Publisher Correction: The immune cell landscape in kidneys of patients with lupus nephritis.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

The immune cell landscape in kidneys of patients with lupus nephritis.

Lupus nephritis is a potentially fatal autoimmune disease for which the current treatment is ineffective and often toxic. To develop mechanistic hypotheses of disease, we analyzed kidney samples from patients with lupus nephritis and from healthy control subjects using single-cell RNA sequencing. Our analysis revealed 21 subsets of leukocytes active in disease, including multiple populations of myeloid cells, T cells, natural killer cells and B cells that demonstrated both pro-inflammatory responses and inflammation-resolving responses. We found evidence of local activation of B cells correlated with an age-associated B-cell signature and evidence of progressive stages of monocyte differentiation within the kidney. A clear interferon response was observed in most cells. Two chemokine receptors, CXCR4 and CX3CR1, were broadly expressed, implying a potentially central role in cell trafficking. Gene expression of immune cells in urine and kidney was highly correlated, which would suggest that urine might serve as a surrogate for kidney biopsies.

Extrarenal symptoms associate with worse quality of life in patients enrolled in the AMP RA/SLE Lupus Nephritis Network.

OBJECTIVE: Lupus nephritis (LN) can occur as an isolated component of disease activity or be accompanied by diverse extrarenal manifestations. Whether isolated renal disease is sufficient to decrease health related quality of life (HRQOL) remains unknown. This study compared Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-Item (PROMIS-29) scores in LN patients with isolated renal disease to those with extrarenal symptoms to evaluate the burden of LN on HRQOL and inform future LN clinical trials incorporating HRQOL outcomes. METHODS: A total of 181 LN patients consecutively enrolled in the multicentre multi-ethnic/racial Accelerating Medicines Partnership completed PROMIS-29 questionnaires at the time of a clinically indicated renal biopsy. Raw PROMIS-29 scores were converted to standardized T scores. RESULTS: Seventy-five (41%) patients had extrarenal disease (mean age 34, 85% female) and 106 (59%) had isolated renal (mean age 36, 82% female). Rash (45%), arthritis (40%) and alopecia (40%) were the most common extrarenal manifestations. Compared with isolated renal, patients with extrarenal disease reported significantly worse pain interference, ability to participate in social roles, physical function, and fatigue. Patients with extrarenal disease had PROMIS-29 scores that significantly differed from the general population by > 0.5 SD of the reference mean in pain interference, physical function, and fatigue. Arthritis was most strongly associated with worse scores in these three domains. CONCLUSION: Most patients had isolated renal disease and extrarenal manifestations associated with worse HRQOL. These data highlight the importance of comprehensive disease management strategies that address both renal and extrarenal manifestations to improve overall patient outcomes.

High incidence of proliferative and membranous nephritis in SLE patients with low proteinuria in the Accelerating Medicines Partnership.

OBJECTIVE: Delayed detection of LN associates with worse outcomes. There are conflicting recommendations regarding a threshold level of proteinuria at which biopsy will likely yield actionable management. This study addressed the association of urine protein:creatinine ratios (UPCR) with clinical characteristics and investigated the incidence of proliferative and membranous histology in patients with a UPCR between 0.5 and 1. METHODS: A total of 275 SLE patients (113 first biopsy, 162 repeat) were enrolled in the multicentre multi-ethnic/racial Accelerating Medicines Partnership across 15 US sites at the time of a clinically indicated renal biopsy. Patients were followed for 1 year. RESULTS: At biopsy, 54 patients had UPCR <1 and 221 had UPCR ≥1. Independent of UPCR or biopsy number, a majority (92%) of patients had class III, IV, V or mixed histology. Moreover, patients with UPCR <1 and class III, IV, V, or mixed had a median activity index of 4.5 and chronicity index of 3, yet 39% of these patients had an inactive sediment. Neither anti-dsDNA nor low complement distinguished class I or II from III, IV, V or mixed in patients with UPCR <1. Of 29 patients with baseline UPCR <1 and class III, IV, V or mixed, 23 (79%) had a UPCR <0.5 at 1 year. CONCLUSION: In this prospective study, three-quarters of patients with UPCR <1 had histology showing class III, IV, V or mixed with accompanying activity and chronicity despite an inactive sediment or normal serologies. These data support renal biopsy at thresholds lower than a UPCR of 1.

