Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50200, Thailand.
Adv Rheumatol. 2023 May 1;63(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s42358-023-00297-0.
Several studies have compared the clinical features and outcomes of late- and early-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients. However, these previous studies were uncontrolled. The current study aimed to compare late- and early-onset SLE patients while controlling for sex and year at diagnosis (± 1 year).
The medical records of SLE patients in a lupus cohort from January 1994 to June 2020 were reviewed. Late-onset patients were identified as those with an age at diagnosis ≥ 50 years. The early-onset patients (age at diagnosis < 50 years) were matched by sex and year at diagnosis with the late-onset patients at a ratio of 2:1. Clinical manifestations, disease activity (mSLEDAI-2K), organ damage scores, treatment, and mortality were compared between the two groups.
The study comprised 62 and 124 late- and early-onset patients, respectively, with a mean follow-up duration of 5 years. At disease onset, when comparing the early-onset patients with the late-onset patients, the latter group had a higher prevalence rate of serositis (37.0% vs. 14.5%, p < 0.001) and hemolytic anemia (50.0% vs. 33.9%, p = 0.034) but lower prevalence rate of malar rash (14.5% vs. 37.1%, p = 0.001), arthritis (41.9% vs. 62.1%, p = 0.009), leukopenia (32.3% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.022) and lymphopenia (50.0% vs. 66.1%, p = 0.034). The groups had similar SLE disease activity (7.41 vs. 7.50), but the late-onset group had higher organ damage scores (0.37 vs. 0.02, p < 0.001). The rates of treatment with corticosteroids, antimalarial drugs, or immunosuppressive drugs were not different. At their last visit, the late-onset patients still had the same pattern of clinically significant differences except for arthritis; additionally, the late-onset group had a lower rate of nephritis (53.2% vs. 74.2%, p = 0.008). They also had a lower level of disease activity (0.41 vs. 0.57, p = 0.006) and received fewer antimalarials (67.7% vs. 85.5%, p = 0.023) and immunosuppressive drugs (61.3% vs. 78.2%, p = 0.044), but they had higher organ damage scores (1.37 vs. 0.47, p < 0.001) and higher mortality rates/100-person year (3.2 vs. 1.1, p = 0.015). After adjusting for disease duration and baseline clinical variables, the late-onset patients only had lower rate of nephritis (p = 0.002), but still received fewer immunosuppressive drugs (p = 0.005) and had a higher mortality rate (p = 0.037).
In this sex- and year at diagnosis-matched controlled study, after adjusting for disease duration and baseline clinical variables, the late-onset SLE patients had less renal involvement and received less aggressive treatment, but had a higher mortality rate than the early-onset patients.
已有多项研究比较了迟发性和早发性系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)患者的临床特征和结局。然而,这些先前的研究均未进行对照。本研究旨在在控制性别和诊断年份(±1 年)的情况下比较迟发性和早发性 SLE 患者。
回顾了 1994 年 1 月至 2020 年 6 月期间狼疮队列中的 SLE 患者的病历。迟发性患者的定义为诊断年龄≥50 岁。早发性患者(诊断年龄<50 岁)通过性别和诊断年份与迟发性患者进行 2:1 匹配,以控制性别和诊断年份。比较两组之间的临床表现、疾病活动度(mSLEDAI-2K)、器官损伤评分、治疗和死亡率。
本研究包括 62 例迟发性和 124 例早发性患者,平均随访时间为 5 年。在疾病发作时,与早发性患者相比,迟发性患者血清病(37.0% vs. 14.5%,p<0.001)和溶血性贫血(50.0% vs. 33.9%,p=0.034)的患病率更高,但蝶形红斑(14.5% vs. 37.1%,p=0.001)、关节炎(41.9% vs. 62.1%,p=0.009)、白细胞减少症(32.3% vs. 50.0%,p=0.022)和淋巴细胞减少症(50.0% vs. 66.1%,p=0.034)的患病率较低。两组的 SLE 疾病活动度相似(7.41 vs. 7.50),但迟发性组的器官损伤评分较高(0.37 vs. 0.02,p<0.001)。使用皮质类固醇、抗疟药或免疫抑制剂治疗的比率没有差异。在最后一次就诊时,迟发性患者仍存在明显的临床差异模式,除关节炎外;此外,迟发性组肾炎的发生率较低(53.2% vs. 74.2%,p=0.008)。他们的疾病活动度也较低(0.41 vs. 0.57,p=0.006),接受的抗疟药物较少(67.7% vs. 85.5%,p=0.023)和免疫抑制剂(61.3% vs. 78.2%,p=0.044),但器官损伤评分较高(1.37 vs. 0.47,p<0.001)和死亡率较高(3.2 vs. 1.1,p=0.015)。调整疾病持续时间和基线临床变量后,迟发性患者仅肾炎发生率较低(p=0.002),但仍接受较少的免疫抑制剂治疗(p=0.005)和死亡率较高(p=0.037)。
在这项性别和诊断年份匹配的对照研究中,调整疾病持续时间和基线临床变量后,迟发性 SLE 患者肾脏受累较少,治疗更为保守,但死亡率高于早发性患者。