Mestizos with systemic lupus erythematosus develop renal disease early while antimalarials retard its appearance: data from a Latin American cohort.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this paper is to assess the predictors of time-to-lupus renal disease in Latin American patients. METHODS: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients (n = 1480) from Grupo Latino Americano De Estudio de Lupus (GLADEL's) longitudinal inception cohort were studied. Endpoint was ACR renal criterion development after SLE diagnosis (prevalent cases excluded). Renal disease predictors were examined by univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. Antimalarials were considered time dependent in alternative analyses. RESULTS: Of the entire cohort, 265 patients (17.9%) developed renal disease after entering the cohort. Of them, 88 (33.2%) developed persistent proteinuria, 44 (16.6%) cellular casts and 133 (50.2%) both; 233 patients (87.9%) were women; mean (± SD) age at diagnosis was 28.0 (11.9) years; 12.2% were African-Latin Americans, 42.5% Mestizos, and 45.3% Caucasians (p = 0.0016). Mestizo ethnicity (HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.19-2.17), hypertension (HR 3.99, 95% CI 3.02-5.26) and SLEDAI at diagnosis (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.06) were associated with a shorter time-to-renal disease occurrence; antimalarial use (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.43-0.77), older age at onset (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.95, for every five years) and photosensitivity (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56-0.98) were associated with a longer time. Alternative model results were consistent with the antimalarial protective effect (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Our data strongly support the fact that Mestizo patients are at increased risk of developing renal disease early while antimalarials seem to delay the appearance of this SLE manifestation. These data have important implications for the treatment of these patients regardless of their geographic location.

Is familial lupus different from sporadic lupus? Data from LUMINA (LXXIII), a multiethnic US cohort.

The aim of this study was to characterize the clinical features of familial lupus, and determine its influence on damage accrual and survival using data from LUMINA, a longitudinal multiethnic US cohort. Familial lupus was defined as patients with a first-degree relative with systemic lupus erythematosus. Relative risks were estimated by logistic regression; odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were the measure of association for familial lupus. Hazard ratios were calculated using Cox proportional hazards adjusted for potential confounders for damage and survival. Of 644 patients, 32 had familial and 612 had sporadic lupus; both groups were of comparable age (~36 years). Patients with familial lupus were, in decreasing order of frequency, siblings, parents and children. In multivariable analyses, mucosal ulcers (OR = 1.92, 95% CI 0.65-5.70), mitral valve prolapse (OR = 1.74, 95% CI 0.50-6.10), cerebrovascular disease (OR = 4.18, 95% CI 0.98-17.76) and oral contraceptive use (ever/never; OR = 2.51, 95% CI 0.88-7.19) were more likely in familial lupus, but a history of low platelet count (<150,000/mm(3); OR=0.31, 95% CI 0.08-1.17) and pulmonary disease activity (OR=0.39, 95% CI 0.14-1.20) were less likely. However, none of these associations reached statistical significance. Familial lupus was not significantly associated with a shorter time to either damage accrual or death (HR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.37-1.59, p = 0.4746 and HR = 0.20, 95% CI 0.03-1.47, p = 0.2020, respectively). We conclude that although some clinical differences were observed between patients with familial and sporadic lupus, familial lupus was not associated with a significantly greater disease burden (damage, survival) than sporadic lupus.

Peripheral vascular damage in systemic lupus erythematosus: data from LUMINA, a large multi-ethnic U.S. cohort (LXIX).

To determine the factors associated with peripheral vascular damage in systemic lupus erythematosus patients and its impact on survival from Lupus in Minorities, Nature versus Nurture, a longitudinal US multi-ethnic cohort. Peripheral vascular damage was defined by the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Damage Index (SDI). Factors associated with peripheral vascular damage were examined by univariable and multi-variable logistic regression models and its impact on survival by a Cox multi-variable regression. Thirty-four (5.3%) of 637 patients (90% women, mean [SD] age 36.5 [12.6] [16-87] years) developed peripheral vascular damage. Age and the SDI (without peripheral vascular damage) were statistically significant (odds ratio [OR] = 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.08; P = 0.0107 and OR = 1.30, 95% CI 0.09-1.56; P = 0.0043, respectively) in multi-variable analyses. Azathioprine, warfarin and statins were also statistically significant, and glucocorticoid use was borderline statistically significant (OR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.10-1.06; P = 0.0975). In the survival analysis, peripheral vascular damage was independently associated with a diminished survival (hazard ratio = 2.36; 95% CI 1.07-5.19; P = 0.0334). In short, age was independently associated with peripheral vascular damage, but so was the presence of damage in other organs (ocular, neuropsychiatric, renal, cardiovascular, pulmonary, musculoskeletal and integument) and some medications (probably reflecting more severe disease). Peripheral vascular damage also negatively affected survival.

Validation of the Spanish, Portuguese and French versions of the Lupus Damage Index questionnaire: data from North and South America, Spain and Portugal.

We have previously developed and validated a self-administered questionnaire, modelled after the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Damage Index (SDI), the Lupus Damage Index Questionnaire (LDIQ), which may allow the ascertainment of this construct in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients followed in the community and thus expand observations made about damage. We have now translated, back-translated and adapted the LDIQ to Spanish, Portuguese and French and applied it to patients followed at academic and non-academic centres in North and South America, Portugal and Spain while their physicians scored the SDI. A total of 887 patients (659 Spanish-speaking, 140 Portuguese-speaking and 80 French-speaking patients) and 40 physicians participated. Overall, patients scored all LDIQ versions higher than their physicians (total score and all domains). Infrequent manifestations had less optimal clinimetric properties but overall agreement was more than 95% for the majority of items. Higher correlations were observed among the Spanish-speaking patients than the Portuguese-speaking and French-speaking patients; further adjustments may be needed before the Portuguese and French versions of the LDIQ are applied in community-based studies. The relationship between the LDIQ and other outcome parameters is currently being investigated in a different patient sample.