The BILAG2004-Pregnancy index is reliable for assessment of disease activity in pregnant SLE patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the inter-rater reliability of the BILAG2004-Pregnancy index for assessment of SLE disease activity in pregnancy. METHODS: Pregnant SLE patients were recruited from four centres and assessed separately by two raters/physicians in routine clinical practice. Disease activity was determined using the BILAG2004-Pregnancy index. Reliability was assessed using level of agreement, κ-statistics and analysis of disagreement. Major disagreement was defined as a score difference of A and C/D/E or B and D/E between the two raters, and minor disagreement was a score difference of A and B or B and C between raters. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients (63.3% Caucasian, 13.3% Afro-Caribbean, 16.7% South Asian) were recruited. The majority of patients had low-level disease activity according to the local rater's assessment, and there was no grade A activity, with grade B activity present in the following systems: mucocutaneous (nine patients), musculoskeletal (two patients), cardiorespiratory (one patient) and renal (one patient). The distribution of disease activity was similar to the external rater's assessment. Good levels of agreement (>70%) were achieved in all systems. κ-statistics were not appropriate for use in the gastrointestinal, ophthalmic, constitutional and neuropsychiatric systems, as there was minimal variation between patients but good levels of agreement otherwise. There were three major disagreements (0.1 per patient, all differences between B and D/E) and five minor disagreements (0.17 per patient). CONCLUSION: The BILAG2004-Pregnancy index is reliable for assessment of disease activity in pregnant SLE patients.

Use of a strategy based on calculated risk scores in managing cardiovascular risk factors in a large British cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a strategy for stratifying risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in a cohort of patients with SLE and to test the usefulness of this strategy in rationalizing management of cardiovascular risk factors. METHODS: For each patient, data were collected once each year to allow calculation of risk of developing CVD in the next 10 years. Those with risk values >7.5% were considered for intervention to reduce risk. The risk figures and effect of this strategy on management of the cohort as a whole were assessed after 3 years. Patients who had been identified as smokers in 2005 were contacted in 2008 to assess changes in their smoking behaviour. RESULTS: Over 3 years, 308 patients (>90%) of the cohort had CVD risk assessed at least once. Although 10-year CVD risk exceeded 7.5% in 35 patients, the majority (24) of these had either diabetes mellitus or previous CVD for which established cardiovascular risk reduction protocols already exist. Calculation of risk scores did not alter management in 96.5% of the patients. Ninety percent of the smokers remembered being counselled about smoking in the lupus clinic, 70% had received help to reduce smoking and 47% had either reduced or stopped. CONCLUSION: A protocol mandating regular assessment of cardiovascular risk factors in our lupus clinic resulted in this issue being discussed with >90% of the patients and there was some evidence of an impact on smoking. However, use of these factors to calculate 10-year risk scores did not alter management in over 96% of the cases.

Prevalence of conventional and lupus-specific risk factors for cardiovascular disease in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: A case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are significantly more likely to experience a myocardial infarction or a stroke than age-matched controls. We compared the prevalence of conventional and lupus-specific risk factors in patients with SLE just before a cardiovascular event and in matched controls with SLE but no cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with SLE and CVD were enrolled. For each patient, 2 ethnically- and sex-matched controls were obtained, 1 matched for age and 1 for SLE duration. Data regarding risk factors were collected for the time immediately preceding the relevant cardiovascular event, or at an equivalent time for controls. RESULTS: Patients' median age at event was 49 years (interquartile range 43-54 years) and mean disease duration was 12.0 +/- 7.1 years. Patients with SLE and CVD were more likely than both age and duration controls to be treated for hypertension (P = 0.01 and P = 0.001, respectively) and to have elevated triglyceride levels (P = 0.05 and P = 0.01, respectively). Compared with duration controls, CVD patients were more likely to have lupus anticoagulant (P = 0.03), but less likely to be receiving treatment with hydroxychloroquine (P = 0.003). Compared with age controls, patients were more likely to be current smokers (P = 0.03), to have taken a mean dosage >7.5 mg/day of prednisolone (P = 0.04), and to have been treated with pulsed methylprednisolone (P = 0.03). In multivariable analysis, only hypertension treatment was an independent risk factor for CVD. CONCLUSION: We identified significantly increased prevalence of some conventional and lupus-specific risk factors in patients with SLE immediately before a CVD event compared with controls matched for age or disease duration.

How should clinicians manage osteoporosis in ankylosing spondylitis?

Osteoporosis is a common complication of AS, with an incidence between 18.7% and 62%. The prevalence of osteoporosis is greater in males, and increases with increasing patient age and disease duration. Osteoporosis is also more common in patients with syndesmophytes, cervical fusion, and peripheral joint involvement. These variables are not all independent, as they may be indicators of disease duration. Osteoporosis in patients with AS is largely confined to the axial skeleton, in contrast to the pattern of osteoporosis seen in rheumatoid arthritis. BMD at the lumbar spine and femoral neck may be severely reduced, while most studies indicate that carpal and radial BMD remain within normal limits. The development of syndesmophytes in late AS can lead to difficulties in the use of DEXA scanning to determine lumbar BMD, as the extraspinal bone may obscure osteoporotic vertebrae. Under these circumstances more accurate assessment of lumbar BMD, and one that correlates better with femoral neck BMD, may be obtained by quantitative CT scanning or DEXA scanning of the lateral aspect of the L3 vertebra. Osteoporosis in AS significantly increases the risk of vertebral compression fractures within 5 years of the diagnosis of AS. The risk of a vertebral compression fracture occurring over a 30 year period following the diagnosis of AS is 14%, compared to 3.4% for population controls. In patients with vertebral osteoporosis relatively minor trauma, such as slipping, can lead to spinal fracture and dislocatior with subsequent damage to the spinal cord. There is a higher incidence of spinal cord injury following spinal fracture dislocations in patients with AS, and the resulting neurological deficit can range from mild sensory loss to complete paraplegia. Cytokines such as TNF-alpha and IL-6 may play an important part in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis in early AS, and IL-6 levels have been correlated with markers of disease activity and severity. In late AS, mechanical factors such as decreased mobility and the support provided by extraspinal bone may play a role in vertebral osteoporosis. Screening patients with AS for the presence of osteoporosis is an important, but contentious subject. This and subsequent monitoring needs to be considered in all patients, but longterm studies are needed to determine with confidence which patients should undergo screening, by which methods, and how often. The treatment of osteoporosis in AS is at present similar to that used for primary osteoporosis, except that due to the male predominance and a relatively young age of patients, there is a limited role for hormone replacement therapy. Exercise regimens and bisphosphonates are widely used, but a study of the relative efficacy of different bisphosphonate agents in patients with AS is required.

Audit of the diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of osteoporosis in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.

OBJECTIVE: Osteoporosis (OP) is a well recognized complication of ankylosing spondylitis (AS), but there is no clear guidance to its appropriate management. To establish what might be considered as reasonable practice we surveyed the current practice of consultant rheumatologists in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A questionnaire comprising 14 questions relating to the management of OP in AS was sent to 449 British rheumatologists. Three hundred ten (69%) of the 449 questionnaires sent were returned. RESULTS: Only 98 respondents (31.6%) indicated that assessment of OP formed part of their routine management. Dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) was the technique of choice for assessing bone mineral density (BMD) for 284 (91.6%). As general treatment, dietary advice was offered by 101 (32.6%) respondents, whereas 306 (98.7%) gave advice on exercise. Two case scenarios were presented and treatment choices recorded. When faced with a patient with osteopenia (-2.5 < T score < -1.0), 168 (54.2%) respondents would prescribe calcium and vitamin D supplements and 66 (21.3%) would prescribe a bisphosphonate. A second scenario featured a man with femoral neck T score of -2.80 and lumbar spine T score of -0.23. In this case 238 (76.8%) respondents would prescribe a bisphosphonate and 99 (31.9%) calcium and vitamin D, with some prescribing both. Thirty-eight (12.3%) would not prescribe calcium and vitamin D or a bisphosphonate. Two hundred twenty-seven (88.3%) rheumatologists indicated that they would repeat the BMD measurement in a patient with OP within 2 years. CONCLUSION: The majority of British rheumatologists do not routinely assess patients with AS for OP. Most would manage OP in AS in a similar way to postmenopausal OP, but many would not. It does not appear to be generally recognized that in AS, spinal BMD as measured by DEXA rises with advancing radiographic changes, so that hip BMD is the measurement of choice. A robust evidence base is required to clarify guidelines for the management of OP in AS.