Background and objectives Autoantibodies to complement C1q (anti-C1q) are associated with the diagnosis of lupus nephritis. In this study, we compare anti-C1q IgG with another complement autoantibody, anti-C3b IgG, as a biomarker of lupus nephritis and lupus nephritis flare.Design, setting, participants, & measurements Our investigation involved the Ohio SLE Study, a prospective observational cohort of patients with recurrently active lupus who were followed bimonthly. Serum anti-C1q and anti-C3b IgG levels were assessed cross-sectionally by ELISA in 40 normal controls and 114 patients in the Ohio SLE Study (41 nonrenal and 73 lupus nephritis) at study entry, and longitudinally in a subset of patients in the Ohio SLE Study with anti-C1q-positive lupus nephritis in samples collected every 2 months for 8 months leading up to lupus nephritis flare (n=16 patients). ResultsIn the cross-sectional analysis, compared with anti-C1q IgG, anti-C3b IgG was less sensitive (36% versus 63%) but more specific (98% versus 71%) for lupus nephritis. Only anti-C3b IgG was associated with patients with lupus nephritis who experienced at least one lupus nephritis flare during the Ohio SLE Study period (P,0.01). In the longitudinal analysis, circulating levels of anti-C1q IgG increased at the time of lupus nephritis flare only in patients who were anti-C3b positive (P=0.02), with significant increases occurring from 6 (38% increase) and 4 months (41% increase) before flare. Anti-C3b IgG levels also trended up at lupus nephritis flare, although the change did not reach statistical significance (P=0.07). Neither autoantibody increased 2 months before flare.Conclusions Although not as prevalent as anti-C1q IgG, anti-C3b IgG showed nearly complete specificity for lupus nephritis. The presence of anti-C3b IgG identified patients with lupus nephritis who were prone to flare and in whom serial measurements of markers associated with complement, such as anti-C1q IgG, may be useful to monitor lupus nephritis activity.
Background/Purpose: To update definitions of multiple joint osteoarthritis (MJOA), and to determine the frequency and impact of MJOA in a community-based cohort.Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines and with the help of a professional research librarian, we performed a systematic review in Medline using the terms osteoarthritis, generalized, polyarticular, multiple joint, and multi-joint among others, to obtain articles related to MJOA. A total of 42 articles were included for data extraction based on multiple criteria including the requirement for a clearly stated definition of OA assessed at more than one body site. We assessed frequency of these definitions in the Johnston County OA Project (JoCo OA) cohort as well as outcomes related to general health and physical function.Results: A total of 6 clearly stated definitions for MJOA were identified. These definitions were integrated with a list of 24 definitions from our previous systematic review and distilled down to produce 10 literature-derived, operationalized MJOA definitions. Based on these definitions, high frequencies of radiographic (4-74%) and symptomatic (2-52%) MJOA were found in the JoCo
Background This cross-sectional study evaluated associations of joint hypermobility and multiple joint osteoarthritis (MJOA) in a community-based cohort of adults 45+ years of age. Methods MJOA and joint hypermobility data were from 1677 participants (mean age 69 years, 68% women) who completed research clinic visits during 2003–2010. Prevalent MJOA was defined in four ways. Radiographic OA (rOA) was defined as Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) > 2 at any included study joint; symptomatic OA (sxOA) required both symptoms and rOA in a joint. Joint hypermobility was defined as a Beighton score of > 4. Separate logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) between joint hypermobility and each MJOA definition, adjusting for age, sex, race, body mass index, and baseline visit. Results In this cohort, 4% had Beighton score > 4 and 63% met any definition of MJOA. Joint hypermobility was associated with significantly lower odds of radiographic and symptomatic MJOA-1 (multiple joint OA-definition 1: involvement of > 1 IP (interphalangeal) nodes and > 2 sites of hip, knee, and spine; 74 and 58% lower, respectively). However, for the other MJOA definitions (i.e., MJOA-2:involvement of > 2 IP joints, > 1 carpometacarpal [CMC] joints, and knee or hip sites; MJOA-3: involvement of > 5 joint sites from among distal interphalangeal, proximal interphalangeal, CMC, hip, knee, or spine sites; and MJOA-4:involvement of > 2 lower body sites (hip, knee, or spine), there were no statistically significant associations. For associations between site-specific hypermobility and any MJOA definition, most adjusted ORs were less than one, but few were statistically significant. Conclusions Overall, joint hypermobility was not positively associated with any definition of prevalent MJOA in this cohort, and an inverse association existed with one definition of MJOA. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine the contribution of hypermobility to the incidence and progression of MJOA outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.