Pons‐Estel, Guillermo

Introduction Cognitive symptoms such as ‘brain fog’ are frequent and disabling in patients with SLE. We aimed to develop and validate the Lupus Brain Fog Severity Scale (LBFSS), the first patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for cognitive symptoms in SLE. Methods The LBFSS was developed using a multi-step international approach involving healthcare professionals and patients with SLE. Patients provided free-text descriptions of brain fog, generating candidate domains through thematic analysis (step 1). Domains were rated for relevance (step 2) and those retained converted into self-assessable items (step 3). The pilot LBFSS was iteratively refined (step 4). The finalised LBFSS was validated (step 5) in a large international SLE cohort. Psychometric evaluation included internal consistency, exploratory factor analysis and assessment of construct, convergent, known-groups and criterion-related validity. Results In step 1, 147 SLE participants across 39 countries generated 21 domains for cognitive symptoms, of which 13 were retained in consensus (step 2), converted into self-assessable items (step 3) and iteratively refined using patient and physician feedback. In step 5, validation of the LBFSS instrument in 378 patients from 36 countries demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α=0.95) and a unidimensional structure explaining 62.2% of variance. LBFSS scores were significantly higher in participants reporting brain fog (p<0.0001), confirming known-group validity. Construct validity was supported by significant correlations with functional impact and symptom severity (ρ=0.46–0.65, p<0.0001), strong convergent validity with the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire-20 (ρ=0.84, p<0.0001) while the discriminative performance for presence versus absence of self-reported brain fog was high (area under the curve=0.85). Conclusion The LBFSS is a new, valid and feasible PROM to assess brain fog and cognitive symptoms in SLE.

Abstract Objectives Patient education is increasingly acknowledged as an important aspect of the management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The aim of the study was to develop the SLE Knowledge Assessment score (SLAKE), a digital multilingual self-assessment tool designed to quantify essential SLE knowledge. Methods International healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patient representatives engaged in a multi-step process to: identify essential SLE knowledge domains, select key domains via rating, and generate an item bank of 394 questions across 11 domains, which was then adapted into 19 languages. For validation, participants completed 44 questions (including 33 randomly selected), with scores calculated for total knowledge and the 11 specific domains. Statistical analyses examined associations between scores and demographic, clinical, and educational variables. Results SLAKE was used by 1182 SLE participants (1120 [94.8%] women, median age: 45 years [IQR: 35–54 years]), with a median SLE duration of 10 years (IQR: 4–20 years). The median SLAKE score was 37 (IQR: 34–40) of a maximum of 44 points while the median score across the 11 SLAKE domains ranged between 3 and 4 over a maximum of 4 points. There was a significant positive association between SLAKE score and SLE duration (p= 0.006), previous participation to a patient education course or a patient training for lupus (p&lt; 0.0001) and the education level (p&lt; 0.0001) but not with age (p= 0.48) or gender (p= 0.39). Conclusion SLAKE is a valid, multilingual, digital self-assessment tool that effectively measures essential SLE knowledge. Its randomized question bank and domain-specific scoring enable targeted education, ultimately supporting better disease management.

ObjectiveThe objective was to determine the mortality rate as well as the causes and predictors of death in antiphospholipid antibody (aPL)–positive patients with and without antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) classification.MethodsThe inclusion criterion for the multicenter international Antiphospholipid Syndrome Alliance for Clinical Trials and International Networking (APS ACTION) registry is positive aPLs according to the Revised Sapporo Classification Criteria tested within one year before enrollment. Patients are observed every 12 ± 3 months with clinical data and blood collection. For this prospective analysis, we first analyzed the causes of death for patients reported as “deceased.” Secondly, we analyzed risk factors for death using the adjusted Cox proportional hazards model and calculated survival probability using the Kaplan‐Meier model based on different age groups.ResultsOf 967 patients, 43 (5%) were deceased after a median follow‐up of 5.3 years. Based on the univariate analysis, deceased patients, compared to living patients, were more likely to be older and have a history of arterial thrombosis, catastrophic APS, concomitant systemic autoimmune diseases (SAIDs), and baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. Based on the Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for age and for each of the strongest predictors of death, arterial thrombosis (hazard ratio [HR] 2.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50–5.76), concomitant SAIDs (HR 2.97, 95% 1.56–5.63), and baseline any CVD risk factor (HR 2.43, 95% CI 1.05–5.71) were significantly associated with mortality.ConclusionIn our cohort of persistently aPL‐positive patients, the mortality rate was 5% after a median follow‐up of five years and was highest for patients ≥60 years old at registry entry. History of arterial thrombosis, concomitant SAIDs, and baseline any CVD risk factor independently predicted future death.

