Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The use of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index-2000 to define active disease and minimal clinically meaningful change based on data from a large cohort of systemic lupus erythematosus patients.
Yee, Chee-Seng; Farewell, Vernon T; Isenberg, David A; Griffiths, Bridget; Teh, Lee-Suan; Bruce, Ian N; Ahmad, Yasmeen; Rahman, Anisur; Prabu, Athiveeraramapandian; Akil, Mohammed; McHugh, Neil; Edwards, Christopher; D'Cruz, David; Khamashta, Munther A; Gordon, Caroline.
Afiliação
  • Yee CS; Rheumatology Research Group, School of Immunity and Infection, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, The Medical School (East Wing), University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK. csyee@ymail.com
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 50(5): 982-8, 2011 May.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21245073
OBJECTIVES: To examine SLEDAI-2000 cut-off scores for definition of active SLE and to determine the sensitivity to change of SLEDAI-2000 for the assessment of SLE disease activity and minimal clinically meaningful changes in score. METHODS: Data from two multi-centre studies were used in the analysis: in a cross-sectional and a longitudinal fashion. At every assessment, data were collected on SLEDAI-2000 and treatment. The cross-sectional analysis with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves was used to examine the appropriate SLEDAI-2000 score to define active disease and increase in therapy was the reference standard. In the longitudinal analysis, sensitivity to change of SLEDAI-2000 was assessed with multinomial logistic regression. ROC curves analysis was used to examine possible cut-points in score changes associated with change in therapy, and mean changes were estimated. RESULTS: In the cross-sectional analysis, the most appropriate cut-off scores for active disease were 3 or 4. In the longitudinal analysis, the best model for predicting treatment increase was with the change in SLEDAI-2000 score and the score from the previous visit as continuous variables. The use of cut-points was less predictive of treatment change than the use of continuous score. The mean difference in the change in SLEDAI-2000 scores, adjusted for prior score, between patients with treatment increase and those without was 2.64 (95% CI 2.16, 3.14). CONCLUSIONS: An appropriate SLEDAI-2000 score to define active disease is 3 or 4. SLEDAI-2000 index is sensitive to change. The use of SLEDAI-2000 as a continuous outcome is recommended for comparative purposes.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Índice de Gravidade de Doença / Progressão da Doença / Lúpus Eritematoso Sistêmico Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2011 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Índice de Gravidade de Doença / Progressão da Doença / Lúpus Eritematoso Sistêmico Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2011 Tipo de documento: Article