Validation of the 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology Criteria Compared to the 1997 American College of Rheumatology Criteria and the 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Criteria in Pediatric Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Comparison of systemic lupus international collaborating clinics 2012 classification criteria and European league against rheumatism/American college of rheumatology 2019 classification criteria for early detection of childhood onset systemic lupus erythematosus (multi-center study)

OBJECTIVE

To assess the performance of the new EULAR/ACR criteria, particularly for early detection of cSLE, in comparison to the SLICC criteria among the pediatric population in multiple centers in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study that enrolled pediatric patients up to the age of 14 years who've been diagnosed with SLE and followed in pediatric rheumatology clinics at 9 multi-tertiary hospitals in Saudi Arabia from 2010 to 2021 as a case group and were compared to a similar group of pediatric patients who've had defined rheumatological diseases other than SLE with a positive ANA titer (≥1:80) as controls. In total, 245 patients were included and distributed as 129 cases (diagnosed by expert pediatric rheumatologists) versus 116 patients in the control group. All relevant clinical information, including history, physical examination findings, and laboratory tests, was documented at the initial presentations. Then, the two sets of SLE classification criteria were applied to both groups to define who's going to meet both or either one of them. The exclusion criteria included those who had insufficient data or had overlapping or undifferentiated diseases. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), receiver operating curve (ROC), and accuracy were calculated for SLICC 2012 and EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria (total scores≥ 10 and ≥ 13). We performed a Chi-squared test to compare sensitivity and specificity of SLICC 2012 and EULAR/ACR 2019.

RESULTS

For SLICC (cut-off ≥4 criteria), the sensitivity was found to be 96.9% (95% CI 92.6%-99.4%) and the specificity was 94.8% (95% CI 89.6%-98.32%), with PPV and NPV of 95.4% and 96.5%, respectively. The ROC for it was 0.96 (95% CI 0.93-0.99), and this criterion had an accuracy of 95%. Regarding EULAR/ACR (total score ≥ 10), the performance measure showed a sensitivity of 99.2% and a specificity of 86.2%. Similarly, PPV was 88.9%; while NPV was a little higher (99.0%) than SLICC. The ROC for EULAR/ACR (total score ≥ 10) was 0.93 (95% CI 0.89-0.96), and this criterion had an accuracy of 93%. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the sensitivity and specificity of either using SLICC or EULAR/ACR (total score ≥ 10), as reflected by a p-value of 0.86 using the Chi-squared test. Although applying the EULAR/ACR with a total score of ≥ 13 revealed lower sensitivity (93.8%) than both the SLICC and the EULAR/ACR (total score ≥ 10), the specificity for it was found to increase up to 91.4% (85.7-96.2%) compared to the (86.2%) specificity of the EULAR/ACR (total score ≥ 10).

CONCLUSION

In this cohort among the Saudi population with childhood-onset SLE, the new EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria efficiently enable early detection of SLE, although a more frequent rate of false positives was observed with them. Escalating the total score from ≥ 10 to ≥ 13 in the cSLE population improved the specificity close to that of SLICC 2012. Further prospective studies in pediatrics need to be done for the validation of a cut- off score of ≥ 13 in cSLE rather than the traditional score of ≥ 10 in aSLE.

Pericardial Effusion Causing Cardiac Tamponade in a 10-Year-Old Male

A 10-year-old male with a past medical history of premature pubarche, mild persistent asthma, and eczema presented to the emergency department with progressive dyspnea and chest pain. On examination, he was found to be tachycardic and tachypneic. Chest radiograph demonstrated cardiomegaly, bilateral pleural effusions, and scattered atelectasis. Echocardiogram revealed a large pericardial effusion with right atrial collapse. The patient was admitted to the pediatric ICU for pericardiocentesis and drain placement. As he later became hypertensive and febrile, we will discuss how our patient's hospital course guided our differential diagnosis and how we arrived at a definitive diagnosis using a multidisciplinary approach.

Evaluating performance of the 2019 EULAR/ACR, 2012 SLICC, and 1997 ACR criteria for classifying adult-onset and childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997, Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012, and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR 2019 SLE criteria are often used to classify patients with adult-onset and childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in clinical practice because there are currently no diagnostic criteria for SLE. However, there is scarce evidence regarding which criteria are best for diagnosing patients with adult-onset and childhood-onset SLE.

