Performance of the New 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology Classification Criteria for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in Children and Young Adults

Utility of pan-immune-inflammation value as a predictor of the prognosis of childhood lupus

BACKGROUND

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic inflammatory multisystemic disease. Monitoring disease activity thoughtout the disease course is important for effective management and assessment of disease outcome.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the pan-immune inflammation value (PIIV) at diagnosis could predict organ involvement and disease activity in childhood SLE (cSLE) patients after 12 months of disease onst.

METHODS

This is an observational retrospective multicenter study that comprised cSLE patients seen and followed at the participating centers between January 2010 and December 2022. All patients met the EULAR/ACR-19 criteria, were immunosuppressive drug-naïve at the time of SLE diagnosis and had a minimal follow-up period of 12 months. The data included clinical and laboratory findings and disease activity using the SLEDAI-2K. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were employed to determine the optimal cut-off value of PIIV and assess its predictive potential for disease activity, and organ involvement.

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients (104 female) with a median age of 16.0 (IQR 5.6) years, a median age at disease onset of 10.9 (IQR 3.0) years, and a median disease duration of 4.8 (IQR 5.3) years were included. The most frequent involved organs at diagnosis were hematological (89.6%), musculoskeletal (68.8%), mucocutaneous (63.2%), and renal (58.4%). However, at a 12-month follow-up visit, the most frequent involved organs were renal (40.0%), hematological (39.2%), musculoskeletal (15.2%), and mucocutaneous (10.4%). The median PIIV at diagnosis was 139 (IQR 229.6), while the median SLEDAI was 12 (IQR 6.5) and 3.5 (IQR 7.0) at diagnosis and 12 months, respectively. An optimal PIIV cut-off of 250 was found to be a predicative for disease activity, with a sensitivity of 45% and a specificity of 86%. The study revealed that the PIIV successfully predicted four systems in our cohort of patients.

CONCLUSION

Our work suggests the PIIV might be a reasonable predictor for organ involvement and disease activity in newly diagnosed cSLE, though further research, particularly larger studies, is required to validate these findings, especially regarding organ involvement.

Early-onset lupus nephritis

Early-onset systemic lupus erythematous (SLE) is a distinct clinical entity characterized by the onset of disease manifestations during childhood. Despite some similarities to patients who are diagnosed during adulthood, early-onset SLE typically displays a greater disease severity, with aggressive multiorgan involvement, lower responsiveness to classical therapies, and more frequent flares. Lupus nephritis is one of the most severe complications of SLE and represents a major risk factor for long-term morbidity and mortality, especially in children. This review focuses on the clinical and histological aspects of early-onset lupus nephritis, aiming at highlighting relevant differences with adult patients, emphasizing long-term outcomes and discussing the management of long-term complications. We also discuss monogenic lupus, a spectrum of conditions caused by single gene variants affecting the complement cascade, extracellular and intracellular nucleic acid sensing and processing, and occasionally other metabolic pathways. These monogenic forms typically develop early in life and often have clinical manifestations that resemble sporadic SLE, whereas their response to standard treatments is poor.

Prognostic Value of the 2019 EULAR/American College of Rheumatology Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification Criteria to Renal Response One Year After Treatment in a Cohort With Childhood-Onset Lupus Nephritis

OBJECTIVE

In 2019, the EULAR/American College of Rheumatology developed classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). A positive correlation between summary score at diagnosis and SLE disease activity at five years has been noted in adult patients with lupus, but little is known among the pediatric population. We evaluated the prognostic value of higher summary scores and number of extrarenal domains at diagnosis (low/moderate number [1-5] vs high number [6-9]) to renal outcomes after one year of treatment in pediatric patients with lupus nephritis (LN).

METHODS

This retrospective, single-center cohort study included 74 pediatric patients with LN. Published pediatric renal response definitions were used for our outcome measure (no, partial, and complete response). Descriptive statistics were reported, and an ordinal logistic regression estimated adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for renal response including 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Patients with high extrarenal domains had OR 1.47 (95% CI 0.55-2.91) of having a complete renal response compared to patients with low/moderate domains. Patients with a summary score <30 had OR 1.31 (95% CI 0.50-3.44) of having a complete renal response relative to a summary score ≥30, though a larger proportion of patients with a summary score of ≥30 had no renal response after one year of treatment.

CONCLUSION

More extrarenal domains at diagnosis did not have a statistically significant impact on renal response at one year, nor did a higher summary score. However, a larger portion of patients with a summary score <30 achieved complete renal response compared to patients with a score ≥30.

Clinical characteristics and prognostic value of autoantibody profile in children with monogenic lupus

Objective

To report the frequency of selected autoantibodies and their associations with clinical features in Arab children with monogenic lupus.

Methods

This study was retrospective single-center study of genetically confirmed monogenic lupus cases at childhood lupus clinic at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, from June 1997 to July 2022. We excluded familial lupus without genetic testing and patients with insufficient data. Collected data comprised clinical and laboratory findings, including the autoantibody profile, which included the anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA), anti-Smith, anti-Sjögren's-syndrome-related antigen A (anti-SSA), anti-Sjögren's-syndrome-related antigen B (anti-SSB), and antiphospholipid (APL) antibodies. Also, disease activity and accrual disease damage were collected at the last follow-up visit.

Results

This study enrolled 27 Arab patients (14 males) with a median age of 11 years (interquartile range 8.0~16 years), with 63% having early-onset disease. The consanguinity rate and family history of lupus were high (74.1% and 55.6%, respectively). The most frequent clinical features were hematological (96.3%), fever (81.5%), mucocutaneous lesions (85.2%), and renal (66.7%). The frequency of the APL antibodies was 59.3%, anti-dsDNA was 55.6%, and anti-Smith and anti-SSA were 48.2% and 44.4%, respectively. Moreover, dsDNA antibodies were significantly associated with musculoskeletal complaints (p<0.05). Likewise, both anti-Smith and anti-SSA antibodies were linked to failure to thrive and recurrent infections in the univariate analysis (p<0.05).

Conclusion

Our study reveals autoantibody frequencies and their association with clinical and prognostic in a substantial monogenic lupus cohort. Distinct clinical manifestations and prognosis association with certain autoantibodies support the idea that monogenic lupus is a distinctive form of lupus. Larger studies needed to validate these findings.

Comparison of systemic lupus international collaborating clinics 2012 classification criteria and European league against rheumatism/American college of rheumatology 2019 classification criteria for early detection of childhood onset systemic lupus erythematosus (multi-center study)

OBJECTIVE

To assess the performance of the new EULAR/ACR criteria, particularly for early detection of cSLE, in comparison to the SLICC criteria among the pediatric population in multiple centers in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study that enrolled pediatric patients up to the age of 14 years who've been diagnosed with SLE and followed in pediatric rheumatology clinics at 9 multi-tertiary hospitals in Saudi Arabia from 2010 to 2021 as a case group and were compared to a similar group of pediatric patients who've had defined rheumatological diseases other than SLE with a positive ANA titer (≥1:80) as controls. In total, 245 patients were included and distributed as 129 cases (diagnosed by expert pediatric rheumatologists) versus 116 patients in the control group. All relevant clinical information, including history, physical examination findings, and laboratory tests, was documented at the initial presentations. Then, the two sets of SLE classification criteria were applied to both groups to define who's going to meet both or either one of them. The exclusion criteria included those who had insufficient data or had overlapping or undifferentiated diseases. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), receiver operating curve (ROC), and accuracy were calculated for SLICC 2012 and EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria (total scores≥ 10 and ≥ 13). We performed a Chi-squared test to compare sensitivity and specificity of SLICC 2012 and EULAR/ACR 2019.

RESULTS

For SLICC (cut-off ≥4 criteria), the sensitivity was found to be 96.9% (95% CI 92.6%-99.4%) and the specificity was 94.8% (95% CI 89.6%-98.32%), with PPV and NPV of 95.4% and 96.5%, respectively. The ROC for it was 0.96 (95% CI 0.93-0.99), and this criterion had an accuracy of 95%. Regarding EULAR/ACR (total score ≥ 10), the performance measure showed a sensitivity of 99.2% and a specificity of 86.2%. Similarly, PPV was 88.9%; while NPV was a little higher (99.0%) than SLICC. The ROC for EULAR/ACR (total score ≥ 10) was 0.93 (95% CI 0.89-0.96), and this criterion had an accuracy of 93%. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the sensitivity and specificity of either using SLICC or EULAR/ACR (total score ≥ 10), as reflected by a p-value of 0.86 using the Chi-squared test. Although applying the EULAR/ACR with a total score of ≥ 13 revealed lower sensitivity (93.8%) than both the SLICC and the EULAR/ACR (total score ≥ 10), the specificity for it was found to increase up to 91.4% (85.7-96.2%) compared to the (86.2%) specificity of the EULAR/ACR (total score ≥ 10).

CONCLUSION

In this cohort among the Saudi population with childhood-onset SLE, the new EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria efficiently enable early detection of SLE, although a more frequent rate of false positives was observed with them. Escalating the total score from ≥ 10 to ≥ 13 in the cSLE population improved the specificity close to that of SLICC 2012. Further prospective studies in pediatrics need to be done for the validation of a cut- off score of ≥ 13 in cSLE rather than the traditional score of ≥ 10 in aSLE.

Phenotype and disease course differences in monogenic and sporadic childhood lupus

OBJECTIVE

To report the differences in phenotypic characteristics, disease course, and outcome in monogenic and sporadic childhood lupus (SC-lupus) from a single tertiary childhood lupus clinic.

METHODS

A descriptive, observational, cross-sectional study was conducted. Data were retrospectively collected at the last follow-up visit on patients with monogenic lupus proven by genetic variants and SC-lupus seen between June 1997 and July 2022. SC-lupus patients were selected by systematic sampling from lupus patients presenting to our lupus clinic; the first patient was chosen randomly, and the subsequent patients were chosen at intervals of three. Data comprised the clinical and laboratory findings, disease activity using the SLEDAI, and damage measured by the pSDI.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients with a median disease duration of 6.8 (IQR 3.5-10.5) years were included. There were 27 patients with monogenic lupus and 27 patients with SC-lupus, with a median age at disease onset of 3.5 (IQR 1.0-6.0), and 9.5 (IQR 7.0-11.8), respectively. (p < 0.05). The rate of consanguinity and family history of lupus were higher in monogenic lupus patients. The two groups were comparable. However, monogenic lupus patients showed more gastrointestinal tract symptoms, and failure to thrive (p < 0.05). They also had more infections. The frequency of the autoantibody profile was higher in monogenic lupus patients. Belimumab was more frequently used in monogenic lupus while rituximab in SC-lupus patients. Monogenic lupus patients had a higher mean SLEDAI, but statistically, it was insignificant. Patients with monogenic lupus had greater disease damage, with a higher mean pSDI and a higher mortality rate (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with monogenic lupus are likely to have an early disease onset and a strong family history of lupus, as well as a guarded prognosis, which is likely due to the disease's severity and frequent infections. These differences may be related to the high consanguinity rate and underlying genetic variants.

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Risk Probability Index: ready for routine use? Results from a Chinese cohort

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the performance of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Risk Probability Index (SLERPI) in patients with SLE using a Chinese cohort.

METHODS

The Chinese cohort included 352 patients with and 385 without SLE (control group). The clinical data of patients, including demographic data, clinical findings and serological profiles, were collected. Patients with an SLERPI score >7 were classified as SLE. The performance of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-1997, Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)-2012 and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR-2019 criteria were used as references.

RESULTS

Of these four classification criteria, SLERPI has the highest sensitivity (98.3% (95% CI 96.3% to 99.4%)), but lowest specificity (89.4% (95% CI 85.8% to 92.2%)). In the control group, patients eligible for the classification criteria for SLE were mainly those with primary Sjogren's syndrome (pSS) and undifferentiated connective tissue disease (UCTD), which adversely affected the specificity of the classification criteria. Moreover, significantly more patients with pSS and UCTD met SLERPI than those who met other classification criteria. After excluding patients with pSS and UCTD from the control group, the specificity and accuracy of SLERPI improved to 94.3% (95% CI 91.0% to 96.6%) and 96.5% (95% CI 95.0% to 97.9%), respectively, and both outperformed the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria. The time to SLERPI classification was the same as their clinical time to diagnosis in 261 patients, earlier than the clinical diagnosis in 23 patients and later than the clinical diagnosis in 9 patients. A total of 280 patients had the same time to SLERPI classification as EULAR/ACR-2019, 8 patients had earlier than EULAR/ACR-2019 and 1 patient had later than EULAR/ACR-2019.

CONCLUSION

SLERPI performed well in patients with SLE, particularly for the earlier diagnosis of SLE.

The value of 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria in predicting lupus nephritis in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus

BACKGROUND

We investigated the role of European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for the prediction of LN among children with SLE.

METHODS

The data of the patients with childhood-onset SLE diagnosed based on 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) criteria were retrospectively evaluated. Based on 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria, the scoring was done at the time of renal biopsy.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients (12 with LN, 40 without LN) were included. The mean score was higher in patients with LN than those without (30.8±6.14, 19.8±7.76, respectively, p=0.000). The score value had indicative value for LN (area under curve [AUC]:0.863±0.055, cut-off value:22.5, p=0.000). Lymphocyte counts had a predictive value for LN (cut-off value:905/mm3, AUC:0.688±0.087, p=0.042). The score was positively associated with SLE disease activity index (SLEDAI) and activity index (r=0.879, p=0.000; r=0.811, p=0.001, respectively). There were significant negative associations between score value and GFR (r=-0.582, p=0.047). The patients with renal flare had higher the mean score than those of without renal flare (35±2/25.4±5.57, respectively, p=0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

The EULAR/ACR criteria score could reflect the activity of disease and severity of nephritis in childhood-onset SLE. A point of 22.5 as score value might be an indicator for LN. During scoring, it should be taken into account that lymphopenia might guide the prediction of LN.

Usefulness of the lupus low disease activity state as a treatment target in childhood-onset SLE

OBJECTIVE

Treat-to-target (T2T) strategies are advocated to improve prognosis in childhood-onset SLE (cSLE). Proposed T2T states include SLEDAI score of <4 (SLEDAI-LD), limited corticosteroid use (low-CS), and lupus low disease activity state (LLDAS). We sought to compare T2T states for their association with cSLE prognosis under consideration of relevant disease characteristics such as pre-existing damage, race and lupus nephritis (LN).

METHODS

Longitudinal data from 165 patients enrolled in the Cincinnati Lupus Registry were included. LN presence was based on renal biopsy, and patients were followed up until 18 years of age.

RESULTS

The 165 patients (LN: 45, white: 95) entered the registry within a median of 0 (IQR: 0-1) year post diagnosis and were followed up for a median of 4 (IQR: 2-5) years during which 80%, 92% and 94% achieved LLDAS, low-CS and SLEDAI-LD. Patients with LN were significantly less likely to achieve any T2T state (all p<0.03) and required a significantly longer time to reach them (all p<0.0001). Over the study period, patients maintained low-CS, SLEDAI-LD or LLDAS for a median of 76% (IQR: 48%-100%), 86% (IQR: 55%-100%) or 39% (IQR: 13%-64%) of their follow-up. Significant predictors of failure to maintain LLDAS included LN (p≤0.0062), pre-existing damage (p≤0.0271) and non-white race (p≤0.0013). There were 22%, 20% and 13% of patients who reached SLEDAI-LD, CS-low and LLDAS and nonetheless acquired new damage. Patients with LN had a higher risk of new damage than patients without LN even if achieving low-CS (p=0.009) or LLDAS (p=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with LN and pre-existing damage are at higher risk of increased future damage acquisition, even if achieving a T2T state such as LLDAS. Among proposed common T2T states, the LLDAS is the hardest to achieve and maintain. The LLDAS may be considered the preferred T2T measure as it conveys the highest protection from acquiring additional disease damage.

Evaluating performance of the 2019 EULAR/ACR, 2012 SLICC, and 1997 ACR criteria for classifying adult-onset and childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997, Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012, and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR 2019 SLE criteria are often used to classify patients with adult-onset and childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in clinical practice because there are currently no diagnostic criteria for SLE. However, there is scarce evidence regarding which criteria are best for diagnosing patients with adult-onset and childhood-onset SLE.

Methods

We searched Medline and Scopus databases for English-language articles from inception through October 2021. Data were extracted from the included publications by two independent reviewers. We performed bivariate meta-analysis with a random-effects model to pool diagnostic parameters. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity sources. We used network meta-analysis to compare diagnosis performance among the three criteria and ranked them in descending order. Publication bias was assessed using Deeks' funnel plot.

Results

We included 29 studies for systematic review and meta-analysis. Of these, 18 studies involved adult-onset SLE and 11 studies involved childhood-onset SLE. The pooled sensitivities of the three criteria for diagnosis of adult-onset SLE were comparable between SLICC 2012 and EULAR/ACR 2019 [95.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 92.28-97.81 vs. 94.79, 95% CI 92.03-96.63]; pooled specificity was highest in ACR 1997 (92.24, 95% CI 87.06-95.46). In childhood-onset SLE, pooled sensitivity was highest in SLICC 2012 (93.76, 95% CI 89.45-96.39), and pooled specificity was highest in ACR 1997 (95.89, 95% CI 91.73-98.00). In network meta-analysis, the pooled diagnostic odds ratio ranked highest for EULAR/ACR 2019 (131.570, 95% CI 61.50-281.47) in adult-onset SLE and ranked highest for SLICC 2012 (191.07, 95% CI 76.06-480.01) in childhood-onset SLE. Deeks' funnel plot showed no publication bias.

Conclusion

We found that the diagnostic performance of the ACR 1997, SLICC 2012, and EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria differed between adult-onset and childhood-onset SLE. EULAR/ACR 2019 performed best for adult-onset SLE and SLICC 2012 was best for childhood-onset SLE in classifying patients with SLE.

Systematic review registration

[www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [CRD420 21281586].

Performances of different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in a single-center cohort from Turkey

Objective

Sensitivity and specificity of SLE classification criteria may vary in different populations and clinical settings. In this study, we aimed to compare the performances of three criteria sets/rules (1997, 2012, and 2019) in a large cohort of patients and relevant diseased controls.

Methods

The medical records of consecutive SLE patients and diseased controls were reviewed for clinical and laboratory features relevant to all sets of criteria. Criteria sets/rules were analyzed based on sensitivity, positive predictive value, specificity, and negative predictive value, using clinical diagnosis with at least 6 months of follow-up as the gold standard. A subgroup analysis was performed in ANA positive patients.

Results

A total of 393 SLE patients and 308 non-SLE diseased controls were included. Sensitivity was 78.4% for 1997 criteria and was more than 90% for both 2012 (91.9%) and 2019 (94.4%) criteria. Specificity was the highest (95.1%) for 1997 ACR criteria, 91.5% for 2012 SLICC criteria and 91.2% for 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, sensitivity of each criteria increased by 1%, 0.8%, and 2.2%, respectively. Specificity of 1997 criteria decreased by 2% and specificity of 2012 and 2019 criteria both decreased to less than 90%.

Conclusion

EULAR/ACR criteria were more sensitive than 1997 criteria and had a comparable performance with SLICC criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, the presence of false positive results (originated from patients with Sjögren’s disease and antiphospholipid syndrome mainly) decreased the specificity of both SLICC and EULAR/ACR criteria.

Diagnostic accuracy of the American College of Rheumatology-1997, the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics-2012, and the European League Against Rheumatism-2019 criteria for juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE/BACKGROUND

Several diagnostic criteria have been developed to effectively diagnose systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Three criteria are most common, namely the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-1997, the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)-2012, and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR/ACR)-2019. Whether they also apply to juvenile SLE is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the diagnostic accuracy of ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, and EULAR/ACR-2019 for juvenile SLE.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was conducted up to 26 March 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

We included all study designs in which patients had any index tests for ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, or EULAR/ACR-2019; both full-text papers and conference abstracts published in English were used. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) case reports; (2) adult subjects; or (3) did not report sufficient information to acquire true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative values of diagnostic criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two authors independently screened studies, extracted relevant data, and assessed the risk of bias.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

First, a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of EULAR/ACR-2019 and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model was performed to estimate sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We then carried out a network meta-analysis to compare the performances of these three diagnostic criteria.

RESULTS

In total, 17 relevant studies that included 2339 juvenile SLE patients were eligible to analyze pooled accuracy. In the meta-analysis, 10 studies (1613 cases) reported the diagnostic performance of EULAR/ACR-2019, showing a pooled sensitivity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89-0.95), pooled specificity of 0.89 (0.77-0.95), and area under HSROC of 0.96 (0.94-0.97). In the network meta-analysis, the SLICC-2012 (0.94, 0.92-0.96) had the highest sensitivity, followed by EULAR/ACR-2019 (0.93, 0.90-0.95), and ACR-1997 (0.78, 0.72-0.82); the ACR-1997 (0.96, 0.92-0.98) demonstrated the highest specificity. EULAR/ACR-2019 (0.92, 0.87-0.96) and SLICC-2012 (0.92, 0.86-0.96) had the similar specificity.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

We found that the applicability of the new EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria in juvenile SLE is not yet the best diagnostic tool.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022321514.

Advances in SLE classification criteria

This year, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1982 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) celebrate their 40th anniversary. From this start, the quest for optimal SLE criteria has led to the 1997 ACR update, the 2012 publication of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) criteria, and, in 2019, the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR classification criteria. The latter have since been externally validated in more than two dozen studies and have become the gold standard inclusion criterion of SLE clinical trials. This comprehensive review attempts to follow the evolving success story of SLE classification, highlighting relevant decisions and their rationale, and discussing consequences for the way SLE is defined and managed.

Performance of the EULAR/ACR 2019 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematous in monogenic lupus

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the application of the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria to monogenic lupus patients and compare its performance against the SLICC-2012 criteria.

