ArticleRMD open2020
Applying the 2019 EULAR/ACR lupus criteria to patients from an established cohort: a Latin American perspective.
Article in RMD open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Novel multiclass classification machine learning approach for the early-stage classification of systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases.Lupus science & medicine · 2024Article
- Complement as a Biomarker for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Biomolecules · 2023Review
- Population-based incidence and time to classification of systemic lupus erythematosus by three different classification criteria: a Lupus Midwest Network (LUMEN) study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Systemic lupus erythematosus as a genetic disease.Clinical immunology (Orlando, Fla.) · 2022Article
- A glimpse into the future of systemic lupus erythematosus.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2022Review
- Validation of the 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in ANA-positive Chinese patients.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2022Article
- How well do the new classification criteria for SLE perform?Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2021Article
- Comparison of the sensitivity of the EULAR / ACR 2019 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria in a Colombian population with systemic lupus erythematosus.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the performance of the 2019 European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) criteria in terms of earlier patients' classification in comparison to the 1982/1997 ACR or the 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) criteria. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients from a Latin America, multiethnic, multicentre cohort, where SLE was defined using the physicians' diagnosis, were included. To calculate the sensitivity of the 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria, the 1982/1997 ACR criteria were considered the gold standard. Additionally, comparison of the 1982/1997 ACR criteria and the 2012 SLICC criteria with the 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria was performed.
resultsThe sensitivity of the 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria when compared with the 1982/1997 ACR criteria as the gold standard was 91.3%. This new set of criteria allowed an earlier SLE patient classification in 7.4% (mean 0.67 years) and 0.6% (mean 1.47 years) than the 1982/1997 ACR and the 2012 SLICC criteria, respectively. Patients accruing the 2019 EULAR/ACR earlier than the 1982/1997 ACR criteria were more likely to have high anti-dsDNA titres; those accruing them later were less likely to have mucocutaneous and joint manifestations; this was not observed when comparing them with the 2012 SLICC criteria.
conclusionsThe 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria classified earlier only a small proportion of Latin America patients than with the two other criteria sets in real-life clinical practice scenarios. Further studies in different patient populations are needed before these new criteria are adopted worldwide.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.