Autoimmune liver diseases in systemic rheumatic diseases

Systemic rheumatic diseases (SRDs) are chronic, inflammatory, autoimmune disorders with the presence of autoantibodies that may affect any organ or system. Liver dysfunction in SRDs can be associated with prescribed drugs, viral hepatitis, alternative hepatic comorbidities and coexisting autoimmune liver diseases (AILDs), requiring an exclusion of secondary conditions before considering liver involvement. The patterns of overlap diseases depend predominantly on genetic determinants with common susceptible loci widely distributing in both disorders. In AILDs, it is important to identify the overlapping SRDs at an early stage since such a coexistence may influence the disease course and prognosis. Commonly co-occurring SRDs in AILDs are Sjögren syndrome (SS), rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), and SS, RA or systemic sclerosis in primary biliary cholangitis. Owing to different disease complications and therapies, it is imperative to differentiate between SLE liver involvement and SLE-AIH overlap disease. Therapeutic options can be personalized to control coexisting conditions of liver autoimmunity and rheumatic manifestations in AILD-SRD overlap diseases. The collaboration between hepatologists and rheumatologists can lead to significant advances in managing such a complex scenario. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview on coexisting AILDs in different SRDs and the therapeutic approach in managing these overlap diseases.

Mortality and its risk factors in critically ill patients with connective tissue diseases: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS), systemic sclerosis (SSc), idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are connective tissue diseases (CTD) whose complications can lead to management in the intensive care unit (ICU).

OBJECTIVES

To estimate by meta-analysis ICU mortality rates for CTD.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed to identify articles studying critically ill CTD patients. A random-effects model was chosen for analysis. Pooled proportion mortality was calculated using aggregated-data meta-analysis with a random-effects model and assessment of heterogeneity with the I² statistic. Risk of bias was assessed using the quality assessment tool.

RESULTS

Of the 5694 individual publications, a sample of 31 independent cohorts was used for the meta-analysis totalling 5007 patients. The main cause for admission was sepsis (43%) followed by "flare-ups" (40%). The overall pooled proportion of mortality of CTD patients across all 31 studies was 33% (95%CI: 28-38%). In the IIM subgroup and that of SSc, mortality was 70% (95%CI: 46-86%) and 40% (95%CI: 25-47%), respectively. In the SLE subgroup, mortality was similar to the overall pooled mortality of 35% (95%CI: 29-42%). Subgroup mortality for RA and pSS patients was respectively 20% (95%CI: 11-33%) and 17% (95%CI: 6-41%); lower than the overall pooled mortality. Heterogeneity in each subgroup remained high.

CONCLUSION

The overall pooled proportion of mortality of ICU patients with CTD was 33% (95%CI: 28-38%), with a high heterogeneity (I²= 89%). In the subgroup analysis, mortality was higher for patients with IIM and SSc.

Outcomes of severe systemic rheumatic disease patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

BACKGROUND

Systemic rheumatic diseases (SRDs) are a group of inflammatory disorders that can require intensive care unit (ICU) admission because of multiorgan involvement with end-organ failure(s). Critically ill SRD patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were studied to gain insight into their characteristics and outcomes.

METHODS

This French monocenter, retrospective study included all SRD patients requiring venovenous (VV)- or venoarterial (VA)-ECMO admitted to a 26-bed ECMO-dedicated ICU from January 2006 to February 2020. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Ninety patients (male/female ratio: 0.5; mean age at admission: 41.6 ± 15.2 years) admitted to the ICU received VA/VV-ECMO, respectively, for an SRD-related flare (n = 69, n = 38/31) or infection (n = 21, n = 10/11). SRD was diagnosed in-ICU for 31 (34.4%) patients. In-ICU and in-hospital mortality rates were 48.9 and 51.1%, respectively. Nine patients were bridged to cardiac (n = 5) or lung transplantation (n = 4), or left ventricular assist device (n = 2). The Cox multivariable model retained the following independent predictors of in-hospital mortality: in-ICU SRD diagnosis, day-0 Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II score ≥ 70 and arterial lactate ≥ 7.5 mmol/L for VA-ECMO-treated patients; diagnosis other than vasculitis, day-0 SAPS II score ≥ 70, ventilator-associated pneumonia and arterial lactate ≥ 7.5 mmol/L for VV-ECMO-treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

ECMO support is a relevant rescue technique for critically ill SRD patients, with 49% survival at hospital discharge. Vasculitis was independently associated with favorable outcomes of VV-ECMO-treated patients. Further studies are needed to specify the role of ECMO for SRD patients.

Etiologies and outcomes of rheumatology patients with acute respiratory failure requiring intensive care: a single-center medical records review study of 259 patients

OBJECTIVE

The etiologies of acute respiratory failure in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases (SRDs) requiring intensive care remain unknown. This study was undertaken to investigate the etiologies and outcomes.

