| 31. |
- Isenberg, D. A., et al.
(author)
-
An assessment of disease flare in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a comparison of BILAG 2004 and the flare version of SELENA
- 2011
-
In: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 70:1, s. 54-59
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims To compare the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) 2004, the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment (SELENA) flare index (SFI) and physician's global assessment (PGA) in assessing flares of disease activity in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods Sixteen patients with active SLE were assessed by a panel of 16 rheumatologists. The order in which the patients were seen was randomised using a 4x4 Latin square design. Each patient's flare status was determined at each assessment using the BILAG 2004 activity index; the SFI and a PGA. A group of five specialists designated each patient into severe, moderate, mild or no flare categories. Results The rate of complete agreement (95% CI) of the four individual examining physicians for any flare versus no flare was 81% (55% to 94%), 75% (49% to 90%) and 75% (49% to 90%) for the BILAG 2004 index, SELENA flare instrument and PGA, respectively. The overall agreement between flare defined by BILAG 2004 and the SFI was 81% and when type of flare was considered was 52%. Intraclass correlation coefficients (95% CI), as a measure of internal reliability, were 0.54 (0.32 to 0.78) for BILAG 2004 flare compared with 0.21 (0.08 to 0.48) for SELENA flare and 0.18 (0.06 to 0.45) for PGA. Severe flare was associated with good agreement between the indices but mild/moderate flare was much less consistent. Conclusions The assessment of flare in patients with SLE is challenging. No flare and severe flare are identifiable but further work is needed to optimise the accurate 'capture' of mild and moderate flares.
|
|
| 32. |
|
|
| 33. |
|
|
| 34. |
- Lessard, Christopher J., et al.
(author)
-
Identification of a Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Susceptibility Locus at 11p13 between PDHX and CD44 in a Multiethnic Study
- 2011
-
In: American Journal of Human Genetics. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-9297 .- 1537-6605. ; 88:1, s. 83-91
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is considered to be the prototypic autoimmune disease, with a complex genetic architecture influenced by environmental factors. We sought to replicate a putative association at 11p13 not yet exceeding genome-wide significance (p < 5 x 10(-8)) identified in a genome-wide association study (GWAS). Our GWA scan identified two intergenic SNPs located between PDHX and CD44 showing suggestive evidence of association with SLE in cases of European descent (rs2732552, p = 0.004, odds ratio [OR] = 0.78; rs387619, p = 0.003, OR = 0.78). The replication cohort consisted of >15,000 subjects, including 3562 SLE cases and 3491 controls of European ancestry, 1527 cases and 1811 controls of African American (AA) descent, and 1265 cases and 1260 controls of Asian origin. We observed robust association at both rs2732552 (p = 9.03 x 10(-8), OR = 0.83) and rs387619 (p = 7.7 x 10(-7), OR = 0.83) in the European samples with p(meta) = 1.82 x 10(-9) for rs2732552. The AA and Asian SLE cases also demonstrated association at rs2732552 (p = 5 x 10(-3), OR = 0.81 and p = 4.3 x 10(-4), OR = 0.80, respectively). A meta-analysis of rs2732552 for all racial and ethnic groups studied produced p(meta) = 2.36 x 10(-13). This locus contains multiple regulatory sites that could potentially affect expression and functions of CD44, a cell-surface glycoprotein influencing immunologic, inflammatory, and oncologic phenotypes, or PDHX, a subunit of the pyruvate dehydrogenase complex.
|
|
| 35. |
|
|
| 36. |
|
|
| 37. |
|
|
| 38. |
|
|
| 39. |
- Orbai, A-M, et al.
(author)
-
Anti-C1q antibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus.
- 2015
-
In: Lupus. - : SAGE Publications. - 0961-2033 .- 1477-0962. ; 24:1, s. 42-49
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Anti-C1q has been associated with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and lupus nephritis in previous studies. We studied anti-C1q specificity for SLE (vs rheumatic disease controls) and the association with SLE manifestations in an international multicenter study.
|
|
| 40. |
- Petri, Michelle, et al.
(author)
-
Comparison of the 2019 European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology/American College of Rheumatology Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification Criteria With Two Sets of Earlier Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification Criteria
- 2021
-
In: Arthritis Care and Research. - : Wiley. - 2151-464X .- 2151-4658. ; 73:9, s. 1231-1235
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria and the revised American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997 criteria are list based, counting each SLE manifestation equally. We derived a classification rule based on giving variable weights to the SLICC criteria and compared its performance to the revised ACR 1997, the unweighted SLICC 2012, and the newly reported European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR)/ACR 2019 criteria sets. Methods: The physician-rated patient scenarios used to develop the SLICC 2012 classification criteria were reemployed to devise a new weighted classification rule using multiple linear regression. The performance of the rule was evaluated on an independent set of expert-diagnosed patient scenarios and compared to the performance of the previously reported classification rules. Results: The weighted SLICC criteria and the EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria had less sensitivity but better specificity compared to the list-based revised ACR 1997 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria. There were no statistically significant differences between any pair of rules with respect to overall agreement with the physician diagnosis. Conclusion: The 2 new weighted classification rules did not perform better than the existing list-based rules in terms of overall agreement on a data set originally generated to assess the SLICC criteria. Given the added complexity of summing weights, researchers may prefer the unweighted SLICC criteria. However, the performance of a classification rule will always depend on the populations from which the cases and non-cases are derived and whether the goal is to prioritize sensitivity or specificity.
|
|
