ABSTRACT
Anti-dsDNA autoantibodies quantification and complement levels are widely used to monitor disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). However, better biomarkers are still needed. We hypothesised whether the dsDNA antibody-secreting B-cells could be a complementary biomarker in disease activity and prognosis of SLE patients. Fifty-two SLE patients were enrolled and followed for up to 12 months. Additionally, 39 controls were included. An activity cut-off (comparing active and non-active patients according to clinical SLEDAI-2K) was established for SLE-ELISpot, chemiluminescence and Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence tests (≥11.24, ≥374.1 and ≥1, respectively). Assays performances together with complement status were compared regarding major organ involvement at the inclusion and flare-up risk prediction after follow-up. SLE-ELISpot showed the best performance in identifying active patients. High SLE-ELISpot results were associated with haematological involvement and, after follow-up, with an increased hazard ratio for disease flare-up (3.4) and especially renal flare (6.5). Additionally, the combination of hypocomplementemia and high SLE-ELISpot results increased those risks up to 5.2 and 32.9, respectively. SLE-ELISpot offers complementary information to anti-dsDNA autoantibodies to evaluate the risk of a flare-up in the following year. In some cases, adding SLE-ELISpot to the current follow-up protocol for SLE patients can improve clinicians' personalised care decisions.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Patients with COVID-19 presented with an elevated prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) but the relationship with thrombosis is controversial. We analysed the persistence of aPL and their association with the clinical outcomes during hospitalisation in a cohort of COVID-19 patients. Patients and Methods: We conducted a prospective study including consecutive hospitalised patients with COVID-19 from Hospital Clínic of Barcelona between March 28th and April 22nd, 2020. Clinical outcomes during hospitalisation were thrombosis, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and severe ventilatory failure. We determined both criteria and non-criteria aPL. Of note, in those patients with a positive result in the first determination, a second sample separated by at least 12 weeks was drawn to test the persistence of aPL. Results: One hundred and fifty-eight patients (59.5% men) with a mean age of 61.4 ± 14.9 years old were included. Thrombosis was present in 28 (17.7%) patients, severe respiratory failure in 47 (30.5%), and 30 (18.9%) patients were admitted to ICU. Sixteen (28.6%) patients were positive for the criteria aPL at both determinations and only two (3.6%) of them suffered from thrombosis during hospitalisations (both had aCL IgG). However, they presented with low titers of aCL. Of note, aPL were not related to thrombosis, ICU admission or severe respiratory failure. Conclusion: Although aPL were prevalent in our cohort of hospitalised COVID-19 patients and they were persistent in half of tested patients, most determinations were at low titers and they were not related to worse clinical outcomes.