Search

Background: A consensus on digital ulcer (DU) definition in systemic sclerosis (SSc) has been recently reached (Suliman et al., J Scleroderma Relat Disord 2:115-20, 2017), while for their evaluation, classification and categorisation, it is still missing. The aims of this study were to identify a set of essential items for digital ulcer (DU) evaluation, to assess if the existing DU classification was useful and feasible in clinical practice and to investigate if the new categorisation was preferred to the simple distinction of DU in recurrent and not recurrent, in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc).Methods: DeSScipher is the largest European multicentre study on SSc. It consists of five observational trials (OTs), and one of them, OT1, is focused on DU management. The DeSScipher OT1 items on DU that reached ≥ 60% of completion rate were administered to EUSTAR (European Scleroderma Trials and Research group) centres via online survey. Questions about feasibility and usefulness of the existing DU classification (DU due to digital pitting scars, to loss of tissue, derived from calcinosis and gangrene) and newly proposed categorisation (episodic, recurrent and chronic) were also asked.Results: A total of 84/148 (56.8%) EUSTAR centres completed the questionnaire. DeSScipher items scored by ≥ 70% of the participants as essential and feasible for DU evaluation were the number of DU defined as a loss of tissue (level of agreement 92%), recurrent DU (84%) and number of new DU (74%). For 65% of the centres, the proposed classification of DU was considered useful and feasible in clinical practice. Moreover, 80% of the centres preferred the categorisation of DU in episodic, recurrent and chronic to simple distinction in recurrent/not recurrent DU.Conclusions: For clinical practice, EUSTAR centres identified only three essential items for DU evaluation and considered the proposed classification and categorisation as useful and feasible. The set of items needs to be validated while further implementation of DU classification and categorisation is warranted.Trial registration: Observational trial on DU (OT1) is one of the five trials of the DeSScipher project (ClinicalTrials.gov; OT1 Identifier: NCT01836263, posted on April 19, 2013).

Background Interstitial lung disease in systemic sclerosis (SSc-ILD) is a major cause of SSc-related death. Imunosuppressive treatment (IS) is used in patients with SSc for various organ manifestations mainly to ameliorate progression of SSc-ILD. Data on everyday IS prescription patterns and clinical courses of lung function during and after therapy are scarce. Methods We analysed patients fulfilling American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) 2013 criteria for SSc-ILD and at least one report of IS. Types of IS, pulmonary function tests (PFT) and PFT courses during IS treatment were evaluated. Results EUSTAR contains 3778/11,496 patients with SSc-ILD (33%), with IS in 2681/3,778 (71%). Glucocorticoid (GC) monotherapy was prescribed in 30.6% patients with GC combinations plus cyclophosphamide (CYC) (11.9%), azathioprine (AZA) (9.2%), methotrexate (MTX) (8.7%), or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (7.3%). Intensive IS (MMF + GC, CYC or CYC + GC) was started in patients with the worst PFTs and ground glass opacifications on imaging. Patients without IS showed slightly less worsening in forced vital capacity (FVC) when starting with FVC 50–75% or >75%. GC showed negative trends when starting with FVC

BackgroundValidity of European Scleroderma Study Group (EScSG) activity indexes currently used to assess disease activity in systemic sclerosis (SSc) has been criticised.MethodsThree investigators assigned an activity score on a 0–10 scale for 97 clinical charts. The median score served as gold standard. Two other investigators labelled the disease as inactive/moderately active or active/very active. Univariate–multivariate linear regression analyses were used to define variables predicting the ‘gold standard’, their weight and derive an activity index. The cut-off point of the index best separating active/very active from inactive/moderately active disease was identified by a receiver-operating curve analysis. The index was validated on a second set of 60 charts assessed by three different investigators on a 0–10 scale and defined as inactive/moderately active or active/very active by other two investigators. One hundred and twenty-three were investigated for changes over time in the index and their relationships with those in the summed Medsger severity score (MSS).ResultsA weighted 10-point activity index was identified and validated: Δ-skin=1.5 (Δ=patient assessed worsening during the previous month), modified Rodnan skin score (mRss) >18=1.5, digital ulcers=1.5, tendon friction rubs=2.25, C-reactive protein >1 mg/dL=2.25 and diffusing capacity of the lung for CO (DLCO) % predicted ConclusionsA preliminarily revised SSc activity index has been developed and validated, providing a valuable tool for clinical practice and observational studies.