Our study indicates that oral contraceptives do not increase the risk of flare among women with systemic lupus erythematosus whose disease is stable.

Guidelines and recommendations developed and/or endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) are intended to provide guidance for particular patterns of practice and not to dictate the care of a particular patient. The ACR considers adherence to the recommendations within this guideline to be voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding their application to be made by the physician in light of each patient's individual circumstances. Guidelines and recommendations are intended to promote beneficial or desirable outcomes but cannot guarantee any specific outcome. Guidelines and recommendations developed and endorsed by the ACR are subject to periodic revision as warranted by the evolution of medical knowledge, technology, and practice. ACR recommendations are not intended to dictate payment or insurance decisions. These recommendations cannot adequately convey all uncertainties and nuances of patient care.The American College of Rheumatology is an independent, professional, medical and scientific society that does not guarantee, warrant, or endorse any commercial product or service.

Although good evidence suggests that many agents are effective in preventing osteoporotic fractures, the data are insufficient to determine the relative efficacy or safety of these agents.

No abstract

This guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients making treatment decisions. Clinicians and patients should use a shared decision-making process that accounts for patients' values, preferences, and comorbidities. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies.

Objective. To examine the relationship between changes in anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) antibody levels and the risk of renal flare in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), using data from 2 randomized, controlled trials.Methods. Analyses were based on 487 patients with SLE and a history of lupus nephritis who had an anti-dsDNA antibody titer >15 IU/ml at baseline, as measured by Farr assay. Results are presented for the combined population of patients, the placebo arms, and the drug treatment arms in which a dsDNA-based bioconjugate (abetimus sodium; LJP 394) was used.Results. Changes in anti-dsDNA antibody levels were inversely correlated with changes in the C3 level (P < 0.0001 in both trials). Cox proportional hazards regression models showed that changes in anti-dsDNA antibody levels correlated with the risk of renal flare. The models predicted that a point estimate of a 50% reduction in anti-dsDNA antibody levels is associated with a 52% reduction (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 26-68%, nominal P ‫؍‬ 0.0007) and a 53% reduction (95% CI 33-69%, nominal P < 0.0001) in the risk of renal flare in the 2 trials, respectively. In the 2 trials, the incidence of renal flare was lower in patients with sustained reductions in anti-dsDNA antibodies (3.0% and 4.1%, respectively) than in patients with stable or increasing antibody levels (21.3% and 20.3%, respectively).Conclusion. Changes in anti-dsDNA antibody levels were directly correlated with the risk of renal flare and inversely correlated with changes in the C3 level. Reducing anti-dsDNA antibody levels may represent a therapeutic objective in SLE patients with lupus nephritis, because it is associated with a reduced risk of renal flare.Anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) antibodies are diagnostic for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (1) and have been implicated in the underlying pathogenesis of SLE renal disease and other disease manifestations (2-7). Immune complexes containing anti-

The Lupus Foundation of America (LFA) convened an international working group to obtain a consensus definition of disease flare in lupus. With help from the Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organization (PRINTO), two web-based Delphi surveys of physicians were conducted. Subsequently, the LFA held a second consensus conference followed by a third Delphi survey to reach a community-wide agreement for flare definition. Sixty-nine of the 120 (57.5%) polled physicians responded to the first survey. Fifty-nine of the responses were available to draft 12 preliminary statements, which were circulated in the second survey. Eighty-seven of 118 (74%) physicians completed the second survey, with an agreement of 70% for 9/12 (75%) statements. During the second conference, three alternative flare definitions were consolidated and sent back to the international community. One hundred and sixteen of 146 (79.5%) responded, with agreement by 71/116 (61%) for the following definition: "A flare is a measurable increase in disease activity in one or more organ systems involving new or worse clinical signs and symptoms and/or laboratory measurements. It must be considered clinically significant by the assessor and usually there would be at least consideration of a change or an increase in treatment." The LFA proposes this definition for lupus flare on the basis of its high face validity.

Because of a previously unexploited weakness in tumor architecture, nanomaterials may offer a way to treat cancer without doing too much damage to healthy tissue. The weakness isn’t really a property of the tumors themselves but of the blood vessels that feed them.