[Screening and management of cardiovascular risk factors in systemic lupus erythematosus: Recommendations for clinical practice based on the literature and expert opinion]

PURPOSE

To develop French recommendations about screening and management of cardiovascular risk factors in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

METHODS

Thirty-nine experts qualified in internal medicine, rheumatology and nephrology have selected recommendations from a list developed based on evidence from the literature. For each recommendation, the level of evidence and the level of agreement among the experts were specified.

RESULTS

Experts recommended an annual screening of cardiovascular risk factors in SLE. Statins should be prescribed for primary prevention in SLE patients based on the level of LDL-cholesterol and the number of cardiovascular risk factors, considering SLE as an additional risk factor. For secondary prevention, experts have agreed on an LDL-cholesterol target of <0.7 g/L. Hypertension should be managed according to the 2013 European guidelines, using renin-angiotensin system blockers as first line agents in case of renal involvement. Aspirin can be prescribed in patients with high cardiovascular risk or with antiphospholipid antibodies.

CONCLUSION

These recommendations about the screening and management of cardiovascular risk factors in SLE can be expected to improve clinical practice uniformity and, in the longer term, to optimize the management of SLE patients.

Factors influencing the efficacy of two injections of a pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) nonadjuvanted vaccine in systemic lupus erythematosus

OBJECTIVE

To assess the factors influencing the efficacy of 2 injections of a pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) vaccine in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, observational prospective study of 111 patients who were vaccinated with a monovalent, inactivated, nonadjuvanted, split-virus vaccine during December 2009 and January 2010 and received a second dose of vaccine 3 weeks later. The antibody response was evaluated using the hemagglutination inhibition assay according to the guidelines recommended for the pandemic vaccine, consisting of 3 immunogenicity criteria (i.e., a seroprotection rate of 70%, a seroconversion rate of 40%, and a geometric mean ratio [GMR] of 2.5).

RESULTS

The 3 immunogenicity criteria were met on day 42 (seroprotection rate 80.0% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 72.5-87.5%], seroconversion rate 71.8% [95% CI 63.4-80.2%], and GMR 10.3 [95% CI 2.9-14.2]), while only 2 criteria were met on day 21 (seroprotection rate 66.7% [95% CI 57.9-75.4%], seroconversion rate 60.4% [95% CI 51.3-69.5%], and GMR 8.5 [95% CI 3.2-12.0]). The vaccine was well tolerated. Disease activity, assessed by the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment version of the SLE Disease Activity Index, the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group score, and the Systemic Lupus Activity Questionnaire, did not increase. In the multivariate analysis, vaccination failure was significantly associated with immunosuppressive treatment or a lymphocyte count of ≤ 1.0 × 10⁹/liter. The second injection significantly increased the immunogenicity in these subgroups, but not high enough to fulfill the seroprotection criterion in patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that the efficacy of the vaccine was impaired in patients who were receiving immunosuppressive drugs or who had lymphopenia. A second injection increased vaccine immunogenicity without reaching all efficacy criteria for a pandemic vaccine in patients receiving an immunosuppressive agent. These results open possibilities for improving anti-influenza vaccination in SLE.