Vasculitis & polymyalgia rheumatica
Value of the chewing gum test for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis: a multicentre pilot study
Performance · Diagnostic performance for GCAResult — go to the resultSensitivity 55% vs 45%Authors' conclusion
Although the relatively low sensitivity of the CGT limits its stand-alone clinical applicability, its association with conventional questioning may help to identify JC in patients with suspected GCA, thereby facilitating earlier diagnosis and potentially reducing visual complications.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with suspected giant cell arteritis (GCA), October 2019 to December 2021 (33 confirmed GCA, 15 controls)33 GCA, 15 controls
- Participants
- 48 patients
- Comparison
- Chewing gum test vs conventional questioning for detecting jaw claudication in suspected GCA
- Outcome
- Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of the CGT
Methodological detailsprospective, multicentre, pilot, blinded
- Prospective
- Multicentre
- Pilot
- Blinded
Performance
Diagnostic performance for GCA
Sensitivity
55% vs 45%
P < 0.0001
Events by group
Conventional questioning
15
events
Chewing gum test (CGT)
- Sensitivity
- 36%
- Specificity
- 79%
- PPV
- 80%
- NPV
- 34%
Conventional questioning + CGT
55%
sensitivity
As reported in the abstract
- Jaw claudication (JC) not detected by conventional questioning identified by CGT
- 3
- CGT false positives
- 3
Original publication
Value of the chewing gum test for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis: a multicentre pilot study. Scand J Rheumatol. Published 17 April 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →