RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to quantify damage burden measured by Damage Index for Antiphospholipid Syndrome (DIAPS) in aPL-positive patients with or without a history of thrombosis in an international cohort (the APS ACTION cohort). Secondly, we aimed to identify clinical and laboratory characteristics associated with damage in aPL-positive patients. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we analysed the baseline damage in aPL-positive patients with or without APS classification. We excluded patients with other autoimmune diseases. We analysed the demographic, clinical and laboratory characteristics based on two subgroups: (i) thrombotic APS patients with high vs low damage; and (ii) non-thrombotic aPL-positive patients with vs without damage. RESULTS: Of the 826 aPL-positive patients included in the registry as of April 2020, 586 with no other systemic autoimmune diseases were included in the analysis (412 thrombotic and 174 non-thrombotic). In the thrombotic group, hyperlipidaemia (odds ratio [OR] 1.82; 95% CI 1.05, 3.15; adjusted P = 0.032), obesity (OR 2.14; 95% CI 1.23, 3.71; adjusted P = 0.007), aß2GPI high titres (OR 2.33; 95% CI 1.36, 4.02; adjusted P = 0.002) and corticosteroid use (ever) (OR 3.73; 95% CI 1.80, 7.75; adjusted P < 0.001) were independently associated with high damage at baseline. In the non-thrombotic group, hypertension (OR 4.55; 95% CI 1.82, 11.35; adjusted P = 0.001) and hyperlipidaemia (OR 4.32; 95% CI 1.37, 13.65; adjusted P = 0.013) were independent predictors of damage at baseline; conversely, single aPL positivity was inversely correlated with damage (OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.075, 0.77; adjusted P = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: DIAPS indicates substantial damage in aPL-positive patients in the APS ACTION cohort. Selected traditional cardiovascular risk factors, steroids use and specific aPL profiles may help to identify patients more prone to present with a higher damage burden.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To determine the independent impact of different definitions of remission and low disease activity (LDA) on damage accrual. METHODS: Patients with ≥2 annual assessments from a longitudinal multinational inception lupus cohort were studied. Five mutually exclusive disease activity states were defined: remission off-treatment: clinical Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (cSLEDAI)-2K=0, without prednisone or immunosuppressants; remission on-treatment: cSLEDAI-2K score=0, prednisone ≤5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants; low disease activity Toronto cohort (LDA-TC): cSLEDAI-2K score of ≤2, without prednisone or immunosuppressants; modified lupus low disease activity (mLLDAS): Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index-2K score of 4 with no activity in major organ/systems, no new disease activity, prednisone ≤7.5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants; active: all remaining visits. Only the most stringent definition was used per visit. Antimalarials were allowed in all. The proportion of time that patients were in a specific state at each visit since cohort entry was determined. Damage accrual was ascertained with the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index (SDI). Univariable and multivariable generalised estimated equation negative binomial regression models were used. Time-dependent covariates were determined at the same annual visit as the disease activity state but the SDI at the subsequent visit. RESULTS: There were 1652 patients, 1464 (88.6%) female, mean age at diagnosis 34.2 (SD 13.4) years and mean follow-up time of 7.7 (SD 4.8) years. Being in remission off-treatment, remission on-treatment, LDA-TC and mLLDAS (per 25% increase) were each associated with a lower probability of damage accrual (remission off-treatment: incidence rate ratio (IRR)=0.75, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.81; remission on-treatment: IRR=0.68, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.75; LDA: IRR=0.79, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.92; and mLLDAS: IRR=0.76, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.89)). CONCLUSIONS: Remission on-treatment and off-treatment, LDA-TC and mLLDAS were associated with less damage accrual, even adjusting for possible confounders and effect modifiers.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: In systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), disease activity and glucocorticoid (GC) exposure are known to contribute to irreversible organ damage. We aimed to examine the association between GC exposure and organ damage occurrence. METHODS: We conducted a literature search (PubMed (Medline), Embase and Cochrane January 1966-October 2021). We identified original longitudinal observational studies reporting GC exposure as the proportion of users and/or GC use with dose information as well as the occurrence of new major organ damage as defined in the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index. Meta-regression analyses were performed. Reviews, case-reports and studies with <5 years of follow-up, <50 patients, different outcomes and special populations were excluded. RESULTS: We selected 49 articles including 16 224 patients, 14 755 (90.9%) female with a mean age and disease duration of 35.1 years and of 37.1 months. The mean follow-up time was 104.9 months. For individual damage items, the average daily GC dose was associated with the occurrence of overall cardiovascular events and with osteoporosis with fractures. A higher average cumulative dose adjusted (or not)/number of follow-up years and a higher proportion of patients on GC were associated with the occurrence of osteonecrosis. CONCLUSIONS: We confirm associations of GC use with three specific damage items. In treating patients with SLE, our aim should be to maximise the efficacy of GC and to minimise their harms.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is characterized by episodes of thrombosis, obstetric morbidity or both, associated with persistently positive antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Studying the profile of a rare disease in an admixed population is important as it can provide new insights for understanding an autoimmune disease. In this sense of miscegenation, Brazil is characterized by one of the most heterogeneous populations in the world, which is the result of five centuries of interethnic crosses of people from three continents. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and laboratory characteristics of Brazilian vs. non-Brazilian primary antiphospholipid syndrome (PAPS) patients. METHODS: We classified PAPS patients into 2 groups: Brazilian PAPS patients (BPAPS) and PAPS patients from other countries (non-BPAPS). They were compared regarding demographic characteristics, criteria and non-criteria APS manifestations, antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) profile, and the adjusted Global Antiphospholipid Syndrome Score (aGAPSS). RESULTS: We included 415 PAPS patients (88 [21%] BPAPS and 327 [79%] non-BPAPS). Brazilian patients were significantly younger, more frequently female, sedentary, obese, non-white, and had a higher frequency of livedo (25% vs. 10%, p < 0.001), cognitive dysfunction (21% vs. 8%, p = 0.001) and seizures (16% vs. 7%, p = 0.007), and a lower frequency of thrombocytopenia (9% vs. 18%, p = 0.037). Additionally, they were more frequently positive for lupus anticoagulant (87.5% vs. 74.6%, p = 0.01), and less frequently positive to anticardiolipin (46.6% vs. 73.7%, p < 0.001) and anti-ß2-glycoprotein-I (13.6% vs. 62.7%, p < 0.001) antibodies. Triple aPL positivity was also less frequent (8% vs. 41.6%, p < 0.001) in Brazilian patients. Median aGAPSS was lower in the Brazilian group (8 vs. 10, p < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis, BPAPS patients still presented more frequently with livedo, cognitive dysfunction and sedentary lifestyle, and less frequently with thrombocytopenia and triple positivity to aPL. They were also less often white. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests a specific profile of PAPS in Brazil with higher frequency of selected non-criteria manifestations and lupus anticoagulant positivity. Lupus anticoagulant (not triple positivity) was the major aPL predictor of a classification criteria event.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Abstract Background: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is characterized by episodes of thrombosis, obstetric morbidity or both, associated with persistently positive antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Studying the profile of a rare disease in an admixed population is important as it can provide new insights for understanding an autoimmune disease. In this sense of miscegenation, Brazil is characterized by one of the most heterogeneous populations in the world, which is the result of five centuries of interethnic crosses of people from three continents. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and laboratory characteristics of Brazilian vs. non-Brazilian primary antiphospholipid syndrome (PAPS) patients. Methods: We classified PAPS patients into 2 groups: Brazilian PAPS patients (BPAPS) and PAPS patients from other countries (non-BPAPS). They were compared regarding demographic characteristics, criteria and non-criteria APS manifestations, antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) profile, and the adjusted Global Antiphospholipid Syndrome Score (aGAPSS). Results: We included 415 PAPS patients (88 [21%] BPAPS and 327 [79%] non-BPAPS). Brazilian patients were significantly younger, more frequently female, sedentary, obese, non-white, and had a higher frequency of livedo (25% vs. 10%, p < 0.001), cognitive dysfunction (21% vs. 8%, p = 0.001) and seizures (16% vs. 7%, p = 0.007), and a lower frequency of thrombocytopenia (9% vs. 18%, p = 0.037). Additionally, they were more frequently positive for lupus anticoagulant (87.5% vs. 74.6%, p = 0.01), and less frequently positive to anticardiolipin (46.6% vs. 73.7%, p < 0.001) and anti-ß2-glycoprotein-I (13.6% vs. 62.7%, p < 0.001) antibodies. Triple aPL positivity was also less frequent (8% vs. 41.6%, p < 0.001) in Brazilian patients. Median aGAPSS was lower in the Brazilian group (8 vs. 10, p < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis, BPAPS patients still presented more frequently with livedo, cognitive dysfunction and sedentary lifestyle, and less frequently with thrombocytopenia and triple positivity to aPL. They were also less often white. Conclusions: Our study suggests a specific profile of PAPS in Brazil with higher frequency of selected non-criteria manifestations and lupus anticoagulant positivity. Lupus anticoagulant (not triple positivity) was the major aPL predictor of a classification criteria event.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To test the interrater and intrarater reliability of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) Responder Index (SRI-50), an index designed to measure ≥ 50% improvement in disease activity between visits in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. METHODS: This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study with raters from Canada, the United Kingdom, and Argentina. Patient profile scenarios were derived from real adult patients. Ten rheumatologists from university and community hospitals and postdoctoral rheumatology fellows participated. An SRI-50 data retrieval form was used. Each rheumatologist scored SLEDAI-2K at the baseline visit and SRI-50 on followup visit, for the same patients, on 2 occasions 2 weeks apart. Physician global assessment (PGA) was determined on a numerical scale at baseline visit and a Likert scale on followup visit. Interrater and intrarater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and kappa statistics whenever applicable. RESULTS: Forty patient profiles were created. The ICC performed on 80 patient profiles for interrater ranged from 1.00 for SLEDAI-2K and SRI-50 to 0.96 for PGA. The intrarater ICC for SLEDAI-2K, SRI-50, and PGA scores ranged from 1.00 to 0.86. Substantial agreement was determined for the interrater Likert scale, with a kappa statistic of 0.57. CONCLUSION: The SRI-50 is reliable to assess ≥ 50% improvement in lupus disease activity. Use of the SRI-50 data retrieval form is essential to ensure optimal performance of the SRI-50. SRI-50 can be used by both rheumatologists and trainees and performs equally well in trained as well as untrained rheumatologists.

Asunto(s)