Cross-sectional characteristics of pediatric-onset discoid lupus erythematosus: Results of a multicenter, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of systemic lupus in children with discoid lupus is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the baseline characteristics of patients with pediatric discoid lupus erythematosus (pDLE). METHODS: Medical records at 17 sites were reviewed for pediatric dermatology and rheumatology patients with discoid lupus erythematosus. The inclusion criteria were clinical and/or histopathologic diagnosis of discoid lupus erythematosus with an age at onset of <18 years. Baseline data were collected at the first documented visit. Outcomes included diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) at the baseline visit using the 1997 American College of Rheumatology (primary) and the 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (secondary) criteria. RESULTS: Of the >1500 charts reviewed, 438 patients met the inclusion criteria. The cohort was predominantly female (72%) and racially/ethnically diverse. A diagnosis of SLE at the baseline visit (pDLE + SLE) was rendered in 162 (37%) patients using the American College of Rheumatology and in 181 (41%) patients using the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics criteria. Patients with pDLE + SLE were older at the time of rash onset (median, 12.9 vs 8.9 years; P < .001), with shorter time from discoid lupus erythematosus onset to diagnosis, compared with patients with pDLE-only (median, 2 vs 7 months; P < .001). Patients with pDLE + SLE were more likely to be female (P = .004), with generalized discoid lupus erythematosus and clinically aggressive disease, including end-organ involvement, positive serologies, and higher- titer levels of antinuclear antibodies (P < .001). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study. CONCLUSION: A diagnosis of discoid lupus erythematosus in adolescence should prompt thorough screening for SLE.

Practice-based differences in paediatric discoid lupus erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: Children with discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) are at risk for disfigurement and progression to systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Consensus is lacking regarding optimal care for children with DLE. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare practice patterns among paediatric dermatologists/rheumatologists treating paediatric DLE. METHODS: An online survey was sent to 292 paediatric rheumatologists in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance and 200 paediatric dermatologists in the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement. RESULTS: Survey response rates were 38% (76 of 200) for dermatology and 21% (60 of 292) for rheumatology. Both specialties agreed that screening labs should include complete blood counts with differential, urinalysis, complement levels, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, antinuclear antibody and other autoantibodies, hepatic function and renal function/electrolytes. Both specialties agreed that arthritis or nephritis should prompt intensified evaluation for SLE. No other patient features achieved consensus as disease-modifying risk factors. Hydroxychloroquine was agreed upon as first-line systemic therapy, but consensus was lacking for second- or third-line treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We found few areas of consensus and significant practice differences between paediatric dermatologists and rheumatologists treating DLE. Knowledge gaps include risk factors for SLE, optimal screening and treatment of refractory skin disease.

Employment outcomes among survivors of common cancers: the Symptom Outcomes and Practice Patterns (SOAPP) study.

INTRODUCTION: Risk factors for employment difficulties after cancer diagnosis are incompletely understood, and interventions to improve post-cancer employment remain few. New targets for intervention are needed. METHODS: We assessed a cohort of 530 nonmetastatic cancer patients (aged ≤ 65 years, >6 months from diagnosis, off chemo- or radiotherapy) from the observational multi-site Symptom Outcomes and Practice Patterns study. Participants reported employment change, current employment, and symptoms. Groups were based on employment at survey (working full- or part-time versus not working) and whether there had been a change due to illness (yes versus no). The predictive power of symptom interference with work was evaluated for employment group (working stably versus no longer working). Race/ethnicity, gender, cancer type, therapy, and time since diagnosis were also assessed. Association between employment group and specific symptoms was examined. RESULTS: The cohort was largely non-Hispanic white (76 %), female (85 %), and diagnosed with breast cancer (75 %); 24 % reported a change in employment. On multivariable analysis, participants with at least moderate symptom interference were more likely to report no longer working than their less effected counterparts (odds ratio (OR) = 8.0, 95 % CI, 4.2-15.4), as were minority participants compared with their non-Hispanic white counterparts (OR = 3.2, 95 % CI, 1.8-5.6). Results from the multiple regression model indicated the combination of fatigue (OR = 2.3, 95 % CI, 1.1-4.7), distress (OR = 3.9, 95 % CI, 1.7-9.0), and dry mouth (OR = 2.6, 95 % CI, 1.1-6.2) together with race/ethnicity and time since diagnosis adequately accounted for employment group. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the hypothesis that residual symptom burden is related to post-cancer employment: Residual symptoms may be targets for intervention to improve work outcomes among cancer survivors. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: This analysis examines whether increased symptom burden is associated with a change to not working following a cancer diagnosis. We also examined individual symptoms to assess which symptoms were most strongly associated with not working after a cancer diagnosis. Our hope is that we will be able to use this information to both screen survivors post-active treatment as well as target high-risk symptoms for further and more aggressive intervention, in an attempt to improve post-cancer work outcomes.

The Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale: psychometric properties of the English version.

Research is now suggesting that intolerance of uncertainty may be very important in understanding worry and may play a key role in the etiology and maintenance of worry. The present study attempted to further our understanding of intolerance of uncertainty by examining the psychometric properties of the English version of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS), which has already been validated in French. Factor analysis indicated that the IUS has a four-factor structure that represents the idea that uncertainty is stressful and upsetting, uncertainty leads to the inability to act, uncertain events are negative and should be avoided, and being uncertain is unfair. The IUS has excellent internal consistency, good test-retest reliability over a five-week period, and convergent and divergent validity when assessed with symptom measures of worry, depression, and anxiety. Overall, this study suggests that the IUS is a sound measure of intolerance of uncertainty and supports the idea that intolerance of uncertainty is an important construct involved in worry.