Renée SD, Mercado U

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 507-513
PDF size: 188.39 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objetivo: To describe the frequency and the clinical and immunological characteristics of systemic lupus erythematosus applying the 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria.
Materials and Method: A retrospective study was done describing the frequency and the clinical and immunological characteristics of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus care in the internal medicine and rheumatology service from 2014 to 2020. The cut-off points for the individual diagnosis of lupus was ≥ 10 points. The presence of antinuclear antibodies was mandatory.
Results: There were included 132 patients, 116 women and 16 men with a 7:1 ratio. The median age was 35 years (range: 12 to 58); 77% had arthritis, 71% leukopenia, 59% acute cutaneous lupus, 41% oral ulcers and 32% fever. Nephropathy was observed in 28%, determined by proteinuria or renal biopsy; in 13 cases the histopathological study revealed type III/IV nephritis and in one case type II/V nephritis (ISN/RPS); 78% had anti-DNA native and 20% anti-Sm/RNP. The decrease in complement was found in 22% of the cases.
Conclusions: The new classification criteria of EULAR/ACR 2019 for systemic lupus erythematosus are based on previous criteria, except for fever. All our patients fulfilled 10 or more points to meet the classification criteria.

REFERENCES

1. Sherer Y, Gorstein A, Friztler M, Shoenfeld Y. Autoantibodyexplosion in systemic lupus erythematosus: more than100 in different antibodies found in SLE patients. SemArthritis Rheum 2004; 34: 501-37. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit. 2004.07.002.

2. Yaniv G, Twig G, Ben-Ami Shor D, Furer A, Sherer Y, et al.A volcanic explosion of autoantibodies in systemic lupuserythematosus: a diversity of 180 different antibodiesfound in SLE patients. Autoimmun Rev 2015; 14: 75-9.DOI:10.1016/J.AUTREV.2014.10.003.

3. Tan EM, Cohen AS, Fries JF, Masi AT, McShane DJ, RothfieldNF et al. The 1982 revised criteria for the classification ofsystemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 1982; 25:1271-7. doi: 10.1002/art.1780251101.

4. Hochberg MC. Updating the American College of rheumatologyrevised criteria for the classification of systemiclupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 1997; 40: 1725. doi:10.1002/art.1780400928.

5. Petri M, Orbai AM, Alarcon GS, Gordon C, Merril JT, FortinPR, et al. Derivation and validation of systemic lupusinternational colaborating clinics classification criteria forsystemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2012; 64:2677-86. doi: 10.1002/art.34473.

6. Aringer M, Constenbader K, Daikh D, Brinks R, Mosca M,Ramsey-Goldman R, et al. 2019 European League AgainRheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classificationcriteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann RheumDis 2019; 78: 1151-9. doi: 10.1002/art.40930.

7. Aringer M, Leuchten N, Johnson SR. New criteria for lupus.Curr Rheumatol Rep 2020; 22: 18. doi: 10.1007/s11926-020-00896-6.

8. Aringer M, Petri M. New classification criteria for systemiclupus erythematosus. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2020; 6: 590-

9. doi: 10.1097/BOR.0000000000000740.9. Fries JF. Aspectos clínicos del lupus eritematoso sistémico.Clin Med N Am 1977; 61: 229-240.

10. Estes D, Christian CL. The natural history of systemic lupuserythematosus by prospective analyses. Medicine 1971;50: 85. doi: 10.1097/00005792-197103000-00001.

11. Hochberg MC, Boyd RE, Ahearn JM, Arnett FC, Bias WT,Provost TT, et al. Systemic lupus erythematosus: A reviewof clinico-laboratory features and immunogenetic markersin 150 patients with emphasis on demographic subsets.Medicine 1985; 64: 285-95.

12. Pons-Estel G, Ugarte-Gil MF, Harvey GB, Wojdyla D,Quintana R, Saurit V, et al. Applying the 2019 EULAR/ACRlupus criteria to patients from an established cohort: aLatin American perspective. RMD Open 2020; 6: 1-6. doi:10.1136/rmdopen-2019-001097.