METHODS

In a multicenter retrospective cohort study, consecutive patients with monogenic lupus from three tertiary lupus clinics were enrolled. The diagnosis of monogenic lupus was based on the expert physician's opinion or fulfilling the SLICC-2012 criteria. All enrolled patients had genetic variants. A control group of sporadic childhood SLE (cSLE) and non-SLE patients, were included. A descriptive data analysis was conducted, and the EULAR/ACR-2019 and SLICC-2012 criteria were applied to both groups.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients with monogenic lupus with a median age at diagnosis of 6.0 (IQR 3.0-10.8) years and 104 controls (55 patients with cSLE and 49 non-lupus patients with a median age at diagnosis of 10.0 and 5.0 respectively) were included. Forty-four (89.8%) patients with monogenic lupus fulfilled the EULAR/ACR-2019 with a mean score of 22.3±8.9. The most frequent domains were immunologic (93.9%), musculoskeletal and renal (each 57.1%), and mucocutaneous (55.1%). Fifty-four (98.2%) cSLE patients and six (12.2%) non-lupus patients met the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria with a mean score of 22.5±9.2 and 8.5±5.2, respectively. The sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria in monogenic lupus was 89.9% (95% CI: 78.3-90.2), while the specificity was 87.6% (95% CI: 75.2-88.7).

CONCLUSION

This is the first and largest cohort of monogenic lupus patients testing the performance of the 2019-EULAR/ACR criteria. It efficiently classifies monogenic lupus patients, irrespective of the underlying genetic variants. Further studies are needed before these criteria are adopted worldwide. Key Points • Typically, patients with monogenic lupus have early onset severe disease, especially with mucocutaneous manifestations and a strong family history of SLE. • Monogenic lupus is a distinctive entity and might differ from the sporadic childhood SLE. • Our study includes a large multinational cohort of monogenic lupus with heterogeneous phenotypic features and underlying genetic variants. • Our study demonstrates that the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria efficiently classified monogenic lupus patients, irrespective of the diversity of the underlying genetic variants.

Classification of systemic lupus erythematosus in children and adults

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune multisystem disease with a variable clinical phenotype and no single clinical, laboratory or pathological feature that can be used as a gold standard for disease classification or diagnosis. Classification criteria have been developed in an attempt to define homogenous groups of SLE patients for clinical research. They have been mainly validated in adult cohorts, given the much lower prevalence of SLE before puberty. The three commonly used sets of current classification criteria and their validation studies to date are described in this review. Challenges relating to classification of SLE patients, including important differences across age-groups and ethnicities, are explored along with future directions in the classification of SLE.

Comparison of the sensitivity of the EULAR / ACR 2019 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria in a Colombian population with systemic lupus erythematosus

BACKGROUND

/Objective: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a multisystem autoimmune disease with a wide range of clinical manifestations. The latest classification criteria, EULAR/ACR 2019, have not been validated in a Latin American population of Amerindian ancestry. The objective of this study is to compare the sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR 2019 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria in a group of SLE patients with the above ancestry.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was done. Data were obtained from the review of medical records of patients who met the inclusion criteria. The overall sensitivity of the criteria was calculated and compared to each other using the McNemar test.

RESULTS

146 medical records of patients from two referral centers were included. There were no differences in the sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR and SLICC 2012 criteria (84.9% versus 85.6% p = 0.79) nor were differences found when the groups based on disease duration were compared: less than 5 years (91.0% versus 92.5% p = 0.70), between 5 and 10 years (82.8% versus 82.8% p = 1), and 10 years or more (76.7% versus 76.7% p = 1). However, SLICC 2012 criteria was found to better classify patients with a less than 5-year disease duration compared to those with 10-year duration or more (92.5% versus 76.4% p = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

There are no statistically significant differences between the EULAR/ACR and SLICC 2012 criteria in the population studied. Nor were differences found when evaluating them by age at diagnosis and duration of the disease except when the group with less than 5 years of duration was compared to those with 10 years or more using the SLICC 2012 criteria.

Limited sensitivity and specificity of the ACR/EULAR-2019 classification criteria for SLE in JSLE?-observations from the UK JSLE Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to test the performance of the new ACR and EULAR criteria, that include ANA positivity as entry criterion, in JSLE.

METHODS

Performance of the ACR/EULAR-2019 criteria were compared with Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC-2012), using data from children and young people (CYP) in the UK JSLE Cohort Study (n = 482), with the ACR-1997 criteria used as reference standard. An unselected cohort of CYP positive for ANA (n = 129) was used to calculate positive/negative predictive values of the criteria.

RESULTS

At both first and last visits, the number of patients fulfilling the different classification criteria varied significantly (P < 0.001). The sensitivity of the SLICC-2012 criteria was higher when compared with that of the ACR/EULAR-2019 criteria at first and last visits (98% vs 94% for first visit, and 98% vs 96% for last visit; P < 0.001), when all available CYP were considered. The ACR/EULAR-2019 criteria were more specific when compared with the SLICC-2012 criteria (77% vs 67% for first visit, and 81% vs 71% for last visit; P < 0.001). Significant differences between the classification criteria were mainly caused by the variation in ANA positivity across ages. In the unselected cohort of ANA-positive CYP, the ACR/EULAR-2019 criteria produced the highest false-positive classification (6/129, 5%).

