Petri, Michelle

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.

Background/Purpose APS ACTION Registry was created to study the natural course of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) over 10 years in persistently antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) positive patients with or without systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). Our primary objective was to compare the characteristics of aPL-positive patients with or without thrombocytopenia (TP) and/or autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA). Methods The registry inclusion criteria are positive aPL based on the Revised Sapporo APS Classification Criteria, tested at least twice within 1 year prior to enrollment. For the primary comparison of demographic, clinical, and serologic characteristics in this retrospective study, we divided patients into two groups: TP/AIHA ever and never. Thrombocytopenia was defined as a platelet count of <100,000 x 10 9 /L tested twice at least 12 weeks apart, and AIHA was defined as anemia with hemolysis and a positive direct antiglobulin test (DAT). For the secondary analysis, we compared patients with TP versus AIHA, and the immunosuppressive use stratified by systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification. Results As of April 2022, of 1,039 patients (primary aPL/APS: 618 [59%]; SLE classification: 334 [31%]) included in the registry, 228 (22%) had baseline (historical or current) TP and/or AIHA (TP only: 176 [17%]; AIHA only: 35 [3%], and both: 17 [2%]). Thrombocytopenia and/or AIHA was significantly associated with Asian race, SLE classification, cardiac valve disease, catastrophic/microvascular APS, triple aPL (lupus anticoagulant, anticardiolipin antibody, and anti-β 2 -glycoprotein-I antibody) positivity, and SLE-related serologic and inflammatory markers. When 101/618 (16%) primary aPL/APS patients and 101/334 (34%) SLE patients with TP and/or AIHA were compared, azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil were more commonly reported in lupus patients, however corticosteroid, intravenous immunoglobulin, and rituximab use were similar between groups. Conclusion In our large multi-center international cohort of persistently aPL-positive patients, approximately one-fifth had active or historical TP and/or AIHA at registry entry; half of these patients had additional SLE. Cardiac valve disease, catastrophic/microvascular APS, and triple aPL-positivity were aPL-related clinical and laboratory manifestations associated with TP and/or AIHA, suggesting a more severe APS clinical phenotype in aPL-patients with TP and/or AIHA.

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.

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.

Objective Lupus nephritis (LN) is a severe manifestation of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) that exhibits familial aggregation and may progress to end‐stage renal disease (ESRD). LN is more prevalent among African Americans than among European Americans. This study was undertaken to investigate the hypothesis that the apolipoprotein L1 gene ( APOL1 ) nephropathy risk alleles G1/G2, common in African Americans and rare in European Americans, contribute to the ethnic disparity in risk. Methods APOL1 G1 and G2 nephropathy alleles were genotyped in 855 African American SLE patients with LN‐ESRD (cases) and 534 African American SLE patients without nephropathy (controls) and tested for association under a recessive genetic model, by logistic regression. Results Ninety percent of the SLE patients were female. The mean ± SD age at SLE diagnosis was significantly lower in LN‐ESRD cases than in SLE non‐nephropathy controls (27.3 ± 10.9 years versus 39.5 ± 12.2 years). The mean ± SD time from SLE diagnosis to development of LN‐ESRD in cases was 7.3 ± 7.2 years. The G1/G2 risk alleles were strongly associated with SLE‐ESRD, with 25% of cases and 12% of controls having 2 nephropathy alleles (odds ratio [OR] 2.57, recessive model P = 1.49 × 10 −9 ), and after adjustment for age, sex, and ancestry admixture (OR 2.72, P = 6.23 × 10 −6 ). The age‐, sex‐, and admixture‐adjusted population attributable risk for ESRD among patients with G1/G2 polymorphisms was 0.26, compared to 0.003 among European American patients. The mean time from SLE diagnosis to ESRD development was ∼2 years earlier among individuals with APOL1 risk genotypes ( P = 0.01). Conclusion APOL1 G1/G2 alleles strongly impact the risk of LN‐ESRD in African Americans, as well as the time to progression to ESRD. The high frequency of these alleles in African Americans with near absence in European Americans explains an important proportion of the increased risk of LN‐ESRD in African Americans.