2019
DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2019-000895
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance of the proposed ACR–EULAR classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in a cohort of patients with SLE with neuropsychiatric symptoms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These criteria, however, need to be validated in several eth nic groups; for example, in 2 multiethnic, multicenter cohorts, one from the US (LUpus in MInorities, NAture versus nurture [LUMINA]) and the other from Latin America (Grupo Latinoamericano de Estudio del Lupus Eritematoso [GLADEL]), we found a sensitiv ity of 84.8% and 91.3%, respectively, using as gold standard the 1982/1997 ACR revised classification criteria for SLE as updated in 1997 (3)(4)(5)(6)(7). Similarly, in Brazil, in a cohort of childhood onset SLE patients, the sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR criteria was 87.7%, and the specificity was 67.4% using as gold standard the clinical criteria (8), while in the Netherlands, the sensitivity was 87.% and the specificity was 74% in a cohort of SLE patients with neuropsychiatric symptoms (9).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These criteria, however, need to be validated in several eth nic groups; for example, in 2 multiethnic, multicenter cohorts, one from the US (LUpus in MInorities, NAture versus nurture [LUMINA]) and the other from Latin America (Grupo Latinoamericano de Estudio del Lupus Eritematoso [GLADEL]), we found a sensitiv ity of 84.8% and 91.3%, respectively, using as gold standard the 1982/1997 ACR revised classification criteria for SLE as updated in 1997 (3)(4)(5)(6)(7). Similarly, in Brazil, in a cohort of childhood onset SLE patients, the sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR criteria was 87.7%, and the specificity was 67.4% using as gold standard the clinical criteria (8), while in the Netherlands, the sensitivity was 87.% and the specificity was 74% in a cohort of SLE patients with neuropsychiatric symptoms (9).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies that analyzed the performances of these three classification criteria in different populations have yielded various results. 1,2,8,11,14,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] The sensitivities and specificities varied considerably in these studies. Sensitivities as low as 56% 21 and as high as 100% 14,21,25 and specificities as low as 56.5% 20 and as high as 100% 21,23 have been reported.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies performed by Batu et al, 14 Rodrigues Fonseca et al, 16 Aljaberi et al, 18 and Ma et al 23 were performed in pediatric SLE patients. Study of Gegenava et al 19 focused on SLE patients that had neuropsychiatric symptoms. Rest of the studies did not define specific SLE subgroups, but they were performed in different populations across the globe.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…10 Studies have compared the performance of SLICC criteria (sensitivity between 85% and 96.7%; specificity 76% and 83.6%) and ARC-EULAR (sensitivity between 87% and 96.3%; specificity 74% and 93.4%). [11][12][13] Both criteria performed worse in one of the studies, this, according to the authors, being due to a more selected population with several confounding factors. Thus, in more challenging situations, when classification criteria may be more useful, the performance can be sub-optimal.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%