Comparison of Sensitivities of American College of Rheumatology and Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Classification Criteria in Childhood-onset 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.

Extrapolation of Adult Efficacy Data to Pediatric Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Evaluating Similarities in Exposure-Response

To streamline drug development, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) can consider the extrapolation of adult efficacy data to children when the disease and drug effects are sufficiently similar. This study explored whether the relationship between drug exposure and response for selected drugs in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) was sufficiently similar to support a consideration of the extrapolation of adult efficacy data to children of ≥5 years of age. An exposure-response analysis of drugs used to treat SLE was conducted using published exposure versus response and efficacy versus time data. Statistical analyses included noncompartmental analysis of a drug's area under the effect curve and direct Imax pharmacodynamic (PD) modeling. Six drugs were included: azathioprine, belimumab, cyclophosphamide, hydroxychloroquine, mycophenolate/mycophenolic acid, and rituximab. For belimumab, the net change in responders at week 52 (the primary end point) was nearly identical between 1 adult trial and the pediatric trial. For mycophenolate, PD modeling suggested no significant differences in exposure and SLE disease activity between adults and children. For azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, hydroxychloroquine, and rituximab the data were not sufficient to quantitatively characterize the exposure-response relationship, but the clinical or pharmacologic response between children and adults was similar overall. Adult SLE data should be leveraged to guide pediatric drug development programs and identify areas with residual uncertainty regarding the effectiveness or safety of a drug in children. The degree to which efficacy extrapolation can reduce clinical trial requirements in pediatric SLE should be individualized for each new drug product, depending in part on the mechanism of action of the drug and the similarity of disease manifestations in children and adults.

Neuropsychiatric manifestations in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus

Neuropsychiatric manifestations occur frequently and are challenging to diagnose in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Most patients with childhood-onset SLE have neuropsychiatric events in the first 2 years of disease. 30-70% of patients present with more than one neuropsychiatric event during their disease course, with an average of 2-3 events per person. These symptoms are associated with disability and mortality. Serum, cerebrospinal fluid, and neuroimaging findings have been described in childhood-onset SLE; however, only a few have been validated as biomarkers for diagnosis, monitoring response to treatment, or prognosis. The aim of this Review is to describe the genetic risk, clinical and neuroimaging characteristics, and current treatment strategies of neuropsychiatric manifestations in childhood-onset SLE.

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.

Performance of the EULAR/ACR 2019 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematous in monogenic lupus

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the application of the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria to monogenic lupus patients and compare its performance against the SLICC-2012 criteria.

METHODS

In a multicenter retrospective cohort study, consecutive patients with monogenic lupus from three tertiary lupus clinics were enrolled. The diagnosis of monogenic lupus was based on the expert physician's opinion or fulfilling the SLICC-2012 criteria. All enrolled patients had genetic variants. A control group of sporadic childhood SLE (cSLE) and non-SLE patients, were included. A descriptive data analysis was conducted, and the EULAR/ACR-2019 and SLICC-2012 criteria were applied to both groups.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients with monogenic lupus with a median age at diagnosis of 6.0 (IQR 3.0-10.8) years and 104 controls (55 patients with cSLE and 49 non-lupus patients with a median age at diagnosis of 10.0 and 5.0 respectively) were included. Forty-four (89.8%) patients with monogenic lupus fulfilled the EULAR/ACR-2019 with a mean score of 22.3±8.9. The most frequent domains were immunologic (93.9%), musculoskeletal and renal (each 57.1%), and mucocutaneous (55.1%). Fifty-four (98.2%) cSLE patients and six (12.2%) non-lupus patients met the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria with a mean score of 22.5±9.2 and 8.5±5.2, respectively. The sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria in monogenic lupus was 89.9% (95% CI: 78.3-90.2), while the specificity was 87.6% (95% CI: 75.2-88.7).

CONCLUSION

This is the first and largest cohort of monogenic lupus patients testing the performance of the 2019-EULAR/ACR criteria. It efficiently classifies monogenic lupus patients, irrespective of the underlying genetic variants. Further studies are needed before these criteria are adopted worldwide. Key Points • Typically, patients with monogenic lupus have early onset severe disease, especially with mucocutaneous manifestations and a strong family history of SLE. • Monogenic lupus is a distinctive entity and might differ from the sporadic childhood SLE. • Our study includes a large multinational cohort of monogenic lupus with heterogeneous phenotypic features and underlying genetic variants. • Our study demonstrates that the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria efficiently classified monogenic lupus patients, irrespective of the diversity of the underlying genetic variants.