METHODS

A medical records review study was performed of 259 adult SRDs patients with respiratory failure admitted to medical ICU across a 5-year period. The etiologies were classified as infection, SRD exacerbation, and undetermined. The factors associated with ICU mortality were identified with multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The etiologies of respiratory failure included infection (n = 209, 80.7%), SRD exacerbation (n = 71, 27.4%), and undetermined (n = 21, 8.1%). The most common pathogen was Pneumocystis jirovecii (39.8%), followed by Aspergillus spp. (33.2%), and cytomegalovirus (23.2%). The ICU mortality rate was 59.8%. A high acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score (OR 1.118, 95% CI 1.054 to 1.186, p < 0.001), a PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio < 100 mmHg (OR 3.918, 95% CI 2.199 to 6.892, p < 0.001), and a diagnosis of dermatomyositis/polymyositis (OR 4.898, 95% CI 1.949 to 12.309, p = 0.001), vasculitis (OR 3.007, 95% CI 1.237 to 7.309, p = 0.015), and Pneumocystis pneumonia (OR 2.345, 95% CI 1.168 to 4.705, p = 0.016) were associated with increased mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Opportunistic infections and SRD exacerbation were the most common etiologies of acute respiratory failure in patients with SRDs requiring ICU admission, with high ICU mortality. Development of a standard protocol for differential diagnosis in this population might help initiate definitive therapy and improve clinical outcome. Key Points • Infections, especially with opportunistic infections, were the leading cause of acute respiratory failure in critically ill rheumatology patients, with high mortality. • Severity of illness, certain types of rheumatic diseases, and opportunistic fungal infections were associated with increased mortality. • Using a comprehensive diagnostic workup might help to confirm the infective etiology and improve outcome.

Comparing the burdens of opportunistic infections among patients with systemic rheumatic diseases: a nationally representative cohort study

Objective

To estimate and compare the burdens of opportunistic infections and herpes zoster in real-world practice among patients with various systemic rheumatic diseases.

Methods

This 13-year cohort study used national health insurance data to compare the incidence rates (IRs) of nine opportunistic infections among patients with five rheumatic diseases. The analyses were stratified according to follow-up duration using Poisson regression, and Cox models were used to compare the risk of first opportunistic infection.

Results

During 2000–2013, we identified 76,966 patients who had polymyositis/dermatomyositis (PM/DM, 2270 cases), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE, 15,961 cases), systemic sclerosis (SSc, 2071 cases), rheumatoid arthritis (RA, 38,355 cases), or primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS, 18,309 cases). The IR of opportunistic infections was highest for PM/DM cases (61.3/1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval [CI] 56.6–66.2), followed by SLE cases (43.1/1000 person-years, 95% CI 41.7–44.5), SSc cases (31.6/1000 person-years, 95% CI 28.3–35.1), RA cases (25.0/1000 person-years, 95% CI 24.4–25.7), and pSS cases (24.1/1000 person-years, 95% CI 23.1–25.2). Multivariable Cox analysis revealed that, relative to SLE, PM/DM was associated with a significantly higher risk of opportunistic infections (hazard ratio 1.18, 95% CI 1.08–1.29). The risk of opportunistic infections was highest during the first year after the diagnosis of all five rheumatic diseases.

Conclusions

The risk of opportunistic infection was highest for PM/DM, followed by SLE, SSc, RA, and pSS. Careful observation and preventive therapy for opportunistic infections may be warranted in selected PM/DM patients, especially during the first year after the diagnosis.

Elevated serum globulin gap as a highly reliable marker of elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases

OBJECTIVE

Serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) are the two most commonly used markers of inflammation in clinical practice. Reducing the need for these tests could lead to considerable cost savings without sacrificing the quality of patient care.

METHODS

The electronic medical records of patients with systemic rheumatic diseases seen between May 2015 and June 2017 in the rheumatology clinics at a single academic medical center were retrospectively reviewed. Correlations and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves between serum CRP level and ESR vs serum globulin gap (the difference between levels of total protein and albumin) and albumin-to-globulin (A:G) ratio were determined.

RESULTS

In two independent cohorts (discovery: 263 subjects, 446 entries; validation: 438 subjects, 1959 entries), the globulin gap and A:G ratio correlated (p < 0.001) with CRP level and ESR, with correlation coefficients being greater for ESR than for CRP level. ROC curve analyses demonstrated better area-under-curve for ESR than for CRP level. The percentages of entries with elevated globulin gap (≥4.0 g/dl) and low A:G ratio (<0.8) were ∼8.4% and ∼2.6%, respectively, and each had a positive predictive value of ≥0.960 for elevated ESR. Among patients with high globulin gap, the change in globulin gap over time faithfully reflected changes in ESR.