Methods

We searched Medline and Scopus databases for English-language articles from inception through October 2021. Data were extracted from the included publications by two independent reviewers. We performed bivariate meta-analysis with a random-effects model to pool diagnostic parameters. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity sources. We used network meta-analysis to compare diagnosis performance among the three criteria and ranked them in descending order. Publication bias was assessed using Deeks' funnel plot.

Results

We included 29 studies for systematic review and meta-analysis. Of these, 18 studies involved adult-onset SLE and 11 studies involved childhood-onset SLE. The pooled sensitivities of the three criteria for diagnosis of adult-onset SLE were comparable between SLICC 2012 and EULAR/ACR 2019 [95.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 92.28-97.81 vs. 94.79, 95% CI 92.03-96.63]; pooled specificity was highest in ACR 1997 (92.24, 95% CI 87.06-95.46). In childhood-onset SLE, pooled sensitivity was highest in SLICC 2012 (93.76, 95% CI 89.45-96.39), and pooled specificity was highest in ACR 1997 (95.89, 95% CI 91.73-98.00). In network meta-analysis, the pooled diagnostic odds ratio ranked highest for EULAR/ACR 2019 (131.570, 95% CI 61.50-281.47) in adult-onset SLE and ranked highest for SLICC 2012 (191.07, 95% CI 76.06-480.01) in childhood-onset SLE. Deeks' funnel plot showed no publication bias.

Conclusion

We found that the diagnostic performance of the ACR 1997, SLICC 2012, and EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria differed between adult-onset and childhood-onset SLE. EULAR/ACR 2019 performed best for adult-onset SLE and SLICC 2012 was best for childhood-onset SLE in classifying patients with SLE.

Systematic review registration

[www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [CRD420 21281586].

Performances of different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in a single-center cohort from Turkey

Objective

Sensitivity and specificity of SLE classification criteria may vary in different populations and clinical settings. In this study, we aimed to compare the performances of three criteria sets/rules (1997, 2012, and 2019) in a large cohort of patients and relevant diseased controls.

Methods

The medical records of consecutive SLE patients and diseased controls were reviewed for clinical and laboratory features relevant to all sets of criteria. Criteria sets/rules were analyzed based on sensitivity, positive predictive value, specificity, and negative predictive value, using clinical diagnosis with at least 6 months of follow-up as the gold standard. A subgroup analysis was performed in ANA positive patients.

Results

A total of 393 SLE patients and 308 non-SLE diseased controls were included. Sensitivity was 78.4% for 1997 criteria and was more than 90% for both 2012 (91.9%) and 2019 (94.4%) criteria. Specificity was the highest (95.1%) for 1997 ACR criteria, 91.5% for 2012 SLICC criteria and 91.2% for 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, sensitivity of each criteria increased by 1%, 0.8%, and 2.2%, respectively. Specificity of 1997 criteria decreased by 2% and specificity of 2012 and 2019 criteria both decreased to less than 90%.

Conclusion

EULAR/ACR criteria were more sensitive than 1997 criteria and had a comparable performance with SLICC criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, the presence of false positive results (originated from patients with Sjögren’s disease and antiphospholipid syndrome mainly) decreased the specificity of both SLICC and EULAR/ACR criteria.

Diagnostic accuracy of the American College of Rheumatology-1997, the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics-2012, and the European League Against Rheumatism-2019 criteria for juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE/BACKGROUND

Several diagnostic criteria have been developed to effectively diagnose systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Three criteria are most common, namely the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-1997, the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)-2012, and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR/ACR)-2019. Whether they also apply to juvenile SLE is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the diagnostic accuracy of ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, and EULAR/ACR-2019 for juvenile SLE.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was conducted up to 26 March 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

We included all study designs in which patients had any index tests for ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, or EULAR/ACR-2019; both full-text papers and conference abstracts published in English were used. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) case reports; (2) adult subjects; or (3) did not report sufficient information to acquire true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative values of diagnostic criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two authors independently screened studies, extracted relevant data, and assessed the risk of bias.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

First, a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of EULAR/ACR-2019 and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model was performed to estimate sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We then carried out a network meta-analysis to compare the performances of these three diagnostic criteria.

