Literature DB >> 8607885

Laboratory tests as predictors of disease exacerbations in systemic lupus erythematosus. Why some tests fail.

J M Esdaile1, M Abrahamowicz, L Joseph, T MacKenzie, Y Li, D Danoff.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether changes in laboratory test values are either simultaneous with or precede disease exacerbations in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).
METHODS: At 9, 6, and 3 months preceding a flare in disease activity (defined as a rise of > or = 6 points in the modified SLE Disease Activity Index), laboratory tests were performed to measure patients' hematocrit levels, white blood cell, lymphocyte, and platelet counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C1q binding, DNA binding, and levels of C3 and C4. Flares were classified as either present or absent, and were divided into renal, vasculitic, central nervous system, skin, serosal, and musculoskeletal subgroups. The predictive patterns were 1) the simultaneous change in the test value from the mean of 9, 6, and 3 months preceding a flare to the time of the flare; 2) the gradual change, following a linear time trend, in test results for the same time points; and 3) the change from the mean of 9 and 6 months to 3 months preceding a flare, as a measure of predictive ability. These analyses used repeated-measures analysis of variance models. Multiple linear regression was used to study the cross-sectional association of average-over-time differences in test results with patients' flare subgroup.
RESULTS: Among 202 patients with SLE (median followup 86.5 months), 83 flares occurred in 53 patients. Of 189 statistical contrasts performed, only 14 were significant (versus 10 expected), and the differences were of minor importance. Nonetheless, evaluation of all test results over each patient's observed disease course revealed significant differences between selected test values in association with specific types of flare.
CONCLUSION: Fluctuations in laboratory test values are poor predictors of disease exacerbations in SLE. Cross-sectional evaluation of some test results revealed differences at the time of flare for those patients who were destined to have different types of flares, because these values differed over the entire study period. This pattern explains the frequent cross-sectional association of disease activity with laboratory test results, and the inconsistent association of flares with recent changes in test values.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8607885     DOI: 10.1002/art.1780390304

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthritis Rheum        ISSN: 0004-3591


  47 in total

Review 1.  Rheumatology: 2. What laboratory tests are needed?

Authors:  K Shojania
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2000-04-18       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 2.  The use of laboratory tests in the diagnosis of SLE.

Authors:  W Egner
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 3.  Recognition and management of systemic lupus erythematosus.

Authors:  J O Schroeder; H H Euler
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 4.  Biomarkers in systemic lupus erythematosus.

Authors:  Gabor G Illei; Peter E Lipsky
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.592

Review 5.  Complement as a source of biomarkers in systemic lupus erythematosus: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Chau-Ching Liu; Joseph M Ahearn; Susan Manzi
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.592

Review 6.  Serologic testing in connective tissue diseases.

Authors:  Dana E Habash-Bseiso; Steven H Yale; Ingrid Glurich; Jerry W Goldberg
Journal:  Clin Med Res       Date:  2005-08

7.  Prior anti-dsDNA antibody status does not predict later disease manifestations in systemic lupus erythematosus.

Authors:  Loes van den Berg; Hans Nossent; Ole Rekvig
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2005-11-23       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 8.  Anti-DNA antibodies as early predictor for disease exacerbations in SLE. Guideline for treatment?

Authors:  P E Spronk; H Bootsma; C G Kallenberg
Journal:  Clin Rev Allergy Immunol       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 8.667

9.  Erythrocyte C3d and C4d for monitoring disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus.

Authors:  Amy H Kao; Jeannine S Navratil; Margie J Ruffing; Chau-Ching Liu; Douglas Hawkins; Kathleen M McKinnon; Natalya Danchenko; Joseph M Ahearn; Susan Manzi
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2010-03

10.  Pediatric lupus--are there differences in presentation, genetics, response to therapy, and damage accrual compared with adult lupus?

Authors:  Rina Mina; Hermine I Brunner
Journal:  Rheum Dis Clin North Am       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 2.670

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.