Duarte-García, Alí

Abstract Objective To assess the association of aPL and diffuse alveolar haemorrhage (DAH) in patients with SLE by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods Multiple databases were systematically searched from inception to February 2024. Studies were eligible if they included patients with SLE (population), reported aPL status (exposure), and DAH (outcome). We pooled the estimates as odds ratio (OR) using fixed-effect models. We examined the association between aPL and DAH, as well as associations based on aPL subtypes or concomitant APS. Results Out of 454 screened studies, nine were included in meta-analysis, encompassing 7746 patients with SLE, of whom 2016 (26.0%) were aPL-positive and 163 (2.1%) had DAH. Patients with SLE and positive aPL (any) were more likely to develop DAH than aPL-negative patients (OR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.24–2.49; I2 = 0%). Patients with SLE and positive LA (OR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.06–2.93, I2 = 35%) or positive anticardiolipin IgG (OR = 1.62, 95% CI 1.13–2.34, I2 = 0%) had a higher likelihood of developing DAH compared with patients that were negative for these aPL. An APS diagnosis was associated with a 2.5-fold increased likelihood of DAH compared with subjects without APS (OR = 2.46, 95% CI 1.23–4.92, I2 = 0%). Positivity of anti-β2 glycoprotein I IgG was not significantly associated with DAH among patients with SLE (OR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.45–1.36, I2 = 0%). Conclusion In patients with SLE, aPL positivity increases the risk of DAH compared with aPL-negative patients, particularly in those positive for LA and anticardiolipin IgG.

ObjectiveWe aimed to characterize presentation and care pathways of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and delays in access to SLE‐specialized care.MethodsWe included patients with incident SLE from the Lupus Midwest Network registry. Time from the first medical encounter for SLE clinical manifestation to access to SLE‐specialized care, physician diagnosis, and treatment was estimated. Delays were defined as ≥6 months to access specialized care. We compared SLE manifestations, disease activity, and Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology damage indexes (SDI) between patients with and without delays. Logistic regression models assessed associations with delays.ResultsThe study included 373 patients with SLE. The median time to access SLE‐specialized care was 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.9–1.5) months, time to diagnosis was 30.6 (95% CI 18.9–48.1) months, and time to treatment initiation was 4.7 (95% CI 3.9–8.4) months. Approximately 25% of patients (93 out of 373) experienced delays accessing specialized care, which were associated with fewer SLE manifestations at first SLE‐related encounter (fewer than two SLE domains; 92% vs 72%, P < 0.001). Patients with mucocutaneous or musculoskeletal manifestations were less likely to experience delays, whereas hematologic (odds ratio [OR] 1.71, 95% CI 1.03–2.84) or antiphospholipid antibodies domains (OR 6.05, 95% CI 2.46–14.88) were associated with delays. Delays were associated with damage at first access to SLE‐specialized care (SDI ≥1; 30% vs 7%, P < 0.001).ConclusionPatients follow a heterogeneous pathway to receive care. One‐fourth of patients experienced delays accessing SLE‐specialized care, which was associated with disease‐related damage. Fewer manifestations, hematologic manifestations, or antiphospholipid antibodies were associated with delays.image