Comparison of the sensitivity of the EULAR / ACR 2019 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria in a Colombian population with systemic lupus erythematosus

BACKGROUND

/Objective: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a multisystem autoimmune disease with a wide range of clinical manifestations. The latest classification criteria, EULAR/ACR 2019, have not been validated in a Latin American population of Amerindian ancestry. The objective of this study is to compare the sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR 2019 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria in a group of SLE patients with the above ancestry.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was done. Data were obtained from the review of medical records of patients who met the inclusion criteria. The overall sensitivity of the criteria was calculated and compared to each other using the McNemar test.

RESULTS

146 medical records of patients from two referral centers were included. There were no differences in the sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR and SLICC 2012 criteria (84.9% versus 85.6% p = 0.79) nor were differences found when the groups based on disease duration were compared: less than 5 years (91.0% versus 92.5% p = 0.70), between 5 and 10 years (82.8% versus 82.8% p = 1), and 10 years or more (76.7% versus 76.7% p = 1). However, SLICC 2012 criteria was found to better classify patients with a less than 5-year disease duration compared to those with 10-year duration or more (92.5% versus 76.4% p = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

There are no statistically significant differences between the EULAR/ACR and SLICC 2012 criteria in the population studied. Nor were differences found when evaluating them by age at diagnosis and duration of the disease except when the group with less than 5 years of duration was compared to those with 10 years or more using the SLICC 2012 criteria.

Evaluating the performance of ACR, SLICC and EULAR/ACR classification criteria in childhood onset systemic lupus erythematosus

BACKGROUND

The ACR 1997, SLICC 2012 and EULAR/ACR 2019 classification criteria were validated based on adult patients. To date, there are no classification criteria specific for children with SLE. The aim of the study is to compare the performance characteristics among the three SLE classification criteria (ACR-1997, SLICC-2012 and EULAR/ACR-2019) in childhood onset SLE (cSLE) cohort of Arab ethnicity from Oman.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicenter study in Oman of cSLE patients as cases and patients with other rheumatic disease with a positive ANA titer as controls. The cSLE cases recruited were children diagnosed with SLE before 13 years of age. Data was retrospectively collected to establish the ACR-1997, SLICC-2012 and EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria fulfilled at first visit, first year follow up and last follow up.

RESULTS

Study population included 113 cSLE cases (mean age at diagnosis of 7.3 ± 3.4 years with disease duration of 6.1 ± 4.6 years) and 51 controls (mean age at diagnosis 5.0 ± 3.4 with disease duration 5.7 ± 3.9). The cSLE cases had higher frequency of familial SLE than controls (38% vs 7.8%; p < 0.001). The performance measures demonstrated that EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria had the highest sensitivity (81, 88, 89%) compared to ACR 1997 (49, 57, 66%) and SLICC 2012 (76, 84,86%); while the ACR 1997 had the highest specificity (96%) compared to SLICC 2012 (94%) and EULAR/ACR 2019 (90%) at first visit, first year and last assessment. When we increased the threshold score to ≥13 rather than the traditional score ≥ 10 for ACR/EULAR 2019, there was increased specificity (96%) at the expense of lower sensitivity (76, 83, and 84%) at first visit, first year and last assessment.

CONCLUSION

In this cSLE population, EULAR/ACR 2019 scored better at initial presentation, first year and last assessment follow up. Further multinational studies are needed to validate the appropriate cut off score for the newly proposed ACR/EULAR 2019 classification criteria in cSLE to increase early sensitivity and specificity for cSLE classification.

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.

Performance of the New 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology Classification Criteria for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in Children and Young Adults

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic usefulness of the 2019 European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) to that of the 1997 ACR classification criteria for SLE when applied to youths (age ≤21 years) with SLE.

METHODS

Data were extracted from electronic health records of patients followed at a large academic pediatric hospital. The treating rheumatologist's diagnosis of SLE served as the standard criterion for identifying SLE patients (cases). Controls were patients with juvenile dermatomyositis (DM), juvenile scleroderma, or juvenile systemic sclerosis (SSc). The 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria and the 1997 ACR criteria were tested against the standard criterion.

RESULTS

A total of 112 SLE patients ages 2-21 years and 105 controls ages 1-19 years (66% juvenile DM, 34% juvenile scleroderma or juvenile SSc) were available for analysis. The 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria had significantly higher sensitivity (85% versus 72%; P = 0.023) and similar specificity (83% versus 87%; P = 0.456) than the 1997 ACR criteria. The mean ± SD 2019 EULAR/ACR classification summary scores were significantly higher among non-White than White patients (22.41 ± 10.04 versus 17.59 ± 9.19; P < 0.01). The sensitivity of the 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria in non-White/White patients was 92%/80% (P = 0.08) versus 83%/64% (P < 0.02) for the 1997 ACR criteria. The sensitivity of the 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria was not affected by age or sex.

CONCLUSION

The 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria efficiently classify youths with SLE, irrespective of age, sex, and race. Compared to the 1997 ACR criteria, the new criteria are significantly more sensitive and similarly specific in youths with SLE.

