Identifying a Response for the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity 2000 Glucocorticoid Index

Recommendations for the use of anti-dsDNA autoantibodies in the diagnosis and follow-up of systemic lupus erythematosus - A proposal from an expert panel

Anti-dsDNA autoantibodies are listed as one of the classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and are relatively effective indicators for monitoring disease activity and treatment response. Therefore, clinicians rely on them to diagnose and adjust medication and treatment strategies for SLE patients. However, the use of anti-dsDNA antibodies is not free from controversy. Part of this controversy stems from the fact that anti-dsDNA antibodies are found in several disorders, besides SLE. In addition to this, anti-dsDNA antibodies are a heterogeneous group of antibodies, and their determination still lacks proper standardization. Moreover, anti-dsDNA testing specificity and diagnostic performance change depending on the population under study. These and other issues result in inconsistency and encumber the clinical use of anti-dsDNA antibodies. A panel of medical laboratory and clinical experts on SLE discussed such issues based on their clinical experience in a first meeting, establishing a series of recommendations. The proceedings of this first meeting, plus an exhaustive review of the literature, were used to compose a paper draft. The panel subsequently discussed and refined this draft in a second meeting, the result of which is this paper. This document is relevant to clinical laboratories as it guides to improving diagnosis and monitoring of SLE. Simultaneously, it will help laboratories compile more informative reports, not limited to a mere number. It is also relevant to clinical doctors who wish to better understand laboratory methods so that they can do a more efficient, better-aimed laboratory test ordering.

[Assessment tools for systemic lupus erythematosus]

A systematic assessment is critical for taking advantage of the current options for optimizing systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) management. Without regular SLE activity measurements, treat to target and remission are empty words, and the EULAR recommendations therefore insist on these assessments. They rely on activity scores, such as SLEDAI, ECLAM and BILAG or more recently, EasyBILAG and SLE-DAS. Assessment is completed by organ-specific measurement methods and the evaluation of damage. In the study setting the classification criteria and combined endpoints for clinical testing are crucial, as is measurement of the quality of life. This review article provides an overview of the current state of SLE assessments.

Association of mycophenolate and azathioprine use with cognitive function in systemic lupus

OBJECTIVES

Cognitive dysfunction (CD) is a common manifestation of SLE that can have detrimental consequences for those affected. To date, no treatments have been approved for SLE-CD. This study aims to assess the association of azathioprine (AZA) and mycophenolate (MMF) use with SLE-CD, given that these medications have demonstrated neuroprotective qualities in prior studies.

METHODS

Consecutive adult SLE patients presenting to a single healthcare center were considered for participation. The ACR neuropsychological battery for SLE was administered to consenting patients at 0, 6 and 12 months. Scores were compared with age- and sex-matched controls. Primary outcome was CD, defined as a z-score ≤-1.5 in two or more cognitive domains. Mixed-effects logistic regression models were constructed to estimate the odds of CD with respect to AZA and MMF use.

RESULTS

A total of 300 participants representing 676 patient visits completed the study; 114 (38%) met criteria for CD at baseline. The cumulative AZA dose (g/kg) was associated with reduced odds of CD [odds ratio (OR) 0.76 (95% CI 0.58, 0.98), P = 0.04]. Years of AZA treatment was also associated with reduced odds of CD [OR 0.72 (95% CI 0.54, 0.97), P = 0.03]. MMF use was not associated with CD.

CONCLUSION

AZA use was associated with significantly lower odds of SLE-CD, while MMF use was not. Additional studies are warranted to further investigate the relationship of AZA and SLE-CD.

Researchers in rheumatology should avoid categorization of continuous predictor variables

BACKGROUND

Rheumatology researchers often categorize continuous predictor variables. We aimed to show how this practice may alter results from observational studies in rheumatology.

METHODS

We conducted and compared the results of two analyses of the association between our predictor variable (percentage change in body mass index [BMI] from baseline to four years) and two outcome variable domains of structure and pain in knee and hip osteoarthritis. These two outcome variable domains covered 26 different outcomes for knee and hip combined. In the first analysis (categorical analysis), percentage change in BMI was categorized as ≥ 5% decrease in BMI, < 5% change in BMI, and ≥ 5% increase in BMI, while in the second analysis (continuous analysis), it was left as a continuous variable. In both analyses (categorical and continuous), we used generalized estimating equations with a logistic link function to investigate the association between the percentage change in BMI and the outcomes.

RESULTS

For eight of the 26 investigated outcomes (31%), the results from the categorical analyses were different from the results from the continuous analyses. These differences were of three types: 1) for six of these eight outcomes, while the continuous analyses revealed associations in both directions (i.e., a decrease in BMI had one effect, while an increase in BMI had the opposite effect), the categorical analyses showed associations only in one direction of BMI change, not both; 2) for another one of these eight outcomes, the categorical analyses suggested an association with change in BMI, while this association was not shown in the continuous analyses (this is potentially a false positive association); 3) for the last of the eight outcomes, the continuous analyses suggested an association of change in BMI, while this association was not shown in the categorical analyses (this is potentially a false negative association).

CONCLUSIONS

Categorization of continuous predictor variables alters the results of analyses and could lead to different conclusions; therefore, researchers in rheumatology should avoid it.

Serum amyloid A-to-albumin ratio as a potential biomarker to predict the activity, severity, and poor prognosis of systemic lupus erythematosus

Objectives

To evaluate the predictive value of serum amyloid A‐to‐albumin ratio (SAR) for active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), severe active SLE, and poor prognosis of SLE.

Methods

One hundred and eighty‐six patients with SLE undergoing treatment in our hospital were selected. The demographic characteristics, clinical data, and disease prognosis of all patients were collected and analyzed.

Results

There were significant differences in SLEDAI, total glyceride (TG), serum amyloid A (SAA), SAR, urinary microalbumin‐to‐creatinine ratio (ACR), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), albumin (ALB), complement 3 (C3), anti‐dsDNA, anti‐Sm positive rate, and anti‐dsDNA positive rate between active SLE and stable SLE patients. TG, SAR, C3, ACR, and positive anti‐dsDNA were independent influencing factors of active SLE, and the odds ratio (OR) values were 2.342, 10.921, 0.832, 1.451, and 2.476, respectively. The area under curves (AUCs) of SAA, ALB, and SAR for predicting active SLE and severe active SLE were 0.743, 0.724, 0.787, 0.711, 0.686, and 0.733, respectively. The AUC of SAR for predicting the poor prognosis of active SLE was 0.719. High SAR, high ACR, low C3, and positive anti‐dsDNA were high risk factors for poor prognosis. Kaplan–Meier (K‐M) survival analysis showed that patients with high SAR, high ACR, low C3, and positive anti‐dsDNA had shorter continuous remission time than that with low SAR, low ACR, high C3, and negative anti‐dsDNA.

Conclusion

SAR had high predictive value for active SLE, severe active SLE, and poor prognosis of SLE. High SAR may be a potential marker for predicting the activity and prognosis of Chinese patients with SLE.

Insight into intraindividual variability across neuropsychological tests and its association with cognitive dysfunction in patients with lupus

Objective

Dispersion, or variability in an individual’s performance across multiple tasks at a single assessment visit, has been associated with cognitive dysfunction (CD) in many neurodegenerative and neurodevelopmental disorders. We aimed to compute a dispersion score using neuropsychological battery (NB) tests and determine its association with CD in patients with SLE.

Methods

CD was defined as a z-score of ≤−1.5 on ≥2 domains of the NB. To compute a type of dispersion score known as the intraindividual SD (ISD), the SD of age-adjusted and sex-adjusted z-scores was calculated for each visit in each patient. To estimate the association between ISD and cognitive status (CD and non-CD), we used multilevel logistic regression, adjusting for clinically important covariates.

Results

A total of 301 adult patients with SLE completed the NB at baseline, 187 of whom were reassessed at 6 months and 189 at 12 months. CD was observed in 35.2% of patients at baseline, 27.8% at 6 months and 28.0% at 12 months. Prior to covariate adjustment, the mean ISD for non-CD was 1.10±0.31 compared with 1.50±0.70 for CD. After adjusting for ethnicity, education, employment, socioeconomic status and anxiety/depression, there was a statistically significant association between ISD and CD (OR for one-unit increase in ISD: 13.56, 95% CI 4.80 to 38.31; OR for 1/10th-unit increase in ISD: 1.30, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.44). Findings were valid across multiple sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

This is the first study to show that patients with SLE who were classified as having CD by the NB had more variability across the NB tests (ie, higher ISD score) compared with those who were not classified as having CD.

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Outcome Measures for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Clinical Trials

The assessment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) disease activity in clinical trials has been challenging. This is related to the wide spectrum of SLE manifestations and the heterogeneity of the disease trajectory. Currently, composite outcome measures are most commonly used as a primary endpoint while organ-specific measures are often used as secondary outcomes. In this article, we review the outcome measures and endpoints used in most recent clinical trials and explore potential avenues for further development of new measures and the refinement of existing tools.