ObjectiveOur objective was to evaluate the effect of glucocorticoid regimens on renal response, infections, and mortality among patients with lupus nephritis (LN).MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis of the control arms of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). We included RCTs of biopsy‐proven LN that used a protocolized regimen of glucocorticoids in combination with mycophenolic acid analogs or cyclophosphamide and reported the outcomes of complete response (CR), serious infections, and death. The starting dosage of glucocorticoids, tapering method, and administration of glucocorticoid pulses were abstracted. Meta‐analysis of proportions, meta‐regression, and subgroup meta‐analysis were performed at 6 and 12 months for all outcomes.ResultsFifty RCT arms (3,231 patients with LN) were included. The predicted rates of CR, serious infections, and death when starting on oral prednisone at 25 mg/day without pulses were 19.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.3–31.5), 3.2% (95% CI 2.4–4.0), and 0.2% (95% CI 0.0–0.4), respectively. Starting on prednisone at 60 mg/day (without pulses) increased the rates to 34.6% (95% CI 16.9–52.3), 12.1% (95% CI 9.3–14.9), and 2.7% (95% CI 0.0–5.3), respectively. Adding glucocorticoid pulses increased the rates of CR and death but not serious infections. We observed a dose–response gradient between the initial glucocorticoid dosage and all the outcomes at six months after accounting for the administration of glucocorticoid pulses, underlying immunosuppressant, and baseline proteinuria.ConclusionA higher exposure to glucocorticoids during the initial therapy of LN was associated with better renal outcomes at the cost of increased infections and death.

ObjectiveNeuroinflammatory adverse events have been observed among new users of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. No studies to date have compared the real‐world risk of TNFs with other new users of biologic or targeted synthetic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs). The objective of this study is to describe the risk of neuroinflammatory disease after initiation b/tsDMARDs.MethodsThis new user comparative effectiveness cohort study used a large US‐based electronic health records database to describe the unadjusted incidence of neuroinflammatory adverse events over a 3‐year period. The cohort included patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis initiating treatment with a TNF inhibitor (n = 93,661) or other b/tsDMARD (n = 38,354).ResultsAmong 132,015 patients included in the analysis, the most common first biologic agent was a TNF inhibitor; the unadjusted incidence of neuroinflammatory events was numerically lower among new users of TNF inhibitors (incidence 1.34 per 1,000 patient‐years) as compared with the combined non‐TNF group (1.69 per 1,000 patient‐years). There was no significant association between TNF exposure and neuroinflammatory events as compared with the combined non‐TNF b/tsDMARDs overall (hazard ratio 1.01; 95% confidence interval 0.75–1.36) and within each disease group.ConclusionThe overall risk of neuroinflammatory events among new users of TNF inhibitors did not differ substantially as compared with new users of other b/tsDMARDs. Meta‐analyses of randomized trials should be conducted to corroborate these findings, which may be affected by channeling bias.

Abstract Objectives To examine multimorbidity in psoriasis and its association with the development of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Methods A retrospective cohort study was performed using the Rochester Epidemiology Project. Population-based incidence (2000–09) and prevalence (1 January 2010) cohorts of psoriasis were identified by manual chart review. A cohort of individuals without psoriasis (comparators) were identified (1:1 matched on age, sex and county). Morbidities were defined using two or more Clinical Classification Software codes ≥30 days apart within prior 5 years. PsA was defined using ClASsification of Psoriatic ARthritis (CASPAR) criteria. χ2 and rank-sum tests were used to compare morbidities, and age-, sex- and race-adjusted Cox models to examine the association of baseline morbidities in psoriasis with development of PsA. Results Among 817 incident psoriasis patients, the mean age was 45.2 years with 52.0% females, and 82.0% moderate/severe psoriasis. No multimorbidity differences were found between incident psoriasis patients and comparators. However, in the 1088 prevalent psoriasis patients, multimorbidity was significantly more common compared with 1086 comparators (odds ratio 1.35 and 1.48 for two or more and five or more morbidities, respectively). Over a median 13.3-year follow-up, 23 patients (cumulative incidence: 2.9% by 15 years) developed PsA. Multimorbidity (two or more morbidities) was associated with a 3-fold higher risk of developing PsA. Conclusion Multimorbidity was more common in the prevalent but not incident cohort of psoriasis compared with the general population, suggesting that patients with psoriasis may experience accelerated development of multimorbidity. Moreover, multimorbidity at psoriasis onset significantly increased the risk of developing PsA, highlighting the importance of monitoring multimorbid psoriasis patients for the development of PsA.

