Duarte-García, Alí

Objective The aim of this study was to compare infection‐related hospitalization risk among patients with nonrenal systemic lupus erythematosus initiating commonly used immunosuppressants. Methods We emulated a target trial using Optum Labs Data Warehouse claims to compare the risk of infection‐related hospitalization among patients initiating azathioprine, belimumab, methotrexate, or mycophenolic acid analogues (MPAAs) between March 2011 and September 2023. We excluded patients with prior lupus nephritis, solid‐organ or bone marrow transplantation, or rituximab/cyclophosphamide exposure. The primary outcome was time to first infection‐related hospitalization using intention‐to‐treat (ITT) and per‐protocol (PP) analyses. We applied inverse probability of treatment weighting to account for baseline covariates and fitted marginal structural Cox models incorporating time‐varying monthly glucocorticoid dose during follow‐up. Results Among 6,168 patients, 24‐month cumulative incidence of infection‐related hospitalization was 10% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8–12) for azathioprine, 8% (95% CI 5–10) for belimumab, 10% (95% CI 8–11) for methotrexate, and 13% (95% CI 10–15) for MPAAs. In ITT analyses, MPAAs had higher risk than belimumab (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55, 95% CI 1.07–2.25) and methotrexate (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.04–1.68). In PP analyses, azathioprine (HR 2.04, 95% CI 1.01–4.16) and MPAAs (HR 2.27, 95% CI 1.11–4.62) had higher risk compared with belimumab. After accounting for time‐varying monthly glucocorticoid dose, between‐treatment differences were no longer significant. Conclusion Initial differences in the infection‐related hospitalization risk were attenuated after accounting for time‐varying glucocorticoid exposure. These findings highlight glucocorticoid exposure as an important factor associated with serious infection risk while recognizing that postbaseline glucocorticoid use may reflect both evolving disease activity and a pathway through which therapies influence infection risk. image

Objective Epidemiologic estimates for age of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) diagnosis are limited, particularly for men and racial and ethnic subpopulations in the United States. Leveraging the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Lupus Registry network of population‐based SLE registries, meta‐analyses were performed estimating age‐specific incidence of SLE by sex, race, and ethnicity. Methods The CDC network of SLE registries includes five state‐based registries, plus a sixth Indian Health Service registry. Incidence periods spanned calendar years 2002‐2018. Registries provided age‐specific incidence of SLE, fulfilling the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) SLE classification criteria, per 100,000 person‐years, stratified by sex, race, and ethnicity for the meta‐analyses. Results Incidence rates among women were highest for those aged 30‐39 (12.7, 95%CI: 9.5‐16.8), while rates among men were highest for those aged 60‐69 (2.1, 95%CI: 1.3‐3.4). Black women aged 20‐39 had the highest SLE incidence rates (23.6, 95%CI: 20.7‐26.8). Among women diagnosed with SLE before age 20, incidence was highest among Asian (6.5, 95%CI: 2.8‐15.2) individuals. Among women diagnosed with SLE after age 60, incidence was highest among American Indian/Alaska Native (9.4, 95%CI: 3.4‐15.4) individuals. Weighted percentages show 10.0% of those with SLE were diagnosed before age 20, while 15.1% were diagnosed after age 60. The largest proportion of individuals with SLE, 22.1%, were diagnosed between 30‐39 years. Conclusions This study provides comprehensive sex‐ and race‐specific estimates of age at SLE diagnosis. The substantial later in life SLE incidence among men and disease burden in pediatric and older populations should raise awareness in considering SLE in the differential diagnosis in previously underrecognized groups.

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.

Objective Despite the reported clinical significance of anti-C1q immunoglobulin G autoantibodies (anti-C1q) for SLE and the development of anti-C1q commercial kits, their performance characteristics in routine patient evaluation remain poorly defined. Methods In this cross-sectional study, an unselected cohort of 107 patients with suspicion of a systemic autoimmune disease and 102 controls were included and evaluated for anti-C1q autoantibodies with three kits (Bühlmann, Orgentec and Werfen). Patients in the unselected cohort were classified as having SLE or a mimicker condition. Disease activity was assessed using Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI)-2K and SLE patients were subclassified based on the presence of lupus nephritis (LN) (history/active). Each kit was assessed for diagnostic performance. The degree of association between anti-C1q and SLEDAI/complement levels was assessed using the Spearman correlation coefficient (rho). Between-kit agreement was evaluated using Fleiss Ƙ. Results Werfen had the best performance in discriminating patients with SLE from non-SLE (area under the curve (AUC)=0.76), whereas for the SLE versus mimicker comparison Bühlmann (AUC=0.71) and Werfen (AUC=0.71) exhibited adequate discrimination. Among patients with SLE, all kits exhibited poor discrimination of patients with history of LN versus non-renal SLE, but Orgentec displayed good discrimination for patients with active LN from non-active LN (AUC=0.74). A positive correlation was observed between anti-C1q and SLEDAI scores, whereas a negative correlation was found between anti-C1q and complement C3 and C4 across all kits. Agreement for SLE between the three kits was moderate (Ƙ=0.42). Conclusion Anti-C1q can identify patients with SLE and correlate with global and renal disease activity, highlighting their potential to function as follow-up markers in SLE. Agreement with commercial anti-C1q kits is variable. Further studies are required to harmonise anti-C1q kits for optimal routine patient evaluation.

Objective Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a thromboinflammatory disorder characterized by clinical and mechanistic heterogeneity that complicates early diagnosis and hinders targeted treatment. We aimed to identify distinct molecular endotypes among antiphospholipid antibody (aPL)–positive patients using whole‐blood transcriptomics. Methods Whole‐blood RNA sequencing was performed on 174 aPL‐positive patients, including those with primary APS (n = 102), secondary APS (n = 29), and aPL positivity without classifiable APS (n = 43). Unsupervised machine learning and immune cell deconvolution defined transcriptomic clusters and immune landscapes. Results Four transcriptionally distinct clusters were identified. At one end of the spectrum, cluster 1 showed up‐regulation of ribosomal and metabolic pathways and down‐regulation of mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR), NETosis, and Hippo/interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) signaling. In contrast, cluster 4 exhibited the opposite pattern, with strong up‐regulation of mTOR, NETosis, and Hippo/IL‐6 signaling. Cluster 2 demonstrated modest enrichment in messenger RNA processing and amino acid metabolism, and cluster 3 showed biosynthetic suppression with mild Hippo/IL‐6 activation. Clinically, cluster 4 stood out with higher IgG anticardiolipin and anti–β 2 ‐glycoprotein I positivity, elevated neutrophil counts, and increased urine protein‐to‐creatinine ratios. Immune deconvolution revealed distinct cell type profiles: cluster 1 was lymphoid predominant; cluster 2 had a balanced composition; cluster 3 was enriched in Treg cells, natural killer cells, macrophages, mast cells, and memory B cells; and cluster 4 was dominated by myeloid cells, including neutrophils, eosinophils, and dendritic cells. Distinct immune pathway activations were linked to clinical features, including white matter lesions, seizures, and cardiac valve disease. Conclusion This study reveals four endotypes of aPL‐positive patients, a step toward personalized medicine for APS through pathway‐informed stratification and therapy.

