Remission and low disease activity (LDA) prevent damage accrual in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: results from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) inception cohort.

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.

Longitudinal analysis of ANA in the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) Inception Cohort.

OBJECTIVES: A perception derived from cross-sectional studies of small systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) cohorts is that there is a marked discrepancy between antinuclear antibody (ANA) assays, which impacts on clinicians' approach to diagnosis and follow-up. We compared three ANA assays in a longitudinal analysis of a large international incident SLE cohort retested regularly and followed for 5 years. METHODS: Demographic, clinical and serological data was from 805 SLE patients at enrolment, year 3 and 5. Two HEp-2 indirect immunofluorescence assays (IFA1, IFA2), an ANA ELISA, and SLE-related autoantibodies were performed in one laboratory. Frequencies of positivity, titres or absorbance units (AU), and IFA patterns were compared using McNemar, Wilcoxon and kappa statistics, respectively. RESULTS: At enrolment, ANA positivity (≥1:80) was 96.1% by IFA1 (median titre 1:1280 (IQR 1:640-1:5120)), 98.3% by IFA2 (1:2560 (IQR 1:640-1:5120)) and 96.6% by ELISA (176.3 AU (IQR 106.4 AU-203.5 AU)). At least one ANA assay was positive for 99.6% of patients at enrolment. At year 5, ANA positivity by IFAs (IFA1 95.2%; IFA2 98.9%) remained high, while there was a decrease in ELISA positivity (91.3%, p<0.001). Overall, there was >91% agreement in ANA positivity at all time points and ≥71% agreement in IFA patterns between IFA1 and IFA2. CONCLUSION: In recent-onset SLE, three ANA assays demonstrated commutability with a high proportion of positivity and titres or AU. However, over 5 years follow-up, there was modest variation in ANA assay performance. In clinical situations where the SLE diagnosis is being considered, a negative test by either the ELISA or HEp-2 IFA may require reflex testing.

Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA in the SLICC classification criteria dataset.

OBJECTIVE: Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA is a common isotype of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I in SLE. Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I was not included in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) SLE classification criteria, but was included in the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) criteria. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of anti-beta 2-glycoprotein I IgA in SLE versus other rheumatic diseases. In addition, we examined the association between anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA and disease manifestations in SLE. METHODS: The dataset consisted of 1384 patients, 657 with a consensus physician diagnosis of SLE and 727 controls with other rheumatic diseases. Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I isotypes were measured by ELISA. Patients with a consensus diagnosis of SLE were compared to controls with respect to presence of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I. Among patients with SLE, we assessed the association between anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA and clinical manifestations. RESULTS: The prevalence of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA was 14% in SLE patients and 7% in rheumatic disease controls (odds ratio, OR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.6, 3.3). It was more common in SLE patients who were younger patients and of African descent (p = 0.019). Eleven percent of SLE patients had anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA alone (no anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgG or IgM). There was a significant association between anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA and anti-dsDNA (p = 0.001) and the other antiphospholipid antibodies (p = 0.0004). There was no significant correlation of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA with any of the other ACR or SLICC clinical criteria for SLE. Those with anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA tended to have a history of thrombosis (12% vs 6%, p = 0.071), but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: We found the anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA isotype to be more common in patients with SLE and in particular, with African descent. It could occur alone without other isotypes.

Lower vitamin D is associated with metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance in systemic lupus: data from an international inception cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Vitamin D (25(OH)D) deficiency and metabolic syndrome (MetS) may both contribute to increased cardiovascular risk in SLE. We aimed to examine the association of demographic factors, SLE phenotype, therapy and vitamin D levels with MetS and insulin resistance. METHODS: The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) enrolled patients recently diagnosed with SLE (<15 months) from 33 centres across 11 countries from 2000. Clinical, laboratory and therapeutic data were collected. Vitamin D level was defined according to tertiles based on distribution across this cohort, which were set at T1 (10-36 nmol/l), T2 (37-60 nmol/l) and T3 (61-174 nmol/l). MetS was defined according to the 2009 consensus statement from the International Diabetes Federation. Insulin resistance was determined using the HOMA-IR model. Linear and logistic regressions were used to assess the association of variables with vitamin D levels. RESULTS: Of the 1847 patients, 1163 (63%) had vitamin D measured and 398 (34.2%) subjects were in the lowest 25(OH)D tertile. MetS was present in 286 of 860 (33%) patients whose status could be determined. Patients with lower 25(OH)D were more likely to have MetS and higher HOMA-IR. The MetS components, hypertension, hypertriglyceridemia and decreased high-density lipoprotein (HDL) were all significantly associated with lower 25(OH)D. Increased average glucocorticoid exposure was associated with higher insulin resistance. CONCLUSIONS: MetS and insulin resistance are associated with lower vitamin D in patients with SLE. Further studies could determine whether vitamin D repletion confers better control of these cardiovascular risk factors and improve long-term outcomes in SLE.

