The HyperPed-COVID international registry: Impact of age of onset, disease presentation and geographical distribution on the final outcome of MIS-C.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to establish an international multicenter registry to collect data on patients with Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C), in order to highlight a relationship between clinical presentation, age of onset and geographical distribution on the clinical outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective study involving different international societies for rare immunological disorders.1009 patients diagnosed with MIS-C between March and September 2022, from 48 centers and 22 countries were collected. Five age groups (<1, 1-4, 5-11, 12-16, >16 years) and four geographic macro-areas, Western Europe, Central-Eastern Europe, Latin America, Asian-African resource-limited countries (LRC), were identified. RESULTS: Time to referral was significantly higher in LRC. Intensive anti-inflammatory treatment, including biologics, respiratory support and mechanic ventilation were more frequently used in older children and in European countries. The mortality rate was higher in very young children (<1 year), in older patients (>16 years of age) and in LRC. Multivariate analysis identified the residence in LRC, presence of severe cardiac involvement, renal hypertension, lymphopenia and non-use of heparin prophylaxis, as the factors most strongly associated with unfavorable outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The stratification of patients by age and geographic macro-area provided insights into the clinical presentation, treatment and outcome of MIS-C. The mortality and sequelae rates exhibited a correlation with the age and geographical areas. Patients admitted and treated in LRC displayed more severe outcomes, possibly due to delays in hospital admission and limited access to biologic drugs and to intensive care facilities.

Comparison among ACR1997, SLICC and the new EULAR/ACR classification criteria in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: To date there are no specific classification criteria for childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE). This study aims to compare the performance among the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997, the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics criteria (SLICC) and the new European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR criteria, in a cSLE cohort. METHODS: We conducted a medical chart review study of cSLE cases and controls with defined rheumatic diseases, both ANA positive, to establish each ACR1997, SLICC and EULAR/ACR criterion fulfilled, at first visit and 1-year-follow-up. RESULTS: Study population included 122 cSLE cases and 89 controls. At first visit, SLICC criteria had higher sensitivity than ACR 1997 (89.3% versus 70.5%, p <  0.001), but similar specificity (80.9% versus 83.2%, p = 0.791), however performance was not statistically different at 1-year-follow-up. SLICC better scored in specificity compared to EULAR/ACR score ≥ 10 at first visit (80.9% versus 67.4%, p = 0.008) and at 1-year (76.4% versus 58.4%, p = 0.001), although sensitivities were similar. EULAR/ACR criteria score ≥ 10 exhibited higher sensitivity than ACR 1997 (87.7% versus 70.5%, p <  0.001) at first visit, but comparable at 1-year, whereas specificity was lower at first visit (67.4% versus 83.2%, p = 0.004) and 1-year (58.4% versus 76.4%, p = 0.002). A EULAR/ACR score ≥ 13 against a score ≥ 10, resulted in higher specificity, positive predictive value, and cut-off point accuracy. Compared to SLICC, a EULAR/ACR score ≥ 13 resulted in lower sensitivity at first visit (76.2% versus 89.3%, p <  0.001) and 1-year (91% versus 97.5%, p = 0.008), but similar specificities at both assessments. When compared to ACR 1997, a EULAR/ACR total score ≥ 13, resulted in no differences in sensitivity and specificity at both observation periods. CONCLUSIONS: In this cSLE population, SLICC criteria better scored at first visit and 1-year-follow-up. The adoption of a EULAR/ACR total score ≥ 13 in this study, against the initially proposed ≥10 score, was most appropriate to classify cSLE. Further studies are necessary to address if SLICC criteria might allow fulfillment of cSLE classification earlier in disease course and may be more inclusive of cSLE subjects for clinical studies.