Objective Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) is a clinicoradiological diagnosis that can be associated with SLE. The clinical presentation, risk factors and outcomes of PRES in patients with SLE remain insufficiently described. Methods We conducted a multicentre cohort study at the Mayo Clinic and performed a systematic literature review (SLR) of patients with incident PRES and SLE. We described the clinical features, treatments and outcomes. Across both the cohort study and SLR, we assessed neurological sequelae, recurrence and survival. Within the cohort study, we examined PRES risk factors and discontinuation of antiseizure medications (ASMs). We used logistic regression to evaluate factors associated with neurological sequelae and Cox regression to assess predictors of recurrence. Kaplan-Meier methods estimated the rates of recurrence, survival and ASMs discontinuation. Results 550 cases (53 from the cohort study) were included, of whom 92% were female. Across both cohort and SLR, the most common symptom was seizure, occurring in 80%. PRES was the first manifestation of SLE in 13% of cases. In the adjusted analysis, older age was associated with neurological sequelae (OR 1.63 per 10-year increase; 95% CI 1.12 to 2.39). After 5 years of follow-up, 11.5% (95% CI 2.3 to 19.9%) of patients had a recurrent PRES episode. 30-day and 180-day survival following PRES was observed in 96.3% (95% CI 93.5 to 99.1%) and 93.7% (95% CI 89.8 to 97.7%) patients, respectively. In the Mayo Clinic cohort, 81% of PRES cases were attributed to hypertension in the context of lupus nephritis (LN), and by the fifth year of follow-up, 78.1% (95% CI 58.7 to 88.4%) of patients had discontinued ASMs. Conclusions In this cohort, most of the incident PRES episodes were preceded by hypertension and occurred in patients with LN. Although short-term and long-term prognoses are favourable, older patients more frequently experienced neurological sequelae.

Objective To assess the impact of renal replacement therapy in people with lupus nephritis (LN)–associated end‐stage kidney disease (ESKD) and support the development of the 2024 American College of Rheumatology LN treatment guidelines. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review and meta‐analysis to address three Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) questions related to renal replacement therapy for ESKD due to LN, including comparisons of kidney transplant versus dialysis, hemodialysis versus peritoneal dialysis, and preemptive kidney transplant versus no preemptive kidney transplant. Outcomes of interest included mortality, cardiovascular (CV) events, infections, lupus flares, disease‐related damage, graft failure, and quality of life. We conducted a meta‐analysis and analyzed hazard ratios for time‐to‐event analyses and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes, as well as absolute risk estimates. Results Sixteen comparative observational studies addressed at least one of the three PICO questions. Kidney transplant was found to reduce the risks of all‐cause mortality, CV mortality, infection‐related mortality, and CV events compared with dialysis (high certainty). Dialysis modality (peritoneal vs hemodialysis) was not associated with mortality (high certainty) or with other outcomes of infection, CV complications, and systemic lupus erythematosus flares (low certainty). Preemptive kidney transplant was associated with lower risks of graft failure and mortality (low certainty). Conclusion This systematic review identified improved outcomes with kidney transplant versus dialysis for people with LN‐associated ESKD and potential benefits of preemptive kidney transplant. This evidence supports the use of kidney transplant as a preferred renal replacement therapy for people with LN‐ESKD.

Objective To provide evidence‐based and expert guidance for the treatment and management of non‐renal systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE); treatment and management of lupus nephritis are addressed in a separate guideline. Methods Clinical questions for treatment and management of SLE were developed in the PICO format (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome). Systematic literature reviews were developed for each PICO question, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess evidence quality and formulate recommendations. The Voting Panel achieved a consensus of ≥70% agreement on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of each recommendation. Results We present recommendations and ungraded, consensus‐based good practice statements for the treatment and management of SLE that are applicable to pediatric and adult patients. Recommendations emphasize uniform treatment with hydroxychloroquine, limiting duration of glucocorticoid use, and early introduction of conventional and/or biologic immunosuppressive therapies to achieve and maintain control of SLE inflammation (remission or a low level of disease activity), reduce SLE‐related morbidity and mortality, and minimize medication‐related toxicities. Conclusion This guideline presents direction regarding treatment and management of SLE and provides a foundation for well‐informed, shared clinician–patient decision‐making. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies, as treatment decisions may vary due to the unique clinical situation and personal preferences of each person with SLE.