Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Validation of the 2019 ACR/EULAR classification criteria of systemic lupus erythematosus in 100 Japanese patients: a real-world setting analysis

  • Brief Report
  • Published:
Clinical Rheumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of the study is to evaluate the sensitivity of the new criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), when applied to real SLE cases. We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of 100 consecutive patients who visited St. Luke’s International Hospital. Patients were included if they were clinically diagnosed as having SLE and excluded if they had other autoimmune disease or if they were less than 18 years old. Each patient was evaluated if they satisfied the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997 classification criteria (1997 criteria), 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics criteria (2012 criteria), or 2019 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria. Among the 100 patients, the sensitivity of the 1997, 2012, and 2019 criteria was, 97, 99, and 92%, respectively. The total patient score with the 2019 criteria ranged from 12 to 44 (mean, 27.3). All patients who were classified as non-SLE with the 2019 criteria had an anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) titre of < 1:80. The 2019 criteria for SLE accomplished modestly high sensitivity in the real-world practice, but not as high as the 1997 and 2012 criteria. They possibly misclassify the real SLE cases as non-SLE, especially if patients have a low titre (< 1:80) of ANA.

Key Points

• The 2019 criteria for the classification of SLE achieve modestly high sensitivity in real-world practice.

• The entry criteria (ANA ≥ 1:80) possibly misclassify the real SLE cases as non-SLE, as the sensitivity of IIF-ANA in SLE varies widely depending on the staining kit.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hochberg MC (1997) Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 40(9):1725–1725

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Petri M, Orbai A-M, Alarcón GS et al (2012) Derivation and validation of the systemic lupus international collaborating clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 64(8):2677–2686. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.34473

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Inês L, Silva C, Galindo M et al (2015) Classification of systemic lupus erythematosus: systemic lupus international collaborating clinics versus American College of Rheumatology Criteria. A comparative study of 2,055 patients from a real-life, international systemic lupus erythematosus cohort. Arthritis Care Res 67(8):1180–1185. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.22539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Aringer M, Costenbader K, Daikh D et al (2019) 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis 320. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-214819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wallace DJ, Hahn BH (2012) Dubois’ lupus erythematosus and related syndromes 8th edition, section IV, chapter 22 “overview and clinical presentation”, table 22-1. “Cumulative incidence of SLE manifestations”. Saunders, St. Louis

    Google Scholar 

  6. Leuchten N, Hoyer A, Brinks R, et al. (2018) Performance of antinuclear antibodies for classifying systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic literature review and meta-regression of diagnostic data. Arthritis Care Res. \(3):428-438. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.23292

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Pisetsky DS, Spencer DM, Lipsky PE, Rovin BH (2018) Assay variation in the detection of antinuclear antibodies in the sera of patients with established SLE. Ann Rheum Dis 77(6). https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-212599

  8. Hayashi N, Saegusa J, Uto K et al (2016) Evaluation of a computer-aided microscope system and its anti-nuclear antibody test kit for indirect immunofluorescence assay. Rinsho Byori 64(2):142–151

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bossuyt X, Fieuws S (2014) Detection of antinuclear antibodies: added value of solid phase assay? Ann Rheum Dis 73(3):e10. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204793

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pregnolato F, Borghi MO, Meroni PL, Forum Interdisciplinare per la Ricerca sulle Malattie Autoimmuni (FIRMA) Study Group (2019) Pitfalls of antinuclear antibody detection in systemic lupus erythematosus: the positive experience of a national multicentre study. Ann Rheum Dis 78(6):e50. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-213516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kidd K, Cusi K, Mueller R, Goodner M, Boyes B, Hoy E (2005) Detection and identification of significant ANAs in previously determined ANA negative samples. Clin Lab 51(9–10):517–521

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Chi H, Teng J, Wang Z et al (2019) Do the 2019 EULAR/ACR SLE classification criteria close the door on certain groups of SLE patients? Ann Rheum Dis 0:1. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2019-216253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Assan F, Seror R, Mariette X et al (2019) New 2019 SLE EULAR/ACR classification criteria are valuable for distinguishing patients with SLE from patients with pSS. Ann Rheum Dis 0:1–2. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2019-216222

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Hideki Nakajima for providing technical support and Editage (www.editage.com) for English language editing.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Immuno-Rheumatology Centre, St. Luke’s International Hospital, St. Luke’s International University, 9-1 Akashi-cho Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-8560, Japan

    Masei Suda, Mitsumasa Kishimoto & Masato Okada

  2. Graduate School of Public Health, OMURA Susumu and Mieko Memorial St. Luke’s Centre for Clinical Academia, St. Luke’s International University, 5th Floor, 3-6-2 Tsukiji Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan

    Sachiko Ohde

Authors
  1. Masei Suda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mitsumasa Kishimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sachiko Ohde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Masato Okada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Masei Suda was the main contributor for the conception, design, analysis, and interpretation of data. Sachiko Ohde worked on the statistical analysis and revised the manuscript critically. Mitsumasa Kishimoto was involved in drafting the manuscript and revising it critically. Masato Okada gave his expert comments on the drafted manuscript and gave final approval to the version to be published. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masei Suda.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

None.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Suda, M., Kishimoto, M., Ohde, S. et al. Validation of the 2019 ACR/EULAR classification criteria of systemic lupus erythematosus in 100 Japanese patients: a real-world setting analysis. Clin Rheumatol 39, 1823–1827 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-019-04848-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-019-04848-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation