Diagnostic value and clinical laboratory associations of antibodies against recombinant ribosomal P0, P1 and P2 proteins and their native heterocomplex in a Caucasian cohort with systemic lupus erythematosus

The criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus were proposed in 1971 by the American College of Rheumatology. They have been clarified since then, but need to be revised.Objective. To determine the diagnostic value of the criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus proposed by the American College of Rheumatology.Materials and methods. 370 patients (331 women (89.46%) and 39 men (10.54%), average age 41.24 ± 0.63 years) with SLE and 234 patients (150 women (64.10%) and 84 men (35.90%), average age 48.82 ± 0.85 years) with other rheumatic diseases (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis) were randomly enrolled into the study. The patients had undergone comprehensive clinical-laboratory and instrumental examinations in 2010–2018 before they received treatment. The analysis was conducted in MS Excel and SPSS by constructing contingency tables and calculating indicators of diagnostic value.Results. We identified the following criteria as those that can with statistical significance predict the presence of systemic lupus erythematosus: butterfly rash, photosensitivity, serositis (pleuritis, pericarditis), neurologic disorders (seizures, psychosis), thrombocytopenia, renal disorders (proteinuria, cylindruria), anti-dsDNA and antinuclear antibodies.

Download Full-text

THE CLINICAL, LABORATORY MANIFESTATIONS AND HISTOPATHOLOGY IN NEPHROTIC PATIENTS WITH LUPUS NEPHRITIS

Journal of Medicine and Pharmacy ◽

10.34071/jmp.2018.2.9 ◽

2018 ◽

pp. 52-58

Author(s):

Le Thuan Nguyen ◽

Bui Bao Hoang

Keyword(s):

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Lupus Nephritis ◽

Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Clinical Laboratory ◽

Activity Index ◽

Clinical Manifestations ◽

Systemic Lupus ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Organ Systems ◽

Tubulointerstitial Lesions

Introduction: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disease involving multiple organ systems. The kidney appears to be the most commonly affected organ, especially nephrotic is a serious kidney injury. The clinical, laboratory manifestations and histopathology are very useful for diagnosis, provide the means of predicting prognosis and guiding therapy in nephrotic patients with lupus nephritis. Methods: Descriptive cross-sectional study of nephrotic patients with lupus treated in the Department of Nephrology Trung Vuong Hospital and Cho Ray Hospital between May/2014 and May/2017. Renal histopathological lesions were classified according to International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society - ISN/RPS ’s 2003. The clinical, laboratory manifestations and histopathological features were described. Results: Of 32 LN with nephritic range proteinuria cases studied, 93.7% were women. The 3 most common clinical manifestations were edema (93.8%), hypertension (96.8%) and pallor (68.9%), musculoskeletal manifestions (46.9%), malar rash (40.6%). There was significant rise in laboratory and immunological manifestions with hematuria (78.1%), Hb < 12g/dL (93.5%), increased Cholesterol (100%), and Triglycerid (87.5%), Creatinine > 1.4 mg/dL (87.5%), increased BUN 71.9%, ANA (+) 93.8%, Anti Ds DNA(+) 96.9%, low C3: 96.9%, low C4: 84.4%. The most various and severe features were noted in class IV with active tubulointerstitial lesions and high activity index. Conclusion: Lupus nephritis with nephrotic range proteinuria has the more severity of histopathological feature and the more severity of the more systemic organ involvements and laboratory disorders were noted. Key words: Systemic lupus, erythematosus (SLE) lupus nepphritis, clinical

Download Full-text

Urine β-2-glycoprotein 1 as a biomarker for diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus

Lupus ◽

10.1177/09612033211014268 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 096120332110142

Author(s):

Jung Sun Lee ◽

Eun-Ju Lee ◽

Jeonghun Yeom ◽

Ji Seon Oh ◽

Seokchan Hong ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Medical Center ◽

Characteristic Curve ◽

Area Under The Curve ◽

Diagnostic Value ◽

Urine Samples ◽

Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay ◽

Systemic Lupus ◽

Asan Medical

Objective The need for a biomarker with robust sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) remains unmet. Compared with blood samples, urine samples are more easily collected; thus, we aimed to identify such a biomarker based on urinary proteomics which could distinguish patients with SLE from healthy controls (HCs). Methods Urine samples were collected from 76 SLE patients who visited rheumatology clinic in 2019 at Asan medical center and from 25 HCs. Urine proteins were analyzed using sequential windowed acquisition of all theoretical fragment ion spectra-mass spectrometry, and the candidate marker was confirmed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the diagnostic value of the candidate biomarker. Results Of 1157 proteins quantified, 153 were differentially expressed in urine samples from HCs. Among them were previously known markers including α-1-acid glycoprotein 1, α-2-HS-glycoprotein, ceruloplasmin, and prostaglandin-H2 D-isomerase. Moreover, the amount of β-2 glycoprotein (APOH) was increased in the urine of patients with SLE. The ELISA results also showed the level of urine APOH was higher in patients with SLE than in HCs and patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Moreover, the level was not different between SLE patients with and without nephritis. The urine APOH had an area under the curve value of 0.946 at a cut-off value of 228.53 ng/mg (sensitivity 91.5%, specificity 92.0%) for the diagnosis of SLE. Conclusion The results indicate that the urine APOH level can be an appropriate screening tool in a clinical setting when SLE is suspected.

