%0 Journal Article
%T Classifying systemic lupus erythematosus using laboratory items alone: a preliminary study.
%A Zhang L
%A Ma J
%A Yan D
%A Liu Z
%A Xue L
%J Clin Rheumatol
%V 43
%N 3
%D 2024 Mar 12
%M 38342796
%F 3.65
%R 10.1007/s10067-024-06893-9
%X <B>OBJECTIVE: </B>To explore the performance of laboratory items alone in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>Our cohort consisted of 352 and 385 (control) patients with and without SLE. This study evaluated the performance of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-1997, Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)-2012, European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR-2019, and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Risk Probability Index (SLERPI) using laboratory items alone, including blood and urine test results.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>The median ratio of laboratory items/total items was 66.7%, 75.0%, 60.4%, and 77.4% in ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, EULAR/ACR-2019, and SLERPI, respectively. After including laboratory items alone, the sensitivity of ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, EULAR/ACR-2019, and SLERPI was 31.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 26.4%-36.4%), 79.8% (95% CI: 75.3%-83.9%), 75.9% (95% CI: 71.0%-80.2%), and 85.2% (95% CI: 81.1%-88.8%), respectively. We referenced the SLERPI and removed the additional restrictions, i.e., SLICC-2012 criteria only needs to fulfill at least four items (mSLICC-2012) and EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria needs to have ≥ 10 points (mEULAR/ACR-2019) to qualify for SLE classification. The mSLICC-2012 and mEULAR/ACR-2019 criteria, including laboratory items alone, newly identified 13 and 25 patients, respectively. Based on laboratory items alone, the combination of mSLICC-2012, mEULAR/ACR-2019, and SLERPI identified 348 patients with an improved sensitivity of 90.6% (95% CI: 87.1%-93.5%). Patients, who were classified according to the mEULAR/ACR-2019 criteria, all met the other criteria.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>Incorporating laboratory items alone was clinically feasible to help identify SLE. SLERPI and SLICC-2012, using laboratory items alone, were more worthwhile to promote in the clinic compared with EULAR/ACR-2019. Key Points • Laboratory items play a crucial role in the SLE classification criteria, and incorporating laboratory items alone was clinically feasible to help in the identification of SLE. • The SLERPI and SLICC-2012, using laboratory items alone, were more worthwhile to promote in the clinic compared with EULAR/ACR-2019, and the combination of the two could further improve the sensitivity. • The relative simplicity of evaluating laboratory indices may help nonrheumatologists and inexperienced rheumatologists to identify SLE more quickly, thereby reducing the risk of delayed diagnosis in patients.