CONCLUSION

In CYP, the ACR/EULAR-2019 criteria are not superior to those of the SLICC-2012 or ACR-1997 criteria. If classification criteria are designed to include CYP and adult populations, paediatric rheumatologists should be included in the consensus and evaluation process, as seemingly minor changes can significantly affect outcomes.

The new 2019-EULAR/ACR classification criteria specific domains at diagnosis can predict damage accrual in 670 childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate if the 2019-European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology (EULAR/ACR) criteria at diagnosis of childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) are associated with higher rates of early damage scored by Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology (SLICC/ACR) Damage Index (SDI).

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter study included 670 cSLE patients with ≤5 years of disease duration. All patients fulfilled both 2019-EULAR/ACR and 1997-ACR classification criteria. Total score of 2019-EULAR/ACR criteria and each of its specific domains were assessed at diagnosis as predictors of damage accrual at the last visit, according to the presence of any organ damage (defined by SDI ≥ 1).

RESULTS

Median disease duration was 2.8 (IQR 1.8-3.8) years and 200 (29.9%) patients had at least one organ damage (SDI ≥ 1). The most frequent domains were neuropsychiatric (12%), renal (7%), and musculoskeletal (6%). There was a higher frequency of renal (58% vs 43%, p = 0.0004) and neuropsychiatric domain (21% vs 7%, p < 0.0001) of 2019-EULAR/ACR criteria in patients with damage (SDI ≥ 1) compared to those without damage (SDI = 0). Patients scoring renal or neuropsychiatric domains of the 2019-EULAR/ACR criteria at diagnosis were associated with renal damage (odds ratio 9.701, 95% confidence interval 3.773-24.941, p < 0.001) or neuropsychiatric damage (OR 9.480, 95% CI 5.481-16.399, p<0.0001) at latest visit, respectively. cSLE patients with positive anti-dsDNA at diagnosis were also associated with renal damage by the latest visit (OR 2.438, 95% CI 1.114-5.3381, p = 0.021). Constitutional, hematologic, mucocutaneous, serosal, and musculoskeletal domains and specific criteria as well as other immunologic criteria were not associated with damage accrual. Median of SLEDAI-2K was significantly higher in patients with global damage (19.5 (2-51) vs 14 (0-51), p<0.001). 2019-EULAR/ACR score >25 was associated with more overall (SDI ≥ 1) (38% vs 25%, p = 0.0002) and renal damage (11% vs 5%, p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The 2019-EULAR/ACR criteria at diagnosis were associated with a higher rate of early damage in cSLE patients, especially for renal and neuropsychiatric damage. Of note, damage was particularly associated with high disease activity at diagnosis and 2019-EULAR/ACR score >25.

An Update on the Management of Childhood-Onset Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) is a prototype of a multisystemic, inflammatory, heterogeneous autoimmune condition. This disease is characterized by simultaneous or sequential organ and system involvement, with unpredictable flare and high levels of morbidity and mortality. Racial/ethnic background, socioeconomic status, cost of medications, difficulty accessing health care, and poor adherence seem to impact lupus outcomes and treatment response. In this article, the management of cSLE patients is updated. Regarding pathogenesis, a number of potential targets for drugs have been studied. However, most treatments in pediatric patients are off-label drugs with recommendations based on inadequately powered studies, therapeutic consensus guidelines, or case series. Management practices for cSLE patients include evaluations of disease activity and cumulative damage scores, routine non-live vaccinations, physical activity, and addressing mental health issues. Antimalarials and glucocorticoids are still the most common drugs used to treat cSLE, and hydroxychloroquine is recommended for nearly all cSLE patients. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) should be standardized for each patient, based on disease flare and cSLE severity. Mycophenolate mofetil or intravenous cyclophosphamide is suggested as induction therapy for lupus nephritis classes III and IV. Calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine, tacrolimus, voclosporin) appear to be another good option for cSLE patients with lupus nephritis. Regarding B-cell-targeting biologic agents, rituximab may be used for refractory lupus nephritis patients in combination with another DMARD, and belimumab was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for cSLE treatment in children aged > 5 years. New therapies targeting CD20, such as atacicept and telitacicept, seem to be promising drugs for SLE patients. Anti-interferon therapies (sifalimumab and anifrolumab) have shown beneficial results in phase II randomized control trials in adult SLE patients, as have some Janus kinase inhibitors, and these could be alternative treatments for pediatric patients with severe interferon-mediated inflammatory disease in the future. In addition, strict control of proteinuria and blood pressure is required in cSLE, especially with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker use.