CONCLUSION

In the subset of systemic rheumatic disease patients who harbor an elevated globulin gap, the ESR is almost always elevated. This novel observation sets the conceptual foundation and rationale for subsequent prospective studies that assess whether ESR testing in this subset of rheumatic disease patients could be reduced without sacrificing patient care. Ultimately, ordering an ESR test may often be unnecessary, thereby resulting in cost savings.

Damage indices in rheumatic diseases: A systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

To review the current literature, and evaluate the psychometric properties of disease damage indices in rheumatic diseases.

METHODS

A search of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was performed to June 2018 to identify damage indices in all systemic rheumatic diseases. Articles were included in a systematic review if indices were composite (multi-organ) in nature and if adequate detail on methodology was described. Articles pertaining to the validation of these indices were also reviewed in order to assess the psychometric properties of the indices using the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Arthritis Clinical Trials (OMERACT) filter as a guide.

RESULTS

Of the 2659 articles retrieved through the search, we identified 7 damage indices in five diseases: idiopathic inflammatory myopathy, systemic lupus erythematosus, systemic vasculitis, Sjӧgren's syndrome and antiphospholipid syndrome. A further 48 articles were identified pertaining to the validation of these damage indices. The methodological process for the development of these indices included expert consensus, item reduction and item weighting methods. The level of validation that these indices have achieved is variable, with only 2 damage indices fulfilling all criteria of the OMERACT filter.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, there have been 7 composite disease damage indices created in a variety of rheumatic diseases, with the exception of systemic sclerosis (SSc). This review has informed methodology for the development of a disease damage index in SSc.

Diagnostic value of screening enzyme immunoassays compared to indirect immunofluorescence for anti-nuclear antibodies in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to review and compare the diagnostic accuracy of the screening enzyme immunoassay (SEIA) and indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) as anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) screening assays for patients with systemic rheumatic diseases (SRDs), including systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), Sjögren's syndrome (SS), and systemic sclerosis (SSc).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in the Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus databases for articles published before August 2017. A bivariate random effects model was used to calculate pooled diagnostic values.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies including 3976 combined SRDs, 2839 SLE, 610 SS, and 1002 SSc patients and 11,716 non-healthy and 8408 healthy controls were available for the meta-analysis. The summary sensitivities of SEIA vs. IIF were 87.4% vs 88.4% for combined SRDs, 89.4% vs. 95.2% for SLE, 88.7% vs. 88.4% for SS, and 85.4% vs. 93.6% for SSc, respectively. Meanwhile, the summary specificities of SEIA vs. IIF were 79.7% vs.78.9% for combined SRDs, 89.1% vs. 83.3% for SLE, 89.9% vs. 86.8% for SS, and 92.8% vs. 84.2% for SSc, respectively. Although the differences in sensitivity and specificity between SEIA and IIF were not significant in most subgroups, the summary sensitivity of SLE presented statistically significant changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic meta-analysis demonstrates that both SEIA and IIF are useful to detect ANAs for SRDs. Between the two assays, IIF is a more sensitive screening assay than SEIA, particularly in patients with SLE. SEIA is comparable to IIF, considering the specificity and standardization.

Diagnostic utility of automated indirect immunofluorescence compared to manual indirect immunofluorescence for anti-nuclear antibodies in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to review and compare the analytical and clinical performance of automated indirect immunofluorescence (AIIF) and manual indirect immunofluorescence (MIIF) as anti-nuclear antibody screening assays for patients with systemic rheumatic diseases (SRDs), such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and systemic sclerosis (SSc).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in the Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus databases for studies published before August 2017. A bivariate random effects model was used to calculate the summary diagnostic values.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies involving 6913 positive and 1818 negative samples of MIIF, as well as 524 combined SRD, 132 SLE, and 104 SSc patients, and 520 controls were available for meta-analysis. The summary positive concordance (PC) of qualitative result between AIIF and MIIF was 93.7%, whereas PCs of total pattern (68.5%; homogeneous, 52.3%; speckled, 56.5%; nucleolar, 52.7%; centromere, 51.4%; nuclear dot, 11.7%) and titer (77.8%) exhibited significantly lower values. The summary clinical sensitivities of AIIF vs. MIIF were 84.7% vs 78.2% for combined SRDs, 95.5% vs. 93.9% for SLE, and 86.5% vs. 83.7% for SSc, respectively. Meanwhile, the summary specificities of AIIF vs. MIIF were 75.6% vs. 79.6% for combined SRDs, 74.2% vs. 83.3% for SLE, and 74.2% vs. 83.3% for SSc, respectively. Although the differences in sensitivity and specificity between AIIF and MIIF were not significant in most subgroups, the summary specificity of SLE and SSc showed statistically significant changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic meta-analysis demonstrates that AIIF is comparable to MIIF in distinguishing between the positive and negative results, and screening SRDs based on clinical sensitivities and standardization. However, improvements in the pattern and titer recognition and clinical specificities are necessary.