RESULTS

In total, 17 relevant studies that included 2339 juvenile SLE patients were eligible to analyze pooled accuracy. In the meta-analysis, 10 studies (1613 cases) reported the diagnostic performance of EULAR/ACR-2019, showing a pooled sensitivity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89-0.95), pooled specificity of 0.89 (0.77-0.95), and area under HSROC of 0.96 (0.94-0.97). In the network meta-analysis, the SLICC-2012 (0.94, 0.92-0.96) had the highest sensitivity, followed by EULAR/ACR-2019 (0.93, 0.90-0.95), and ACR-1997 (0.78, 0.72-0.82); the ACR-1997 (0.96, 0.92-0.98) demonstrated the highest specificity. EULAR/ACR-2019 (0.92, 0.87-0.96) and SLICC-2012 (0.92, 0.86-0.96) had the similar specificity.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

We found that the applicability of the new EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria in juvenile SLE is not yet the best diagnostic tool.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022321514.

Advances in SLE classification criteria

This year, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1982 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) celebrate their 40th anniversary. From this start, the quest for optimal SLE criteria has led to the 1997 ACR update, the 2012 publication of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) criteria, and, in 2019, the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR classification criteria. The latter have since been externally validated in more than two dozen studies and have become the gold standard inclusion criterion of SLE clinical trials. This comprehensive review attempts to follow the evolving success story of SLE classification, highlighting relevant decisions and their rationale, and discussing consequences for the way SLE is defined and managed.

Evaluation of the European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology-2019 classification criteria in patients with childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus: a single-center retrospective study

This study aimed to compare the sensitivity and specificity of the European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology-2019 (EULAR/ACR-2019) classification criteria with prior classification schemes for patients with childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE). This single-center retrospective study examined 53 patients with cSLE and 53 patients having antinuclear antibody (ANA) titers ≥ 1:80 but not cSLE as controls. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria, original criteria reported earlier in 2019, the ACR-1997 criteria, and the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics-2012 (SLICC-2012) criteria. The frequency of positivity in the cSLE group for each item of the EULAR/ACR-2019, ACR-1997, and SLICC-2012 criteria was determined. Characteristics of the misclassified patients were also investigated. All patients with cSLE had ANA titers ≥ 1:80. The non-SLE diagnoses included juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS), juvenile idiopathic arthritis, systemic sclerosis, mixed connective tissue disease (MCTD), and others. Sensitivities of the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria, the original criteria, the ACR-1997 criteria, and the SLICC-2012 criteria were 100%, 100%, 86.8%, and 100%, respectively; the specificities were 84.9%, 92.5%, 98.1%, and 88.7%, respectively. In the cSLE group, the items of the SLE-specific antibody (100%), complement (98.1%), hematological (94.3%), and renal (84.9%) domains were frequently observed in the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria. The EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria misclassified patient controls more frequently, especially those with MCTD or pSS, as having SLE than the previous criteria. The EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria for cSLE had high sensitivity but low specificity; the weighted scoring of the original criteria reported earlier in 2019 may confer higher specificity and be more appropriate for the classification of SLE in a pediatric population. Key Points • The EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria for cSLE had high sensitivity but low specificity. • The EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria more frequently misclassified non-SLE patients who did not have SLE, especially those with MCTD or pSS, as having SLE than the previous criteria in patients with childhood onset. • The weighted scoring of the original criteria reported earlier in 2019 may confer higher specificity and be a more appropriate classification of SLE for a pediatric population.

Classification of systemic lupus erythematosus in children and adults

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune multisystem disease with a variable clinical phenotype and no single clinical, laboratory or pathological feature that can be used as a gold standard for disease classification or diagnosis. Classification criteria have been developed in an attempt to define homogenous groups of SLE patients for clinical research. They have been mainly validated in adult cohorts, given the much lower prevalence of SLE before puberty. The three commonly used sets of current classification criteria and their validation studies to date are described in this review. Challenges relating to classification of SLE patients, including important differences across age-groups and ethnicities, are explored along with future directions in the classification of SLE.

A 4-year old presenting with fever and achiness

In children under the age of 5 who have abnormalities in history, physical examination, and laboratory studies indicating multi-system disease, uncovering the correct diagnosis is challenging. Here, we report the course of a 4-year-old girl who presented with a change in behavior, fever, arthralgia, arthritis, and hematuria following three recent hospitalizations for pneumonia and impetigo. Serologic findings were suggestive of a rheumatologic etiology and a renal biopsy was consistent with Membranous Lupus Nephritis Class V which helped secure the diagnosis of pediatric systemic lupus erythematosus. We review the clinical features and diagnostic criteria of early-onset systemic lupus erythematosus and discuss diagnostic considerations and prognosis.

