Use of SLICC criteria in a large, diverse lupus registry enables SLE classification of a subset of ACR-designated subjects with incomplete lupus.

OBJECTIVE: SLE is traditionally classified using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria. The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) recently validated an alternative system. This study examined large cohorts of subjects with SLE and incomplete lupus erythematosus (ILE) to compare the impact of ACR and SLICC criteria. METHODS: Medical records of subjects in the Lupus Family Registry and Repository were reviewed for documentation of 1997 ACR classification criteria, SLICC classification criteria and medication usage. Autoantibodies were assessed by indirect immunofluorescence (ANA, antidouble-stranded DNA), precipitin (Sm) and ELISA (anticardiolipin). Other relevant autoantibodies were detected by precipitin and with a bead-based multiplex assay. RESULTS: Of 3575 subjects classified with SLE under at least one system, 3312 (92.6%) were classified as SLE by both systems (SLEboth), 85 only by ACR criteria (SLEACR-only) and 178 only by SLICC criteria (SLESLICC-only). Of 440 subjects meeting 3 ACR criteria, 33.9% (149/440) were SLESLICC-only, while 66.1% (n=291, designated ILE) did not meet the SLICC classification criteria. Under the SLICC system, the complement criterion and the individual autoantibody criteria enabled SLE classification of SLESLICC-only subjects, while SLEACR-only subjects failed to meet SLICC classification due to the combined acute/subacute cutaneous criterion. The SLICC criteria classified more African-American subjects by the leucopenia/lymphopenia criterion than did ACR criteria. Compared with SLEACR-only subjects, SLESLICC-only subjects exhibited similar numbers of affected organ systems, rates of major organ system involvement (∼30%: pulmonary, cardiovascular, renal, neurological) and medication history. CONCLUSIONS: The SLICC criteria classify more subjects with SLE than ACR criteria; however, individuals with incomplete lupus still exist under SLICC criteria. Subjects who gain SLE classification through SLICC criteria exhibit heterogeneous disease, including potential major organ involvement. These results provide supportive evidence that SLICC criteria may be more inclusive of SLE subjects for clinical studies.

Clinical and Serologic Features in Patients With Incomplete Lupus Classification Versus Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Patients and Controls.

OBJECTIVE: Incomplete lupus erythematosus (ILE) involves clinical and/or serologic manifestations consistent with but insufficient for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification. Because the nature of ILE is poorly understood and no treatment recommendations exist, we examined the clinical manifestations, medication history, and immunologic features in a diverse collection of ILE and SLE patients. METHODS: Medical records of subjects enrolled in the Lupus Family Registry and Repository were reviewed for medication history and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria to identify ILE patients (3 ACR criteria; n = 440) and SLE patients (≥4 ACR criteria; n = 3,397). Participants completed the Connective Tissue Disease Screening Questionnaire. Anticardiolipin and plasma B lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS) were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) by indirect immunofluorescence, and 13 autoantibodies by bead-based assays. RESULTS: On average, ILE patients were older than SLE patients (46.2 years versus 42.0 years; P < 0.0001), and fewer ILE patients were African American (23.9% versus 32.2%; P < 0.001). ILE patients exhibited fewer autoantibody specificities than SLE patients (1.3 versus 2.6; P < 0.0001) and were less likely to have ANA titers ≥1:1,080 (10.5% versus 19.5%; P < 0.0001). BLyS levels were intermediate in ILE patients (controls < ILE; P = 0.016; ILE < SLE; P = 0.008). Pericarditis, renal, or neurologic manifestations occurred in 12.5% of ILE patients and were associated with non-European American race/ethnicity (P = 0.012). Hydroxychloroquine use increased over time, but was less frequent in ILE than SLE patients (65.2% versus 83.1%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Although usually characterized by milder symptoms, ILE manifestations may require immunomodulatory treatments. Longitudinal studies are necessary to understand how ILE affects organ damage and future SLE risk, and to delineate molecular pathways unique to ILE.