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification and Diagnosis

Since the European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology 2019 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were published, they were externally validated by groups worldwide. In particular, the new criteria worked well also in East Asian and pediatric cohorts. Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) as an entry criterion were critically discussed, but the group of ANA-negative patients is small (<5%) worldwide. Specificity of the criteria is dependent on correct attribution only of those criteria that are not better explained by other causes. Although the classification criteria should not be used for diagnosis, many novel aspects inform diagnostic considerations.

Assessment of EULAR/ACR-2019, SLICC-2012 and ACR-1997 Classification Criteria in SLE with Longstanding Disease

BACKGROUND

Different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have been launched over the years. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of the EULAR/ACR-2019, SLICC-2012 and ACR-1997 classification criteria in a cohort of SLE patients with longstanding disease.

METHODS

Descriptive observational study in 79 patients with established and longstanding SLE. The three classification criteria sets were applied to those patients.

RESULTS

Of the 79 patients, 70 were women (88.6%), with a mean age of 51.8 ± 14 years and a mean disease duration of 15.2 ± 11.5 years. The sensitivity of the different criteria were: 51.9%, 87.3% and 86.1% for ACR-1997, SLICC-2012 and EULAR/ACR-2019, respectively. In total, 68 out of 79 patients (53.7%) met all three classification criteria; 11.4% did not meet any classification criteria and were characterized by low SLEDAI (0.6 ± 0.9), low SLICC/ACR Damage Index (0.88 ± 0.56) and fulfilling only skin domains, antiphospholipid antibodies or hypocomplementemia. To fulfill EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria was associated with low complement levels (p < 0.04), high anti-dsDNA levels (p < 0.001), presence of lupus nephritis III-IV (p < 0.05) and arthritis (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The EULAR/ACR-2019 classification criteria showed high sensitivity, similar to SLICC-2012, in SLE patients with longstanding disease. Patients with serological, articular or renal involvement are more likely to fulfill SLICC-2012 or EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria.

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in Children and Young People

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus ((j)SLE) is an autoimmune/inflammatory disease that results in significant damage and disability. When compared to patients with disease onset in adulthood, jSLE patients exhibit increased disease activity, damage and require more aggressive treatments. This manuscript summarises age-specific pathogenic mechanisms and underscores the need for age group-specific research, classification and treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

Genetic factors play a significant role in the pathophysiology of jSLE, as > 7% of patients develop disease as a result of single gene mutations. Remaining patients carry genetic variants that are necessary for disease development, but require additional factors. Increased 'genetic impact' likely contributes to earlier disease onset and more severe phenotypes. Epigenetic events have only recently started to be addressed in jSLE, and add to the list of pathogenic mechanisms that may serve as biomarkers and/or treatment targets. To allow meaningful and patient-oriented paediatric research, age-specific classification criteria and treatment targets require to be defined as currently available tools established for adult-onset SLE have limitations in the paediatric cohort. Significant progress has been made in understanding the pathophysiology of jSLE. Meaningful laboratory and clinical research can only be performed using age group-specific tools, classification criteria and treatment targets.

Performance of 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in a paediatric population—a multicentre study

Objectives

The European League Against Rheumatism and American College of Rheumatology 2019 (EULAR/ACR-19) criteria for the diagnosis of SLE were recently published, with the stated goal of maintaining the level of sensitivity and raising the level of specificity for classification of SLE in adults. The aim of this study is to examine their application to juvenile SLE (jSLE) patients.

Methods

In this multicentre study the charts of jSLE patients from three tertiary medical centres were reviewed and compared with patients with non-jSLE diagnosis. Paediatric rheumatologists, blinded to the original diagnosis, reviewed and diagnosed all cases. Paediatric patients' clinical and laboratory data were retrospectively extracted and then examined with regard to how they met the new and old criteria.

Results

Included were 225 patients (112 jSLE, 113 non-SLE). When applied to juvenile SLE classification, the sensitivity of the new EULAR/ACR-19 criteria was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.9, 0.99) and the specificity was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.82, 0.94). These were comparable to the SLICC criteria. The sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR-19 criteria improves over time and was 0.83 12 months following disease onset, reaching 0.96 after longer than 24 months.

Conclusion

Among a cohort of jSLE patients, sensitivity of the new EULAR/ACR-19 criteria was found to be high and specificity may have improved slightly compared with the SLICC-12 criteria. We support the use of the new classification criteria for paediatric patients in future jSLE studies, but it should be noted that its specificity is lower than for adults.