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.

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.

SLE clinical trials: impact of missing data on estimating treatment effects.

OBJECTIVE: A common problem in clinical trials is missing data due to participant dropout and loss to follow-up, an issue which continues to receive considerable attention in the clinical research community. Our objective was to examine and compare current and alternative methods for handling missing data in SLE trials with a particular focus on multiple imputation, a flexible technique that has been applied in different disease settings but not to address missing data in the primary outcome of an SLE trial. METHODS: Data on 279 patients with SLE randomised to standard of care (SoC) and also receiving mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), azathioprine or methotrexate were obtained from the Lupus Foundation of America-Collective Data Analysis Initiative Database. Complete case analysis (CC), last observation carried forward (LOCF), non-responder imputation (NRI) and multiple imputation (MI) were applied to handle missing data in an analysis to assess differences in SLE Responder Index-5 (SRI-5) response rates at 52 weeks between patients on SoC treated with MMF versus other immunosuppressants (non-MMF). RESULTS: The rates of missing data were 32% in the MMF and 23% in the non-MMF groups. As expected, the NRI missing data approach yielded the lowest estimated response rates. The smallest and least significant estimates of differences between groups were observed with LOCF, and precision was lowest with the CC method. Estimated between-group differences were magnified with the MI approach, and imputing SRI-5 directly versus deriving SRI-5 after separately imputing its individual components yielded similar results. CONCLUSION: The potential advantages of applying MI to address missing data in an SLE trial include reduced bias when estimating treatment effects, and measures of precision that properly reflect uncertainty in the imputations. However, results can vary depending on the imputation model used, and the underlying assumptions should be plausible. Sensitivity analysis should be conducted to demonstrate robustness of results, especially when missing data proportions are high.

Osteopontin and Disease Activity in Patients with Recent-onset Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Results from the SLICC Inception Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: In cross-sectional studies, elevated osteopontin (OPN) levels have been proposed to reflect, and/or precede, progressive organ damage and disease severity in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). We aimed, in a cohort of patients with recent-onset SLE, to determine whether raised serum OPN levels precede damage and/or are associated with disease activity or certain disease phenotypes. METHODS: We included 344 patients from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) Inception Cohort who had 5 years of followup data available. All patients fulfilled the 1997 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria. Baseline sera from patients and from age- and sex-matched population-based controls were analyzed for OPN using ELISA. Disease activity and damage were assessed at each annual followup visit using the SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) and the SLICC/ACR damage index (SDI), respectively. RESULTS: Compared to controls, baseline OPN was raised 4-fold in SLE cases (p < 0.0001). After relevant adjustments in a binary logistic regression model, OPN levels failed to significantly predict global damage accrual defined as SDI ≥ 1 at 5 years. However, baseline OPN correlated with SLEDAI-2K at enrollment into the cohort (r = 0.27, p < 0.0001), and patients with high disease activity (SLEDAI-2K ≥ 5) had raised serum OPN (p < 0.0001). In addition, higher OPN levels were found in patients with persistent disease activity (p = 0.0006), in cases with renal involvement (p < 0.0001) and impaired estimated glomerular filtration rate (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: The performance of OPN to predict development of organ damage was not impressive. However, OPN associated significantly with lupus nephritis and with raised disease activity at enrollment, as well as over time.

Lupus community panel proposals for optimising clinical trials: 2018.

Formidable impediments stand in the way of treatment development for lupus. These include the unwieldy size of current trials, international competition for scarce patients, complex outcome measures and a poor understanding of these outcomes in the world at large. The heterogeneity of the disease itself coupled to superimposition of variegated background polypharmacy has created enough immunological noise to virtually ensure the failure of lupus treatment trials, leaving an understandable suspicion that at least some of the results in testing failed drugs over the years may not have been negative, but merely uninterpretable. The authors have consulted with many clinical trial investigators, biopharmaceutical developers and stakeholders from government and voluntary sectors. This paper examines the available evidence that supports workable trial designs and proposes approaches to improve the odds of completing interpretable treatment development programs for lupus.