Can improvements be made in a currently used set of criteria to diagnose Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada (VKH) disease?
In a case-control study including 1257 patients, the Diagnostic Criteria for VKH Disease (DCV) were developed using latent class analysis on 634 patients with VKH disease and 623 patients with non-VKH uveitis. The DCV were compared with another set of samples containing 537 patients with definite VKH disease and 525 patients with non-VKH uveitis and showed a higher sensitivity and negative predictive value compared with the Revised Diagnostic Criteria for VKH Disease.
These results suggest that use of the DCV could result in an improvement in the sensitivity and negative predictive value to diagnose VKH disease.
To our knowledge, a set of well-defined diagnostic criteria is not yet developed for the diagnosis of Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada (VKH) disease.
To develop and evaluate a set of diagnostic criteria for VKH disease using data from Chinese patients.
Design, Setting, and Participants
This case-control study reviewed medical records of patients from a tertiary referral center between October 2011 and October 2016. Data from 634 patients with VKH disease and 623 patients with non-VKH uveitis from southern China were used to develop the Diagnostic Criteria for VKH Disease (DCV). Data from an additional group of 537 patients with a definite VKH disease diagnosis and 525 patients with non-VKH uveitis from northern China were used to evaluate the diagnostic criteria.
Main Outcomes and Measures
Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and receiver operating characteristic.
Of the 1257 patients used to construct the DCV, 665 (52.9%) were male, and the mean (SD) age at disease onset was 38.6 (13.6) years. The 3-class model and 21 clinical findings were selected by latent class analysis. Variables with a high positive rate in the early-phase or late-phase VKH group or high specificity constituted essential parameters. Constellations of these essential parameters constructed the DCV. The sensitivity and NPV of the DCV were higher than those of the Revised Diagnostic Criteria for VKH Disease (RDC) (sensitivity: 94.6% vs 71.9%; difference, 22.7%; 95% CI, 18.5-27.0; NPV: 94.3% vs 76.6%; difference, 17.7%; 95% CI, 13.9-21.5). The specificity and PPV of the DCV were not different from that of the RDC (specificity: 92.2% vs 93.9%; difference, 1.7%; 95% CI, −1.4 to 4.8; PPV: 89.3% vs 92.3%; difference, 3.0%; 95% CI, −1.4 to 4.8). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the DCV and the RDC were 0.934 (95% CI, 0.917-0.951) and 0.829 (95% CI, 0.803-0.855), respectively.
Conclusions and Relevance
The DCV were developed and evaluated using data from Chinese patients with VKH disease and showed a high sensitivity, NPV, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in comparison with the RDC. However, they were developed using a retrospective analysis and should be evaluated in prospective studies in other racial/ethnic populations.
Yang P, Zhong Y, Du L, et al. Development and Evaluation of Diagnostic Criteria for Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada Disease. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2018;136(9):1025–1031. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2018.2664
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: