Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Patients With a Negative Antinuclear Antibody Meeting the American College of Rheumatology and/or Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Criteria for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (11) ◽  
pp. 1404-1409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meera Tarazi ◽  
Rebecca G. Gaffney ◽  
Carolyn J. Kushner ◽  
Srita Chakka ◽  
Victoria P. Werth
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Antinuclear Antibody ◽  
Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Systemic Lupus ◽  
American College Of Rheumatology ◽  
Cutaneous Lupus

scholarly journals Cutaneous Manifestations of “Lupus”: Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Beyond

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Elizabeth E. Cooper ◽  
Catherine E. Pisano ◽  
Samantha C. Shapiro
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Systemic Treatment ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Laboratory Studies ◽  
Systemic Lupus ◽  
Cutaneous Manifestations ◽  
Distinct Disease ◽  
Cutaneous Lupus

Lupus, Latin for “wolf,” is a term used to describe many dermatologic conditions, some of which are related to underlying systemic lupus erythematosus, while others are distinct disease processes. Cutaneous lupus erythematosus includes a wide array of visible skin manifestations and can progress to systemic lupus erythematosus in some cases. Cutaneous lupus can be subdivided into three main categories: acute cutaneous lupus erythematosus, subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus, and chronic cutaneous lupus erythematosus. Physical exam, laboratory studies, and histopathology enable differentiation of cutaneous lupus subtypes. This differentiation is paramount as the subtype of cutaneous lupus informs upon treatment, disease monitoring, and prognostication. This review outlines the different cutaneous manifestations of lupus erythematosus and provides an update on both topical and systemic treatment options for these patients. Other conditions that utilize the term “lupus” but are not cutaneous lupus erythematosus are also discussed.

Cutaneous lupus erythematosus and systemic lupus erythematosus are associated with clinically significant cardiovascular risk: a Danish nationwide cohort study

Lupus ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Halskou Hesselvig ◽  
O Ahlehoff ◽  
L Dreyer ◽  
G Gislason ◽  
K Kofoed
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Cardiovascular Risk ◽  
Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Systemic Lupus ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Cutaneous Lupus

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a well-known cardiovascular risk factor. Less is known about cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) and the risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Therefore, we investigated the risk of mortality and adverse cardiovascular events in patients diagnosed with SLE and CLE. We conducted a cohort study of the entire Danish population aged ≥ 18 and ≤ 100 years, followed from 1997 to 2011 by individual-level linkage of nationwide registries. Multivariable adjusted Cox regression models were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) for a composite cardiovascular endpoint and all-cause mortality, for patients with SLE and CLE. A total of 3282 patients with CLE and 3747 patients with SLE were identified and compared with 5,513,739 controls. The overall HR for the composite CVD endpoint was 1.31 (95% CI 1.16–1.49) for CLE and 2.05 (95% CI 1.15–3.44) for SLE. The corresponding HRs for all-cause mortality were 1.32 (95% CI 1.20–1.45) for CLE and 2.21 (95% CI 2.03–2.41) for SLE. CLE and SLE were associated with a significantly increased risk of CVD and all-cause mortality. Local and chronic inflammation may be the driver of low-grade systemic inflammation.

A comparison and review of three sets of classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus for distinguishing systemic lupus erythematosus from pure mucocutaneous manifestations in the lupus disease spectrum

Lupus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (14) ◽  
pp. 1854-1865
Author(s):  
Hui Jin ◽  
Tao Huang ◽  
Ruifang Wu ◽  
Ming Zhao ◽  
Haijing Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Diagnostic Criteria ◽  
Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Sample Selection ◽  
Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Classification Criteria ◽  
Systemic Lupus ◽  
American College Of Rheumatology ◽  
Disease Spectrum ◽  
European League Against Rheumatism

Although the original purpose of the systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria was to distinguish SLE from other mimic diseases, and to facilitate sample selection in scientific research, they have become widely used as diagnostic criteria in clinical situations. It is not known yet if regarding classification criteria as diagnostic criteria, what problems might be encountered? This is the first study comparing the three sets of classification criteria for SLE, the 1997 American College of Rheumatology (ACR’97), 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC’12) and 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology (EULAR/ACR’19), for their ability to distinguish patients with SLE from patients with pure mucocutaneous manifestations (isolated cutaneous lupus erythematosus without internal disease, i-CLE) in the lupus disease spectrum. 1,865 patients with SLE and 232 patients with i-CLE were recruited from a multicenter study. We found that, due to low specificity, none of the three criteria are adept at distinguishing patients with SLE from patients with i-CLE. SLICC’12 performed best among the original three criteria, but if a positive ANA was removed as an entry criterion, EULAR/ACR’19 would performed better. A review of previous studies that compared the three sets of criteria was presented in this work.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document