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.

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

OBJECTIVE

Different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have been proposed for many years. The most widely used and accepted criteria has been the 1997 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria. In 2012, the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) criteria were published in an attempt to improve the clinical relevance of SLE criteria. In 2017, weighted criteria were proposed that included entry criteria, something the 1997 ACR and the 2012 SLICC criteria did not identify. The aim of the present study was to validate the 2017 weighted criteria, the 1997 ACR criteria, and the 2012 SLICC criteria and compare the sensitivities and specificities in pediatric SLE.

METHODS

For the past 15 years, retrospective chart review of patients diagnosed with SLE before age 19 years was conducted. The controls were patients referred for serologies positive for antinuclear antibodies but did not fulfill criteria for diagnosis of SLE at the initial visit or were diagnosed with another autoimmune disease. The 3 classification criteria sets were applied to these patients and compared against a gold standard of physician diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total of 156 patients were diagnosed with SLE. The sensitivity for the 2017 weighted criteria was 0.974 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.936-0.993) and the specificity was 0.984 (95% CI 0.966-0.994). The sensitivity for the 1997 ACR criteria was 0.872 (95% CI 0.809-0.920) and the specificity was 1.00 (95% CI 0.990-1.000). The sensitivity for the 2012 SLICC criteria was 0.974 (95% CI 0.936-0.993) and the specificity was 0.997 (95% CI 0.985-1.000).

CONCLUSION

The 2017 weighted criteria and the 2012 SLICC criteria were more sensitive than the 1997 ACR criteria. There were no significant differences in sensitivity and specificity between the 2012 SLICC and the 2017 weighted criteria.

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.

A comparison and review of three sets of classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus for distinguishing systemic lupus erythematosus from pure mucocutaneous manifestations in the lupus disease spectrum

Although the original purpose of the systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria was to distinguish SLE from other mimic diseases, and to facilitate sample selection in scientific research, they have become widely used as diagnostic criteria in clinical situations. It is not known yet if regarding classification criteria as diagnostic criteria, what problems might be encountered? This is the first study comparing the three sets of classification criteria for SLE, the 1997 American College of Rheumatology (ACR’97), 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC’12) and 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology (EULAR/ACR’19), for their ability to distinguish patients with SLE from patients with pure mucocutaneous manifestations (isolated cutaneous lupus erythematosus without internal disease, i-CLE) in the lupus disease spectrum. 1,865 patients with SLE and 232 patients with i-CLE were recruited from a multicenter study. We found that, due to low specificity, none of the three criteria are adept at distinguishing patients with SLE from patients with i-CLE. SLICC’12 performed best among the original three criteria, but if a positive ANA was removed as an entry criterion, EULAR/ACR’19 would performed better. A review of previous studies that compared the three sets of criteria was presented in this work.

Stand-alone renal SLICC criterion with full house glomerular deposits: is it enough for childhood lupus nephritis?

The objective of this study is to assess the usefulness of the stand-alone renal SLICC criterion in patients with childhood systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) and report their disease course, treatment response, and outcome. This study included children who were followed regularly in our lupus clinic with proved full house glomerular immune deposits nephritis and antinuclear (ANA), or anti-double-stranded DNA (dsDNA). They were compared with patients who diagnosed with cSLE with and without biopsy proven nephritis, based on Systemic Lupus International Collaborating (SLICC). The comparative group selected by systematic sampling from our cSLE database; the first patient was chosen randomly, and the subsequent patients chosen at intervals of three. The two groups were compared in respect to demographic data, clinical and laboratory findings, and disease course including response to treatment and outcome using urine protein/creatinine ratio, eGFR, and urine sediments. A total of 37 patients were assessed, six patients met the stand-alone renal SLICC criterion, 18 patients had cSLE with biopsy proven nephritis, and 13 cSLE patients without biopsy proven nephritis. Age of onset and time to diagnosis were comparable. However, patients with stand-alone renal criterion had significantly higher baseline serum creatinine, urine protein/creatinine ratio, and lower ANA titer (p < 0.05). Furthermore, none of the patients had other lupus manifestations. Four patients showed partial response to treatment. Two patients had renal impairment and one patient developed end-stage renal disease. Patients with full house glomerular immune deposits nephritis and ANA, or anti-dsDNA reflect a different disease spectrum with severe renal manifestations and worse outcome. Further large prospective study is required to revisit the validity of the stand-alone renal SLICC criterion in cSLE. KEY POINTS : • There is no definite diagnostic tool for SLE. Furthermore, to date there are no specific classification criteria for cSLE. • It seems that patients who met the stand-alone renal SLICC criterion might represent a distinct disease spectrum with severe renal involvement.