European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) SLE classification criteria item performance.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2019 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus system showed high specificity, while attaining also high sensitivity. We hereby analysed the performance of the individual criteria items and their contribution to the overall performance of the criteria. METHODS: We combined the EULAR/ACR derivation and validation cohorts for a total of 1197 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and n=1074 non-SLE patients with a variety of conditions mimicking SLE, such as other autoimmune diseases, and calculated the sensitivity and specificity for antinuclear antibodies (ANA) and the 23 specific criteria items. We also tested performance omitting the EULAR/ACR criteria attribution rule, which defines that items are only counted if not more likely explained by a cause other than SLE. RESULTS: Positive ANA, the new entry criterion, was 99.5% sensitive, but only 19.4% specific, against a non-SLE population that included other inflammatory rheumatic, infectious, malignant and metabolic diseases. The specific criteria items were highly variable in sensitivity (from 0.42% for delirium and 1.84% for psychosis to 75.6% for antibodies to double-stranded DNA), but their specificity was uniformly high, with low C3 or C4 (83.0%) and leucopenia <4.000/mm³ (83.8%) at the lowest end. Unexplained fever was 95.3% specific in this cohort. Applying the attribution rule improved specificity, particularly for joint involvement. CONCLUSIONS: Changing the position of the highly sensitive, non-specific ANA to an entry criterion and the attribution rule resulted in a specificity of >80% for all items, explaining the higher overall specificity of the criteria set.

Performance of the 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in early disease, across sexes and ethnicities.

OBJECTIVES: The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2019 Classification Criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have been validated with high sensitivity and specificity. We evaluated the performance of the new criteria with regard to disease duration, sex and race/ethnicity, and compared its performance against the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012 and ACR 1982/1997 criteria. METHODS: Twenty-one SLE centres from 16 countries submitted SLE cases and mimicking controls to form the validation cohort. The sensitivity and specificity of the EULAR/ACR 2019, SLICC 2012 and ACR 1982/1997 criteria were evaluated. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of female (n=1098), male (n=172), Asian (n=118), black (n=68), Hispanic (n=124) and white (n=941) patients; with an SLE duration of 1 to <3 years (n=196) and ≥5 years (n=879). Among patients with 1 to <3 years disease duration, the EULAR/ACR criteria had better sensitivity than the ACR criteria (97% vs 81%). The EULAR/ACR criteria performed well in men (sensitivity 93%, specificity 96%) and women (sensitivity 97%, specificity 94%). Among women, the EULAR/ACR criteria had better sensitivity than the ACR criteria (97% vs 83%) and better specificity than the SLICC criteria (94% vs 82%). Among white patients, the EULAR/ACR criteria had better sensitivity than the ACR criteria (95% vs 83%) and better specificity than the SLICC criteria (94% vs 83%). The EULAR/ACR criteria performed well among black patients (sensitivity of 98%, specificity 100%), and had better sensitivity than the ACR criteria among Hispanic patients (100% vs 86%) and Asian patients (97% vs 77%). CONCLUSIONS: The EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria perform well among patients with early disease, men, women, white, black, Hispanic and Asian patients. These criteria have superior sensitivity than the ACR criteria and/or superior specificity than the SLICC criteria across many subgroups.

Multicriteria decision analysis process to develop new classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus.

European League Against Rheumatism and are jointly supporting multiphase development of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria based on weighted criteria and a continuous probability scale. Prior steps included item generation, item reduction and hierarchical organisation of candidate criteria using an evidence-based approach. Our objectives were to determine relative weights using multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) and to set a provisional threshold score for SLE classification. An SLE Expert Panel (8 European, 9 North American) submitted 164 real, unique cases with a wide range of SLE probability in a standardised format. Using the candidate criteria, experts scored and rank-ordered 20 representative cases. At an in-person meeting, experts reviewed inter-rater reliability of scoring, further refined criteria definitions and participated in an MCDA exercise. Based on expert consensus decisions on pairwise comparisons of criteria, 1000minds software calculated criteria weights and rank-ordered the remaining 144 cases based on their additive scores. The score of the lowest-ranked case for which complete expert consensus was achieved defined the provisional threshold classification score. Inter-rater reliability of scoring cases with the candidate criteria was good. MCDA involved 74 pairwise decisions and was repeated for the arthritis and mucocutaneous domains when the initial ranking of some cases did not match expert opinion. After criteria weights and additive scores were recalculated once, experts reached consensus for SLE classification for all cases scoring>83. Using an iterative process, the candidate criteria definitions were refined, preliminary weights were calculated and a provisional threshold score for SLE classification was determined.