Download Full-text

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus with and without Anti-dsDNA Antibodies: Analysis from a Large Monocentric Cohort

Mediators of Inflammation ◽

10.1155/2015/328078 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 2015 ◽

pp. 1-6 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Conti Fabrizio ◽

Ceccarelli Fulvia ◽

Perricone Carlo ◽

Massaro Laura ◽

Marocchi Elisa ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Disease Activity ◽

Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Clinical Laboratory ◽

Renal Involvement ◽

Serum Levels ◽

Activity Measurement ◽

Systemic Lupus ◽

Before And After ◽

Dsdna Antibodies

Objectives. The anti-dsDNA antibodies are a marker for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) and 70–98% of patients test positive. We evaluated the demographic, clinical, laboratory, and therapeutical features of a monocentric SLE cohort according to the anti-dsDNA status.Methods. We identified three groups: anti-dsDNA + (persistent positivity); anti-dsDNA ± (initial positivity and subsequent negativity during disease course); anti-dsDNA − (persistent negativity). Disease activity was assessed by the European Consensus Lupus Activity Measurement (ECLAM).Results. We evaluated 393 patients (anti-dsDNA +: 62.3%; anti-dsDNA ±: 13.3%; anti-dsDNA −: 24.4%). The renal involvement was significantly more frequent in anti-dsDNA + (30.2%), compared with anti-dsDNA ± and anti-dsDNA − (21.1% and 18.7%, resp.;P=0.001). Serositis resulted significantly more frequent in anti-dsDNA − (82.3%) compared to anti-dsDNA + and anti-dsDNA ± (20.8% and 13.4%, resp.;P<0.0001). The reduction of C4 serum levels was identified significantly more frequently in anti-dsDNA + and anti-dsDNA ± (40.0% and 44.2%, resp.) compared with anti-dsDNA − (21.8%,P=0.005). We did not identify significant differences in the mean ECLAM values before and after modification of anti-dsDNA status (P=0.7).Conclusion. Anti-dsDNA status influences the clinical and immunological features of SLE patients. Nonetheless, it does not appear to affect disease activity.

Download Full-text

LUPUS NEPHRITE WITH FAST - PROGRESSING CURRENT: CASE REPORT

Vestnik ◽

10.53065/kaznmu.2021.72.77.027 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 143-146

Author(s):

Б.Г. Султанова ◽

С.Б. Бодесова ◽

А.Т. Ибрашева ◽

Б.С. Мусабаев ◽

Д.Ш. Бетирова ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Case Report ◽

Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Clinical Laboratory ◽

Rapidly Progressive Glomerulonephritis ◽

Diagnostic Methods ◽

Symptomatic Therapy ◽

Systemic Lupus ◽

Current Case ◽

Complex Therapy

В статье описан «неклассический» случай, редко встречающаяся форма заболевания системной красной волчанкой без типичного поражения кожи с проявлением быстропрогрессирующего гломерулонефрита, с поражением тазобедренного сустава, выраженным болевым синдромом у юноши. С применением новых инновационных методов диагностики (непрямая иммунофлюоресценция на анализаторе AKLIDES), что позволило провести своевременно комплексную терапию включая в себя патогенетическую, эфферентную (гемодиализ, плазмаферез), тем самым получен хороший клинический эффект. This article describes a non- racial case of systemic lupus erythematosus with the manifestation of a rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis, hip joint lesion, a pronounced painful syndrom, without dermal manifestations. By the use of new diagnostic methods (immunofluorescence), timely complex therapy: pathogenetic, efferent therapy, symptomatic therapy, it is possible to obtain a fairly good clinical - laboratory- instrumental result.

Download Full-text

PREVALENCE AND CLINICAL/LABORATORY CORRELATION OF HEMATOLOGIC MANIFESTATIONS IN PATIENTS WITH SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS

10.47660/cbr.2021.1880 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Aline Cristina Peres Rodrigues ◽

Catarina Mendes dos Santos ◽

Sara Silva Mendes ◽

Ana Carolina de Oliveira e Silva Montandon ◽

Jozelia Rêgo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Clinical Laboratory ◽

Systemic Lupus

Download Full-text

Spinal cord syndromes in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: differentiating lupus myelitis, neuromyelitis optica, and multiple sclerosis

Lupus ◽

10.1177/0961203319886103 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 28 (14) ◽

pp. 1656-1662

Author(s):

