Arnaiz MC, de Miguel Mendieta E. Utilidad de la ecografía Submit your article to this journal | https://openventio.org/submit-manuscript/ en la evaluación de las entesis periféricas en las espondiloartritis. Re-umatol Clin. 2014; 10(2): 113-119. doi: 10.1016/j.reuma.2013.11.004

De Miguel E, Cobo T, Muñoz-Fernández S, et al. Validity of en-thesis ultrasound assessment in spondyloarthropathy. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009; 68(2): 169-174. doi: 10.1136/ard.2007.084251

Shoop-Worrall S, Cresswell K, Bolger I, Dillon B, Hyrich K, Gei-fman N. Nothing about us without us: Involving patient collabora-tors for machine learning applications in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis. 2021; 80: 1505-1510. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-220454

Kim K-J, Tagkopoulos I. Application of machine learning in rheumatic disease research. Korean J Intern Medv. 2019; 34(4): 708- 722. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2018.349

Murphy KP. Machine Learning: A Probabilistic Perspective. MA, USA: MIT Press; 2012.

Rudwaleit M, Landewé R, van der Heijde D, et al. The devel-opment of assessment of spondyloarthritis international society classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis (part I): Classifi-cation of paper patients by expert opinion including uncertainty appraisal. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009; 68(6): 770-776. doi: 10.1136/ ard.2009.108217

Rudwaleit M, van der Heijde D, Landewé R, et al. The devel-opment of Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis (part II): Valida-tion and final selection. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009; 68(6): 777-783. doi:

1136/ard.2009.108233 10. Taylor W, Gladman D, Helliwell P, et al. Classification criteria for psoriatic arthritis: Development of new criteria from a large international study. Arthritis Rheum. 2006; 54(8): 2665-2673. doi: 10.1002/art.21972

Moya Alvarado P, de Agustín de Oro JJ, Aparicio Espinar M, et al. Interobserver reliability of Masei index validation by a multi-center collaborative group of rheumatologists. Rheumatol Int. 2022; 42(3): 441-448. doi:10.1007/s00296-020-04733-y

Macía-Villa C, Cruz Valenciano A, De Miguel E. Enthesis le-sions are associated with X-ray progression in psoriatic arthritis. Int J Rheum Dis. 2021; 24(6): 828-833. doi: 10.1111/1756-185X.14122

El Miedany Y, El Gaafary M, Youssef S, Ahmed I, Nasr A. Tailored approach to early psoriatic arthritis patients: Clinical and ultrasonographic predictors for structural joint damage. Clin Rheu-matol. 2015; 34: 307-313. doi: 10.1007/s10067-014-2630-2

Falcao S, Castillo-Gallego C, Peiteado D, Branco J, Martín Mola E, de Miguel E. Can we use enthesis ultrasound as an outcome measure of disease activity in spondyloarthritis? A study at the Achilles level. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2015; 54(9): 1557-1562. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keu399

Downloads

Published

2025-09-11

How to Cite

David Castro-Corredor, Luis Á. Calvo-Pascual, Marco A. Ramírez-Huaranga, & Marcos A. Paulino-Huertas. (2025). Regression Models of the Ultrasound Score of Madrid Sonographic Enthesis Index in Patients with Spondyloarthritis. Osteology and Rheumatology, 4(1), 27–32. https://doi.org/10.17140/ORHOJ-4-120

Most read articles by the same author(s)