2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVE: To develop new classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) jointly supported by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). METHODS: This international initiative had four phases. (1) Evaluation of antinuclear antibody (ANA) as an entry criterion through systematic review and meta-regression of the literature and criteria generation through an international Delphi exercise, an early patient cohort and a patient survey. (2) Criteria reduction by Delphi and nominal group technique exercises. (3) Criteria definition and weighting based on criterion performance and on results of a multi-criteria decision analysis. (4) Refinement of weights and threshold scores in a new derivation cohort of 1001 subjects and validation compared with previous criteria in a new validation cohort of 1270 subjects. RESULTS: The 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria for SLE include positive ANA at least once as obligatory entry criterion; followed by additive weighted criteria grouped in seven clinical (constitutional, haematological, neuropsychiatric, mucocutaneous, serosal, musculoskeletal, renal) and three immunological (antiphospholipid antibodies, complement proteins, SLE-specific antibodies) domains, and weighted from 2 to 10. Patients accumulating ≥10 points are classified. In the validation cohort, the new criteria had a sensitivity of 96.1% and specificity of 93.4%, compared with 82.8% sensitivity and 93.4% specificity of the ACR 1997 and 96.7% sensitivity and 83.7% specificity of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics 2012 criteria. CONCLUSION: These new classification criteria were developed using rigorous methodology with multidisciplinary and international input, and have excellent sensitivity and specificity. Use of ANA entry criterion, hierarchically clustered and weighted criteria reflect current thinking about SLE and provide an improved foundation for SLE research.

Phase III trial results with blisibimod, a selective inhibitor of B-cell activating factor, in subjects with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE): results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Targeted inhibitors of B-cell activating factor (BAFF) have been evaluated in phase III trials in over 4000 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Post hoc analyses of these studies identify greater treatment effect in patients entering with higher disease activity, greater corticosteroid doses, anti double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) and low complement C3 or C4. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of blisibimod, a BAFF inhibitor, in a population of patients with SLE enriched for high disease activity. METHODS: 442 patients with SLE with antinuclear antibodies or anti-dsDNA and Safety of Estrogen in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment - Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SELENA-SLEDAI) score ≥10 on standard-of-care medications were randomised to receive weekly subcutaneous blisibimod (200 mg) or placebo. Corticosteroid taper was encouraged from week 8. The primary end point was the week 52 SLE Responder Index-6 (SRI-6). RESULTS: The SRI-6 primary end point was not met. There was a statistically significant steroid-sparing effect, and significantly more blisibimod-treated subjects achieved corticosteroid taper. Increased blisibimod treatment effect on SRI-6 was observed in subjects who achieved a concomitant decrease in corticosteroid dose from baseline. In subjects with baseline urinary protein:creatinine ratio (UPCR) ≥56.5 mg/mmol, significantly higher proportions of blisibimod subjects achieved >50% reduction in UPCR and/or UPCR <56.5 mg/mmol. Reductions in SLE autoantibodies and B cells, and increases in complement C3 and C4 were observed with blisibimod.Blisibimod was well-tolerated. The most common adverse events were upper respiratory tract infection, urinary tract infection, injection site erythema/reaction and diarrhoea. CONCLUSIONS: Although the SRI-6 end point was not met, blisibimod was associated with successful steroid reduction, decreased proteinuria and biomarker responses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01395745.

Reliability of Multiple Mini-Interviews and traditional interviews within and between institutions: a study of five California medical schools.

BACKGROUND: Many medical schools use admissions Multiple Mini-Interviews (MMIs) rather than traditional interviews (TIs), partly because MMIs are thought to be more reliable. Yet prior studies examined single-school samples of candidates completing either an MMI or TI (not both). Using data from five California public medical schools, the authors examined the within- and between-school reliabilities of TIs and MMIs. METHODS: The analyses included applicants interviewing at ≥1 of the five schools during 2011-2013. Three schools employed TIs (TI1, TI2, TI3) and two employed MMIs (MMI1, MMI2). Mixed linear models accounting for nesting of observations within applicants examined standardized TI and MMI scores (mean = 0, SD = 1), adjusting for applicant socio-demographics, academic metrics, year, number of interviews, and interview date. RESULTS: A total of 4993 individuals (completing 7516 interviews [TI = 4137, MMI = 3379]) interviewed at ≥1 school; 428 (14.5%) interviewed at both MMI schools and 687 (20.2%) at more than one TI school. Within schools, inter-interviewer consistency was generally qualitatively lower for TI1, TI2, and TI3 (Pearson's r 0.07, 0.13, and 0.29, and Cronbach's α, 0.40, 0.44, and 0.61, respectively) than for MMI1 and MMI 2 (Cronbach's α 0.68 and 0.60, respectively). Between schools, the adjusted intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.27 (95% CI 0.20-0.35) for TIs and 0.47 (95% CI 0.41-0.54) for MMIs. CONCLUSIONS: Within and between-school reliability was qualitatively higher for MMIs than for TIs. Nonetheless, TI reliabilities were higher than anticipated from prior literature, suggesting TIs may not need to be abandoned on reliability grounds if other factors favor their use.

Efficacy and safety of atacicept for prevention of flares in patients with moderate-to-severe systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE): 52-week data (APRIL-SLE randomised trial).

OBJECTIVES: Despite advances in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) treatment, many patients suffer from the disease and side effects. Atacicept is a fusion protein that blocks B-lymphocyte stimulator and a proliferation-inducing ligand, which are increased in patients with SLE. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients with moderate-to-severe SLE were randomised to atacicept 75 mg or atacicept 150 mg administered subcutaneously, or placebo twice-weekly for 4 weeks, then weekly for 48 weeks. Primary and secondary efficacy measures were the proportion of patients experiencing at least one flare of British Isles Lupus Assessment Group A or B, and time to first flare, respectively. RESULTS: Enrolment in the atacicept 150 mg arm was discontinued prematurely due to two deaths. In the intention-to-treat population (n=461), there was no difference in flare rates or time to first flare between atacicept 75 mg and placebo. Analysis of patients treated with atacicept 150 mg suggested beneficial effect versus placebo in flare rates (OR: 0.48, p=0.002) and time to first flare (HR: 0.56, p=0.009). Both atacicept doses were associated with reductions in total Ig levels and anti-dsDNA antibodies, and increases in C3 and C4 levels. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference between atacicept 75 mg and placebo for flare rate or time to first flare. Analysis of atacicept 150 mg suggested benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT: 2007-003698-13; NCT00624338.

Mycophenolate versus azathioprine as maintenance therapy for lupus nephritis.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy, often with azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil, is required to consolidate remission and prevent relapse after the initial control of lupus nephritis. METHODS: We carried out a 36-month, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3 study comparing oral mycophenolate mofetil (2 g per day) and oral azathioprine (2 mg per kilogram of body weight per day), plus placebo in each group, in patients who met response criteria during a 6-month induction trial. The study group underwent repeat randomization in a 1:1 ratio. Up to 10 mg of prednisone per day or its equivalent was permitted. The primary efficacy end point was the time to treatment failure, which was defined as death, end-stage renal disease, doubling of the serum creatinine level, renal flare, or rescue therapy for lupus nephritis. Secondary assessments included the time to the individual components of treatment failure and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 227 patients were randomly assigned to maintenance treatment (116 to mycophenolate mofetil and 111 to azathioprine). Mycophenolate mofetil was superior to azathioprine with respect to the primary end point, time to treatment failure (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 0.77; P = 0.003), and with respect to time to renal flare and time to rescue therapy (hazard ratio, <1.00; P < 0.05). Observed rates of treatment failure were 16.4% (19 of 116 patients) in the mycophenolate mofetil group and 32.4% (36 of 111) in the azathioprine group. Adverse events, most commonly minor infections and gastrointestinal disorders, occurred in more than 95% of the patients in both groups (P = 0.68). Serious adverse events occurred in 33.3% of patients in the azathioprine group and in 23.5% of those in the mycophenolate mofetil group (P = 0.11), and the rate of withdrawal due to adverse events was higher with azathioprine than with mycophenolate mofetil (39.6% vs. 25.2%, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Mycophenolate mofetil was superior to azathioprine in maintaining a renal response to treatment and in preventing relapse in patients with lupus nephritis who had a response to induction therapy. (Funded by Vifor Pharma [formerly Aspreva]; ALMS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00377637.).

Comparison of alternative primary outcome measures for use in lupus nephritis clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical trials of therapies for lupus nephritis have used many different primary outcome measures, ranging from complete response to time to end-stage renal disease. The objective of this study was to compare several possible outcome measures, using data from a large, multicenter trial of abatacept in lupus nephritis, to gain insight into which outcome measure, if any, was best able to discern differences among treatment groups. METHODS: Study patients received either abatacept or placebo, on a background of mycophenolate mofetil and glucocorticoids. Using data from this trial, the following primary outcome measures at 24 and 52 weeks were compared: complete response rate, major clinical response rate, total response rate (complete plus partial response), improvement in proteinuria, improvement in estimated glomerular filtration rate, and frequency of treatment failure. Time to complete response was also evaluated. RESULTS: Complete response rate, major clinical response rate, and time to complete response were the measures that best discriminated between the abatacept groups and placebo, and the sensitivities of these 3 measures were comparable. For these measures, sample sizes of 50 patients would have been sufficient to demonstrate a statistically significant difference between treatment and control at 52 weeks. Each of the other measures also discriminated between treatment and control, but much larger group sizes would have been required to determine statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The choice of primary outcome measure can substantially influence the ability to detect therapeutic benefit in lupus nephritis trials. This study suggests that complete response rate, major clinical response rate at 52 weeks, and time to complete response may be the most sensitive outcome measures for detecting differences among therapeutic regimens.

Longitudinal patterns and predictors of response to standard-of-care therapy in lupus nephritis: data from the Accelerating Medicines Partnership Lupus Network.

BACKGROUND: Leveraging the Accelerating Medicines Partnership (AMP) Lupus Nephritis (LN) dataset, we evaluated longitudinal patterns, rates, and predictors of response to standard-of-care therapy in patients with lupus nephritis. METHODS: Patients from US academic medical centers with class III, IV, and/or V LN and a baseline urine protein/creatinine (UPCR) ratio ≥ 1.0 (n = 180) were eligible for this analysis. Complete response (CR) required the following: (1) UPCR < 0.5; (2) normal serum creatinine (≤ 1.3 mg/dL) or, if abnormal, ≤ 125% of baseline; and (3) prednisone ≤ 10 mg/day. Partial response (PR) required the following: (1) > 50% reduction in UPCR; (2) normal serum creatinine or, if abnormal, ≤ 125% of baseline; and (3) prednisone dose ≤ 15 mg/day. RESULTS: Response rates to the standard of care at week 52 were CR = 22.2%; PR = 21.7%; non-responder (NR) = 41.7%, and not determined (ND) = 14.4%. Only 8/180 (4.4%) patients had a week 12 CR sustained through week 52. Eighteen (10%) patients attained a week 12 PR or CR and sustained their responses through week 52 and 47 (26.1%) patients achieved sustained PR or CR at weeks 26 and 52. Week 52 CR or PR attainment was associated with baseline UPCR > 3 (ORadj = 3.71 [95%CI = 1.34-10.24]; p = 0.012), > 25% decrease in UPCR from baseline to week 12 (ORadj = 2.61 [95%CI = 1.07-6.41]; p = 0.036), lower chronicity index (ORadj = 1.33 per unit decrease [95%CI = 1.10-1.62]; p = 0.003), and positive anti-dsDNA antibody (ORadj = 2.61 [95%CI = 0.93-7.33]; p = 0.069). CONCLUSIONS: CR and PR rates at week 52 were consistent with the standard-of-care response rates observed in prospective registrational LN trials. Low sustained response rates underscore the need for more efficacious therapies and highlight how critically important it is to understand the molecular pathways associated with response and non-response.

Urine proteomic signatures of histological class, activity, chronicity, and treatment response in lupus nephritis.

Lupus nephritis (LN) is a pathologically heterogenous autoimmune disease linked to end-stage kidney disease and mortality. Better therapeutic strategies are needed as only 30%-40% of patients completely respond to treatment. Noninvasive biomarkers of intrarenal inflammation may guide more precise approaches. Because urine collects the byproducts of kidney inflammation, we studied the urine proteomic profiles of 225 patients with LN (573 samples) in the longitudinal Accelerating Medicines Partnership in RA/SLE cohort. Urinary biomarkers of monocyte/neutrophil degranulation (i.e., PR3, S100A8, azurocidin, catalase, cathepsins, MMP8), macrophage activation (i.e., CD163, CD206, galectin-1), wound healing/matrix degradation (i.e., nidogen-1, decorin), and IL-16 characterized the aggressive proliferative LN classes and significantly correlated with histological activity. A decline of these biomarkers after 3 months of treatment predicted the 1-year response more robustly than proteinuria, the standard of care (AUC: CD206 0.91, EGFR 0.9, CD163 0.89, proteinuria 0.8). Candidate biomarkers were validated and provide potentially treatable targets. We propose these biomarkers of intrarenal immunological activity as noninvasive tools to diagnose LN and guide treatment and as surrogate endpoints for clinical trials. These findings provide insights into the processes involved in LN activity. This data set is a public resource to generate and test hypotheses and validate biomarkers.

Blood immunophenotyping identifies distinct kidney histopathology and outcomes in patients with lupus nephritis.

Lupus nephritis (LN) is a frequent manifestation of systemic lupus erythematosus, and fewer than half of patients achieve complete renal response with standard immunosuppressants. Identifying non-invasive, blood-based pathologic immune alterations associated with renal injury could aid therapeutic decisions. Here, we used mass cytometry immunophenotyping of peripheral blood mononuclear cells in 145 patients with biopsy-proven LN and 40 healthy controls to evaluate the heterogeneity of immune activation in patients with LN and to identify correlates of renal parameters and treatment response. Unbiased analysis identified 3 immunologically distinct groups of patients with LN that were associated with different patterns of histopathology, renal cell infiltrates, urine proteomic profiles, and treatment response at one year. Patients with enriched circulating granzyme B+ T cells at baseline showed more severe disease and increased numbers of activated CD8 T cells in the kidney, yet they had the highest likelihood of treatment response. A second group characterized primarily by a high type I interferon signature had a lower likelihood of response to therapy, while a third group appeared immunologically inactive by immunophenotyping at enrollment but with chronic renal injuries. Main immune profiles could be distilled down to 5 simple cytometric parameters that recapitulate several of the associations, highlighting the potential for blood immune profiling to translate to clinically useful non-invasive metrics to assess immune-mediated disease in LN.

Recent progress in conventional and biologic therapy for systemic lupus erythematosus.

The recent approval of belimumab for the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) ended a decade in which there was mounting optimism about the prospect for developing biologically based therapies for SLE. During this same period, steady progress had been made in understanding and applying conventional therapies for SLE. These advances in the use of conventional therapies provide an important frame of reference for evaluating the novel biologic therapies that are expected to emerge in the near future.

Abatacept for lupus nephritis: alternative definitions of complete response support conflicting conclusions.

OBJECTIVE: Recent clinical trials in lupus nephritis have all used different criteria to assess complete response. The objective of this analysis was to compare several previously proposed criteria, using the same data set from a large trial of abatacept in lupus nephritis (IM101075). In so doing, we sought to determine which criteria are most sensitive to differences among treatment groups and to further examine the potential of abatacept in lupus nephritis. METHODS: Patients in the IM101075 trial received abatacept at 1 of 2 different dose regimens or placebo, both on a background of mycophenolate mofetil and corticosteroids. Using data from this trial, we assessed rates of complete response at 12 months according to 5 sets of criteria, from 1) the trial protocol, 2) the Aspreva Lupus Management Study (ALMS) trial of mycophenolate mofetil, 3) the Lupus Nephritis Assessment with Rituximab (LUNAR) trial of rituximab, 4) an ongoing National Institutes of Health trial of abatacept (Abatacept and Cyclophosphamide Combination: Efficacy and Safety Study [ACCESS]), and 5) published recommendations of the American College of Rheumatology. RESULTS: According to the complete response definition from the IM101075 study protocol, there was no difference among treatment groups in the IM101075 study. In contrast, according to the ALMS, LUNAR, and ACCESS criteria, rates of complete response among patients in the IM101075 study were higher in both treatment groups relative to control. The largest differences were obtained with use of the LUNAR criteria (complete response rate of 6% in the control group, compared to 22% and 24% in the 2 abatacept groups). CONCLUSION: The choice of definition of complete response can determine whether a lupus nephritis trial is interpreted as a success or a failure. The results of this analysis provide an evidence-based rationale for choosing among alternative definitions and offer a strong rationale for conducting further studies of abatacept in lupus nephritis.

Urine Proteomics and Renal Single-Cell Transcriptomics Implicate Interleukin-16 in Lupus Nephritis.

OBJECTIVE: Current lupus nephritis (LN) treatments are effective in only 30% of patients, emphasizing the need for novel therapeutic strategies. We undertook this study to develop mechanistic hypotheses and explore novel biomarkers by analyzing the longitudinal urinary proteomic profiles in LN patients undergoing treatment. METHODS: We quantified 1,000 urinary proteins in 30 patients with LN at the time of the diagnostic renal biopsy and after 3, 6, and 12 months. The proteins and molecular pathways detected in the urine proteome were then analyzed with respect to baseline clinical features and longitudinal trajectories. The intrarenal expression of candidate biomarkers was evaluated using single-cell transcriptomics of renal biopsy sections from LN patients. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed multiple biologic pathways, including chemotaxis, neutrophil activation, platelet degranulation, and extracellular matrix organization, which could be noninvasively quantified and monitored in the urine. We identified 237 urinary biomarkers associated with LN, as compared to controls without systemic lupus erythematosus. Interleukin-16 (IL-16), CD163, and transforming growth factor ß mirrored intrarenal nephritis activity. Response to treatment was paralleled by a reduction in urinary IL-16, a CD4 ligand with proinflammatory and chemotactic properties. Single-cell RNA sequencing independently demonstrated that IL16 is the second most expressed cytokine by most infiltrating immune cells in LN kidneys. IL-16-producing cells were found at key sites of kidney injury. CONCLUSION: Urine proteomics may profoundly change the diagnosis and management of LN by noninvasively monitoring active intrarenal biologic pathways. These findings implicate IL-16 in LN pathogenesis, designating it as a potentially treatable target and biomarker.

Safety of procuring research tissue during a clinically indicated kidney biopsy from patients with lupus: data from the Accelerating Medicines Partnership RA/SLE Network.

OBJECTIVES: In lupus nephritis the pathological diagnosis from tissue retrieved during kidney biopsy drives treatment and management. Despite recent approval of new drugs, complete remission rates remain well under aspirational levels, necessitating identification of new therapeutic targets by greater dissection of the pathways to tissue inflammation and injury. This study assessed the safety of kidney biopsies in patients with SLE enrolled in the Accelerating Medicines Partnership, a consortium formed to molecularly deconstruct nephritis. METHODS: 475 patients with SLE across 15 clinical sites in the USA consented to obtain tissue for research purposes during a clinically indicated kidney biopsy. Adverse events (AEs) were documented for 30 days following the procedure and were determined to be related or unrelated by all site investigators. Serious AEs were defined according to the National Institutes of Health reporting guidelines. RESULTS: 34 patients (7.2%) experienced a procedure-related AE: 30 with haematoma, 2 with jets, 1 with pain and 1 with an arteriovenous fistula. Eighteen (3.8%) experienced a serious AE requiring hospitalisation; four patients (0.8%) required a blood transfusion related to the kidney biopsy. At one site where the number of cores retrieved during the biopsy was recorded, the mean was 3.4 for those who experienced a related AE (n=9) and 3.07 for those who did not experience any AE (n=140). All related AEs resolved. CONCLUSIONS: Procurement of research tissue should be considered feasible, accompanied by a complication risk likely no greater than that incurred for standard clinical purposes. In the quest for targeted treatments personalised based on molecular findings, enhanced diagnostics beyond histology will likely be required.