J N Williams ◽

C B Speyer ◽

D J Kreps ◽

D J Kimbrough ◽

K Costenbader ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Sclerosis ◽

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Spinal Cord ◽

Disease Activity ◽

Neuromyelitis Optica ◽

Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Clinical Laboratory ◽

Activity Index ◽

Disease Activity Index ◽

Systemic Lupus

Objective Non-infectious myelitis in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) may be due to SLE myelitis, comorbid multiple sclerosis (MS), or neuromyelitis optica (NMO). We compared characteristics of these three conditions in SLE patients at a large academic institution. Methods We searched for neurologic diagnoses of SLE myelitis, NMO myelitis, and MS myelitis among 2297 patients with at least four 1997 American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for SLE between 2000 and 2015. Each subject was reviewed by a neurologist to confirm the underlying neurologic diagnosis. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, and radiographic data were extracted and compared using Fisher's exact test, analysis of variance, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Results Fifteen of the 2297 subjects with SLE (0.7%) met criteria for a spinal cord syndrome: seven had SLE myelitis, three had AQP4 seropositive NMO, and five had MS. The median SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 score at time of neurologic syndrome presentation was higher in SLE myelitis subjects (8, interquartile range (IQR) 7–16) compared with subjects with NMO (6, IQR 0–14) or MS (2, IQR 0–4), p = 0.02. Subjects with SLE myelitis were also more likely to have elevated anti-dsDNA antibodies at presentation (86%) compared with subjects with NMO (33%) or MS (0%), p = 0.03. Conclusion Myelitis occurs rarely among patients with SLE. Compared with subjects with SLE + NMO and subjects with SLE + MS, subjects with SLE myelitis had higher SLE disease activity at presentation.

Download Full-text

Anti-DNase I antibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus: diagnostic value and share in the enzyme inhibition

Rheumatology International ◽

10.1007/s00296-016-3437-z ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 36 (4) ◽

pp. 521-529 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

A. S. Trofimenko ◽

I. P. Gontar ◽

A. B. Zborovsky ◽

O. V. Paramonova

Keyword(s):

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Enzyme Inhibition ◽

Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Diagnostic Value ◽

Dnase I ◽

Systemic Lupus

Download Full-text

P607Myocardial injury in systemic lupus erythematosus defined by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: clinical and echocardiographic characteristics

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/eurheartj/ehz747.0216 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

R Du Toit ◽

P G Herbst ◽

A J K Pecoraro ◽

C Ackerman ◽

A Du Plessis ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Cardiac Magnetic Resonance ◽

Magnetic Resonance ◽

Renal Disease ◽

Lupus Erythematosus ◽

Tissue Characterization ◽

Clinical Laboratory ◽

Myocardial Dysfunction ◽

Myocardial Inflammation ◽

Systemic Lupus

Abstract Background Lupus myocarditis (LM) occurs in 5–10% of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Subclinical myocardial inflammation is detected in 37% at post mortem. Echocardiographic strain analyses (speckle tracking [STE]) supports subclinical myocardial dysfunction in SLE. Tissue characterization by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) identifies myocardial inflammation, necrosis/fibrosis, detecting clinical and subclinical myocardial injury (MIN). It is the non-invasive diagnostic modality of choice for myocarditis (all types) based on the Lake Louise criteria (LLC). The utility of CMR is limited by cost (in resource limited settings) as well as intolerance of / contra-indications to CMR. Purpose Determine prevalence of MIN in SLE (as per LLC). Compare clinical and echocardiographic features of patients with and without MIN. Identify echocardiographic predictors of MIN. Methods A prospective crossectional study was done at Tygerberg Hospital, Western Cape, South Africa. Adult inpatients, fulfilling the 2012 classification criteria for SLE were screened for inclusion. Echocardiography (echo) included strain analyses (segmental and global [GLS]) through STE and regional function assessment (wall motion score (WMS)). Patients were grouped according to CMR evidence of MIN (absent LLC [AC]; single criterion [SC]; fulfilling LLC). Clinical, laboratory and echo parameters were compared between groups. Logistic regression and ROC were used to determine predictors of MIN. Results 49/106 SLE patients screened were included (Figure 1). The median age was 27 years (IQR: 22–35) and 88% were female. 46.9% of patients had MIN (≥1 criterion): 12.2% fulfilled LLC and 34.7% had a SC. Demographic features, cardiac risk factors (including antiphospholipid syndrome) and renal disease were similar among groups. Compared to the AC group, SLE disease activity was higher in patients fulfilling LLC (p=0.022), but not in the SC group (p=0.813). A clinical and echo diagnosis of LM was made in all patients fulfilling LLC (p<0.001), in 17.6% of patients in the SC group (p=0.026) vs none in the AC group. Anti-DsDNA (p=0.054) and anti-B2GP1 (p=0.081) were more frequently positive in the SC vs AC group. The WMS was higher in LLC and SC groups (p=0.006; p=0.083) with mid and basal strain more impaired in patients with MIN (p=0.043; p=0.047). LVID and mid STE score (number of segments with impaired STE) combined was the best predictor of MIN (OR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.2–3.5; p=0.008). The predictive model had an AUC of 0.791 (PPV: 81.8%; NPV: 86.4%). Figure 1 Conclusion CMR is limited by a high exclusion rate in SLE, mainly due to renal disease. CMR evidence of MIN is common in SLE, even in the absence of clinical myocardial dysfunction or high lupus activity. Impaired echo regional and global function occurs more frequently in patients with MIN. STE combined with LVID predicts the presence of MIN detected by CMR and has potential as a cost effective screening tool.

Download Full-text