ObjectiveApproximately one third of individuals worldwide have not received a COVID‐19 vaccine. Although studies have investigated risk factors linked to severe COVID‐19 among unvaccinated people with rheumatic diseases (RDs), we know less about whether these factors changed as the pandemic progressed. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with severe COVID‐19 in unvaccinated individuals in different pandemic epochs corresponding to major variants of concern.MethodsPatients with RDs and COVID‐19 were entered into the COVID‐19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Registry between March 2020 and June 2022. An ordinal logistic regression model (not hospitalized, hospitalized, and death) was used with date of COVID‐19 diagnosis, age, sex, race and/or ethnicity, comorbidities, RD activity, medications, and the human development index (HDI) as covariates. The main analysis included all unvaccinated patients across COVID‐19 pandemic epochs; subanalyses stratified patients according to RD types.ResultsAmong 19,256 unvaccinated people with RDs and COVID‐19, those who were older, male, had more comorbidities, used glucocorticoids, had higher disease activity, or lived in lower HDI regions had worse outcomes across epochs. For those with rheumatoid arthritis, sulfasalazine and B‐cell–depleting therapy were associated with worse outcomes, and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were associated with improved outcomes. In those with connective tissue disease or vasculitis, B‐cell–depleting therapy was associated with worse outcomes.ConclusionRisk factors for severe COVID‐19 outcomes were similar throughout pandemic epochs in unvaccinated people with RDs. Ongoing efforts, including vaccination, are needed to reduce COVID‐19 severity in this population, particularly in those with medical and social vulnerabilities identified in this study.

Objective To develop new antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) classification criteria with high specificity for use in observational studies and trials, jointly supported by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and EULAR. Methods This international multidisciplinary initiative included 4 phases: 1) Phase I, criteria generation by surveys and literature review; 2) Phase II, criteria reduction by modified Delphi and nominal group technique exercises; 3) Phase III, criteria definition, further reduction with the guidance of real‐world patient scenarios, and weighting via consensus‐based multicriteria decision analysis, and threshold identification; and 4) Phase IV, validation using independent adjudicators’ consensus as the gold standard. Results The 2023 ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria include an entry criterion of at least one positive antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) test within 3 years of identification of an aPL‐associated clinical criterion, followed by additive weighted criteria (score range 1–7 points each) clustered into 6 clinical domains (macrovascular venous thromboembolism, macrovascular arterial thrombosis, microvascular, obstetric, cardiac valve, and hematologic) and 2 laboratory domains (lupus anticoagulant functional coagulation assays, and solid‐phase enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assays for IgG/IgM anticardiolipin and/or IgG/IgM anti–β 2 ‐glycoprotein I antibodies). Patients accumulating at least 3 points each from the clinical and laboratory domains are classified as having APS. In the validation cohort, the new APS criteria versus the 2006 revised Sapporo classification criteria had a specificity of 99% versu s 86%, and a sensitivity of 84% versus 99%. Conclusion These new ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria were developed using rigorous methodology with multidisciplinary international input. Hierarchically clustered, weighted, and risk‐stratified criteria reflect the current thinking about APS, providing high specificity and a strong foundation for future APS research.