Rheumatology Department, Hospitais da Universidade de Coimbra, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Rheumatology Department, Centro Hospitalar do Tâmega e Sousa, Penafiel, Portugal.
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2024 Apr 2;63(4):1123-1129. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kead353.
To assess the criterion validity of the SLE disease activity score (SLE-DAS) flare tool and compare its performance in identifying flares against other instruments.
Patients with SLE fulfilling SLE-DAS low disease activity at baseline were included from two academic lupus clinics. During follow-up, flares were identified by the senior attending clinician, applying the expert-consensus-based definition as gold-standard. The first clinical flare from flaring patients, and the first visit after baseline in patients without flares were analysed. In each no flare/flare visits, we assessed flares by SLE-DAS (score increase ≥1.72), classic-SELENA Flare Index (c-SELENA FI), revised-SELENA FI (r-SELENA FI), and SLEDAI-2K (score increase ≥4). We estimated the sensitivity, specificity, and Cohen's Kappa agreement of each flare tool against the gold-standard.
A total of 442 patients were included and followed-up for 22.9 (14.2) months. Incidence of flares was 8.19/100 patient-years, with 69 patients experiencing flares. The SLE-DAS identified 96.6% of the expert-defined flares implying a treatment change and classified 28.0% of those as moderate/severe. Sensitivity and specificity for the gold-standard flare definition were: SLE-DAS 97.1% and 97.3%, c-SELENA FI 88.4% and 98.1%, r-SELENA FI 88.4% and 96.8%, SLEDAI-2K 56.5% and 99.2%, respectively. Kappa coefficients of these instruments were 0.902 (95% CI: 0.847, 0.957), 0.870 (95% CI: 0.805, 0.935), 0.832 (95% CI: 0.761, 0.903), and 0.663 (95% CI: 0.557, 0.769), respectively. The number of flare misclassifications was lowest with the SLE-DAS, and highest with the SLEDAI-2K.
The SLE-DAS accurately identifies and categorizes flares as mild or moderate/severe. It is feasible and, thus, may help the physicians' treatment decisions in the clinical practice setting.
评估系统性红斑狼疮疾病活动度评分(SLE-DAS)发作工具的标准效度,并比较其识别发作的性能与其他工具的性能。
从两个学术狼疮诊所中纳入基线时 SLE-DAS 低疾病活动度的 SLE 患者。在随访期间,由资深主治医生根据专家共识定义的金标准来识别发作。分析发作患者的首次临床发作,以及无发作患者的基线后首次就诊。在每次无发作/发作就诊中,我们通过 SLE-DAS(评分增加≥1.72)、经典-SLEENA 发作指数(c-SELENA FI)、修订后的-SLEENA 发作指数(r-SELENA FI)和 SLEDAI-2K(评分增加≥4)评估发作。我们估计了每种发作工具对金标准的敏感性、特异性和 Cohen's Kappa 一致性。
共纳入 442 例患者,随访 22.9(14.2)个月。发作发生率为 8.19/100 患者年,共 69 例患者发作。SLE-DAS 识别出 96.6%的专家定义的发作,提示需要治疗改变,并将 28.0%的发作归类为中度/重度。金标准发作定义的敏感性和特异性为:SLE-DAS 97.1%和 97.3%,c-SELENA FI 88.4%和 98.1%,r-SELENA FI 88.4%和 96.8%,SLEDAI-2K 56.5%和 99.2%。这些工具的 Kappa 系数分别为 0.902(95%CI:0.847,0.957)、0.870(95%CI:0.805,0.935)、0.832(95%CI:0.761,0.903)和 0.663(95%CI:0.557,0.769)。SLE-DAS 发作的分类错误最少,SLEDAI-2K 发作的分类错误最多。
SLE-DAS 准确识别和分类轻度或中度/重度发作。它是可行的,因此可能有助于医生在临床实践中做出治疗决策。