The new 2019-EULAR/ACR classification criteria specific domains at diagnosis can predict damage accrual in 670 childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate if the 2019-European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology (EULAR/ACR) criteria at diagnosis of childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) are associated with higher rates of early damage scored by Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology (SLICC/ACR) Damage Index (SDI).

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter study included 670 cSLE patients with ≤5 years of disease duration. All patients fulfilled both 2019-EULAR/ACR and 1997-ACR classification criteria. Total score of 2019-EULAR/ACR criteria and each of its specific domains were assessed at diagnosis as predictors of damage accrual at the last visit, according to the presence of any organ damage (defined by SDI ≥ 1).

RESULTS

Median disease duration was 2.8 (IQR 1.8-3.8) years and 200 (29.9%) patients had at least one organ damage (SDI ≥ 1). The most frequent domains were neuropsychiatric (12%), renal (7%), and musculoskeletal (6%). There was a higher frequency of renal (58% vs 43%, p = 0.0004) and neuropsychiatric domain (21% vs 7%, p < 0.0001) of 2019-EULAR/ACR criteria in patients with damage (SDI ≥ 1) compared to those without damage (SDI = 0). Patients scoring renal or neuropsychiatric domains of the 2019-EULAR/ACR criteria at diagnosis were associated with renal damage (odds ratio 9.701, 95% confidence interval 3.773-24.941, p < 0.001) or neuropsychiatric damage (OR 9.480, 95% CI 5.481-16.399, p<0.0001) at latest visit, respectively. cSLE patients with positive anti-dsDNA at diagnosis were also associated with renal damage by the latest visit (OR 2.438, 95% CI 1.114-5.3381, p = 0.021). Constitutional, hematologic, mucocutaneous, serosal, and musculoskeletal domains and specific criteria as well as other immunologic criteria were not associated with damage accrual. Median of SLEDAI-2K was significantly higher in patients with global damage (19.5 (2-51) vs 14 (0-51), p<0.001). 2019-EULAR/ACR score >25 was associated with more overall (SDI ≥ 1) (38% vs 25%, p = 0.0002) and renal damage (11% vs 5%, p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The 2019-EULAR/ACR criteria at diagnosis were associated with a higher rate of early damage in cSLE patients, especially for renal and neuropsychiatric damage. Of note, damage was particularly associated with high disease activity at diagnosis and 2019-EULAR/ACR score >25.

An Update on the Management of Childhood-Onset Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) is a prototype of a multisystemic, inflammatory, heterogeneous autoimmune condition. This disease is characterized by simultaneous or sequential organ and system involvement, with unpredictable flare and high levels of morbidity and mortality. Racial/ethnic background, socioeconomic status, cost of medications, difficulty accessing health care, and poor adherence seem to impact lupus outcomes and treatment response. In this article, the management of cSLE patients is updated. Regarding pathogenesis, a number of potential targets for drugs have been studied. However, most treatments in pediatric patients are off-label drugs with recommendations based on inadequately powered studies, therapeutic consensus guidelines, or case series. Management practices for cSLE patients include evaluations of disease activity and cumulative damage scores, routine non-live vaccinations, physical activity, and addressing mental health issues. Antimalarials and glucocorticoids are still the most common drugs used to treat cSLE, and hydroxychloroquine is recommended for nearly all cSLE patients. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) should be standardized for each patient, based on disease flare and cSLE severity. Mycophenolate mofetil or intravenous cyclophosphamide is suggested as induction therapy for lupus nephritis classes III and IV. Calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine, tacrolimus, voclosporin) appear to be another good option for cSLE patients with lupus nephritis. Regarding B-cell-targeting biologic agents, rituximab may be used for refractory lupus nephritis patients in combination with another DMARD, and belimumab was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for cSLE treatment in children aged > 5 years. New therapies targeting CD20, such as atacicept and telitacicept, seem to be promising drugs for SLE patients. Anti-interferon therapies (sifalimumab and anifrolumab) have shown beneficial results in phase II randomized control trials in adult SLE patients, as have some Janus kinase inhibitors, and these could be alternative treatments for pediatric patients with severe interferon-mediated inflammatory disease in the future. In addition, strict control of proteinuria and blood pressure is required in cSLE, especially with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker use.