ObjectiveWhile thrombosis and pregnancy loss are the best‐known clinical features of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), many patients also exhibit “extra‐criteria” manifestations, such as thrombocytopenia. The mechanisms that drive APS thrombocytopenia are not completely understood, and no clinical biomarkers are available for predicting antiphospholipid antibody (aPL)–mediated thrombocytopenia. Calprotectin is a heterodimer of S100A8 and S100A9 that is abundant in the neutrophil cytoplasm and released upon proinflammatory neutrophil activation. Here, we sought to evaluate the presence, clinical associations, and potential mechanistic roles of circulating calprotectin in a cohort of primary APS and aPL‐positive patients.MethodsLevels of circulating calprotectin were determined in plasma by the QUANTA Flash chemiluminescent assay. A viability dye‐based platelet assay was used to assess the potential impact of calprotectin on aPL‐mediated thrombocytopenia.ResultsCirculating calprotectin was measured in 112 patients with primary APS and 30 aPL‐positive (without APS criteria manifestations or lupus) patients as compared to patients with lupus (without APS), patients with unprovoked venous thrombosis (without aPL), and healthy controls. Levels of calprotectin were higher in patients with primary APS and aPL‐positive patients compared to healthy controls. After adjustment for age and sex, calprotectin level correlated positively with absolute neutrophil count (r = 0.41, P < 0.001), positively with C‐reactive protein level (r = 0.34, P = 0.002), and negatively with platelet count (r = −0.24, P = 0.004). Mechanistically, we found that calprotectin provoked aPL‐mediated thrombocytopenia by engaging platelet surface toll‐like receptor 4 and activating the NLRP3‐inflammasome, thereby reducing platelet viability in a caspase‐1‐dependent manner.ConclusionThese data suggest that calprotectin has the potential to be a functional biomarker and a new therapeutic target for APS thrombocytopenia.image

Objective As part of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention–funded American College of Rheumatology (ACR) initiative, we sought to develop quality measures related to Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) use for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) clinical care. Methods An expert workgroup composed of physician, patient, and researcher representatives convened to identify patient‐reported outcome (PRO) domains of greatest importance to people with SLE. A patient advisory panel separately ranked domains. PROMs assessing priority domains were identified through structured literature review, and detailed psychometric reviews were conducted for each PROM. In a Delphi process, the expert workgroup rated PROMs on content validity, psychometric quality, feasibility of implementation, and importance for guiding patient self‐management. The patient advisory panel reviewed PROMs in parallel and contributed to the final recommendations. Results Among relevant PRO domains, the workgroup and patient partners ranked depression, physical function, pain, cognition, and fatigue as high‐priority domains. The workgroup recommended at least once yearly measurement for (1) assessment of depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire or Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) depression scales; (2) assessment of physical function using PROMIS physical function scales or the Multi‐Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire; and (3) optional assessments of fatigue and cognition. Pain scales evaluated were not found to be sufficiently superior to what is already assessed in most SLE clinic visits. Conclusion Expert workgroup members and patient partners recommend that clinicians assess depression and physical function at least once yearly in all people with SLE. Additional PROMs addressing cognition and fatigue can also be assessed. Next steps are to incorporate PROM‐based quality measures into the ACR The Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness registry.

Objective We aimed to evaluate the robustness of phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for SLE and lupus nephritis (LN) using the fragility index (FI), the reverse FI (RFI) and the fragility quotient (FQ). Methods We searched for phase III RCTs that included patients with active SLE or LN. Data on primary endpoints, total participants and the number of events for each arm were obtained. We calculated the FI score for RCTs with statistically significant results (number of patients required to change from event to non-event to make the study lose statistical significance), the RFI for RCTs without statistically significant results (number of patients required to change from non-event to event to make study gain statistical significance) and the FQ score for both (FI or RFI score divided by the sample size). Results We evaluated 20 RCTs (16 SLE, four LN). The mean FI/RFI score was 13.6 (SD 6.6). There were nine RCTs with statistically significant results (seven SLE, two LN), and the mean FI score was 10.2 (SD 6.2). The lowest FI was for the ILLUMINATE-2 trial (FI=2), and the highest FI was for the BLISS-52 trial (FI=17). Twelve studies had non-statistically significant results (10 SLE, two LN) with a mean RFI score of 15.6 (SD 6.1). The lowest RFI was for the ILLUMINATE-1 trial (RFI=4), and the highest RFI was for the TULIP-1 trial (RFI=27). The lowest FQ scores were found in the ILLUMINATE trials and the highest in the Rituximab trials (EXPLORER and LUNAR), meaning that the last ones were the most robust results after accounting for sample size. Conclusions The evidence of therapies for patients with SLE and LN is derived mostly from fragile RCTs. Clinicians and trialists must be aware of the fragility of these RCTs for clinical decision-making and designing trials for novel therapeutics.