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification and Diagnosis

Since the European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology 2019 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were published, they were externally validated by groups worldwide. In particular, the new criteria worked well also in East Asian and pediatric cohorts. Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) as an entry criterion were critically discussed, but the group of ANA-negative patients is small (<5%) worldwide. Specificity of the criteria is dependent on correct attribution only of those criteria that are not better explained by other causes. Although the classification criteria should not be used for diagnosis, many novel aspects inform diagnostic considerations.

Assessment of EULAR/ACR-2019, SLICC-2012 and ACR-1997 Classification Criteria in SLE with Longstanding Disease

BACKGROUND

Different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have been launched over the years. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of the EULAR/ACR-2019, SLICC-2012 and ACR-1997 classification criteria in a cohort of SLE patients with longstanding disease.

METHODS

Descriptive observational study in 79 patients with established and longstanding SLE. The three classification criteria sets were applied to those patients.

RESULTS

Of the 79 patients, 70 were women (88.6%), with a mean age of 51.8 ± 14 years and a mean disease duration of 15.2 ± 11.5 years. The sensitivity of the different criteria were: 51.9%, 87.3% and 86.1% for ACR-1997, SLICC-2012 and EULAR/ACR-2019, respectively. In total, 68 out of 79 patients (53.7%) met all three classification criteria; 11.4% did not meet any classification criteria and were characterized by low SLEDAI (0.6 ± 0.9), low SLICC/ACR Damage Index (0.88 ± 0.56) and fulfilling only skin domains, antiphospholipid antibodies or hypocomplementemia. To fulfill EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria was associated with low complement levels (p < 0.04), high anti-dsDNA levels (p < 0.001), presence of lupus nephritis III-IV (p < 0.05) and arthritis (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The EULAR/ACR-2019 classification criteria showed high sensitivity, similar to SLICC-2012, in SLE patients with longstanding disease. Patients with serological, articular or renal involvement are more likely to fulfill SLICC-2012 or EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria.

New lupus criteria: a critical view

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the validation of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2019 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

RECENT FINDINGS

Positive antinuclear antibodies, which constitute the obligatory entry criterion of the EULAR/ACR criteria, were found in the vast majority of SLE patients worldwide, with 97% (94-100%) of patients antinuclear antibodies positive in studies investigating EULAR/ACR criteria performance. Combined over the publications, EULAR/ACR criteria sensitivity was 92% (range 85-97%). Specificity varied more relevantly, with the publications published after the EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria showing 93% (83-98%) specificity. Of particular relevance is the good performance of the EULAR/ACR criteria seen in pediatric SLE as well as in early SLE.

SUMMARY

The new classification criteria have been investigated in an impressive number of cohorts worldwide, adding to the data from the EULAR/ACR criteria project cohort. It is critical to strictly keep to the attribution rule, that items are only counted if there is no more likely alternative explanation than SLE, the domain structure, where only the highest weighted item in a domain counts, and the limitation to highly specific tests for antibodies to double-stranded DNA.

Performance of 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in a paediatric population—a multicentre study

Objectives

The European League Against Rheumatism and American College of Rheumatology 2019 (EULAR/ACR-19) criteria for the diagnosis of SLE were recently published, with the stated goal of maintaining the level of sensitivity and raising the level of specificity for classification of SLE in adults. The aim of this study is to examine their application to juvenile SLE (jSLE) patients.

Methods

In this multicentre study the charts of jSLE patients from three tertiary medical centres were reviewed and compared with patients with non-jSLE diagnosis. Paediatric rheumatologists, blinded to the original diagnosis, reviewed and diagnosed all cases. Paediatric patients' clinical and laboratory data were retrospectively extracted and then examined with regard to how they met the new and old criteria.

Results

Included were 225 patients (112 jSLE, 113 non-SLE). When applied to juvenile SLE classification, the sensitivity of the new EULAR/ACR-19 criteria was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.9, 0.99) and the specificity was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.82, 0.94). These were comparable to the SLICC criteria. The sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR-19 criteria improves over time and was 0.83 12 months following disease onset, reaching 0.96 after longer than 24 months.

Conclusion

Among a cohort of jSLE patients, sensitivity of the new EULAR/ACR-19 criteria was found to be high and specificity may have improved slightly compared with the SLICC-12 criteria. We support the use of the new classification criteria for paediatric patients in future jSLE studies, but it should be noted that its specificity is lower than for adults.