Abstract Objectives The objectives of this study were to assess the prevalence and incidence of multimorbidity and its association with the SLICC/ACR damage index (SDI) among patients with SLE. Methods Using prevalent and incident population–based cohorts of patients with SLE and their matched comparators, we assessed 57 chronic conditions. Chronic conditions were categorized as SDI-related or SDI-unrelated. Multimorbidity was defined as the presence of two or more chronic conditions. The prevalence of multimorbidity for both cohorts was compared using logistic regression. Cox models were used to examine the development of multimorbidity after SLE incidence. Results The prevalent cohort included 449 patients with established SLE on 1 January 2015. They were three times more likely to have multimorbidity compared with non-SLE comparators [odds ratio (OR) 2.98, 95% CI 2.18–4.11]. The incident cohort included 270 patients with new-onset SLE. At SLE incidence, patients with SLE were more likely to have multimorbidity than comparators (OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.59–3.27). After incidence, the risk of developing multimorbidity was 2-fold higher among patients with SLE than among comparators [hazard ratio (HR) 2.11, 95% CI 1.59–2.80]. The development of multimorbidity was higher in patients with SLE based on SDI-related conditions (HR 2.91, 95% CI 2.17–3.88) than on SDI-unrelated conditions (HR 1.73, 95% CI, 1.32–2.26). Conclusion Patients with SLE had a higher burden of multimorbidity, even before the onset of the disease. The risk disparity continued after SLE classification and was also seen in a prevalent SLE cohort. Multimorbidity was driven both by SDI-related and unrelated conditions.

Abstract Objectives Multimorbidity is burdensome for people with RA. We investigated differences in multimorbidity and comorbidities by sex and age in the RA population. Methods This cross-sectional analysis used national administrative claims (OptumLabs® Data Warehouse) from people with RA and non-RA comparators (matched on age, sex, race, census region, index year and length of baseline insurance coverage) from 2010–2019. RA was determined using a validated algorithm. Multimorbidity was defined as ≥2 (MM2+) or ≥5 (MM5+) comorbidities from a validated set of 44 chronic conditions. We used logistic regression to assess associations between characteristics and multimorbidity. Results The sample included 154 391 RA patients and 154 391 non-RA comparators. For people aged 18–50 years, RA women (vs RA men) had 7.5 and 4.4 (vs 3.2 and 0.9 in non-RA women vs non-RA men) percentage point increases for MM2+ and MM5+, respectively. For people aged 51+ years, RA women (vs RA men) had 2.1 and 2.5 (vs 1.2 and 0.3 in non-RA women vs non-RA men) percentage point increases for MM2+ and MM5+, respectively. Interactions revealed that differences in multimorbidity between women and men were exacerbated by RA (vs non-RA) (P &lt; 0.05), with more pronounced effects in people aged 18–50. Men had more cardiovascular-related conditions, whereas RA women had more psychological, neurological and general musculoskeletal conditions. Other comorbidities varied by sex and age. Conclusion Multimorbidity disproportionately impacts women with RA. Research, clinical and policy agendas for rheumatic diseases should acknowledge and support the variation in care needs by sex and gender across the lifespan.