Splenomegaly in Children and Adolescents

In contrast to other lymphoid tissues making up the immune system, the spleen as its biggest organ is directly linked into the blood circulation. Beside its main task to filter out microorganism, proteins, and overaged or pathologically altered blood cells, also humoral and cellular immune responses are initiated in this organ. The spleen is not palpable during a physical examination in most but not all healthy patients. A correct diagnosis of splenomegaly in children and adolescents must take into account age-dependent size reference values. Ultrasound examination is nowadays used to measure the spleen size and to judge on reasons for morphological alterations in associated with an increase in organ size. An enormous amount of possible causes has to be put in consideration if splenomegaly is diagnosed. Among these are infectious agents, hematologic disorders, infiltrative diseases, hyperplasia of the white pulp, congestion, and changes in the composition and structure of the white pulp by immunologically mediated diseases. This review attempts to discuss a comprehensive list of differential diagnoses to be considered clinically in children and young adolescents.

The Performances of the ACR 1997, SLICC 2012, and EULAR/ACR 2019 Classification Criteria in Pediatric Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Objective.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune disease. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997, Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012, and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR 2019 SLE classification criteria are formed based on data mainly from adult patients. We aimed to test the performances of the SLE classification criteria among pediatric patients with SLE.

Methods.

Pediatric patients with SLE (n = 262; 80.9% female) were included from 3 different centers in Turkey. As controls, 174 children (60.9% female) with other diseases who had ANA (antinuclear antibody) test results were included. The gold standard for SLE diagnosis was expert opinion.

Results.

The sensitivities of the ACR 1997, SLICC 2012, and EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria were 68.7%, 95.4%, and 91.6%, respectively. The specificities of the ACR 1997, SLICC 2012, and EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria were 94.8%, 89.7%, and 88.5%, respectively. Eighteen patients with SLE met the SLICC 2012 but not the EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria. Among these, hematologic involvement was prominent (n = 13; 72.2%). Eight patients with SLE fulfilled the EULAR/ACR 2019 but not the SLICC 2012 criteria. Among these, joint involvement was prominent (n = 6; 75%).

Conclusion.

To our knowledge, this is the largest cohort study of pediatric SLE to test the performances of all 3 classification criteria. The SLICC 2012 criteria yielded the best sensitivity, whereas the ACR 1997 criteria had the best specificity. SLICC 2012 criteria performed better than EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria. Separation of different hematological manifestations in the SLICC 2012 criteria might have contributed to the higher performance of this criteria set.

Neue Klassifikationskriterien des SLE: was helfen sie für die klinische Diagnose des SLE?

Im September 2019 sind die gemeinsamen Klassifikationskriterien der European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) und des American College of Rheumatology (ACR) für den systemischen Lupus erythematodes (SLE) erschienen. Die EULAR/ACR 2019 Klassifikationskriterien verwenden (jemals) positive antinukleäre Antikörper (ANA) als obligates Eingangskriterium und gewichtete Kriterien mit Werten von 2 bis 10 und einem Cut-off von 10. Die Kriterien sind in 10 Domänen geordnet, innerhalb derer Assoziationen zwischen verschiedenen Manifestationen bestehen, und nur der höchste Wert in einer Domäne wird verwendet. Kriterien werden nur gewertet, wenn es für sie keine andere Erklärung gibt, die wahrscheinlicher ist als der SLE. Die neuen Kriterien sind statistisch den älteren Kriteriensets überlegen. Sie gelten aber nur für die Klassifikation. Für die meisten Rheumatologinnen und Rheumatologen ist das Stellen der Diagnose eines SLE wesentlich relevanter als der Einschluss in SLE-Studien, für den die Klassifikationskriterien gedacht sind. Daher stellt sich die Frage, wie weit die Klassifikationskriterien für die Diagnose helfen können. Direkt dafür verwendet werden dürfen sie wirklich nicht. Erfahrene Ärztinnen und Ärzte sind besser und v. a. sensitiver als die besten Kriterien. Manche Detailinformationen helfen aber dennoch dabei, die individuelle Diagnose für konkret Patientinnen und Patienten zu stellen. Die vorliegende Arbeit erörtert die Neuigkeiten in den EULAR/ACR 2019-Kriterien, stellt den Unterschied zwischen Klassifikation und Diagnose dar und diskutiert, welche Informationen auch im klinischen Alltag Anwendung finden können.