Search

Objective. This was an exploratory analysis to develop a new way of representing BILAG-2004 system scores longitudinally that would be clinically meaningful and easier to analyse in comparison with multiple categorical variables.Methods. Data from a multicentre longitudinal study of SLE patients (the BILAG-2004 index and therapy collected at every visit) were used. External responsiveness analysis of the index suggested the possibility of using counts of systems with specified transitions in scores as a basis to analyse the system scores. Exploratory analyses with multinomial logistic regression were used to examine the appropriateness of this new method of analysing BILAG-2004 system scores. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to assess the performance of this approach.Results. There were 1414 observations from 347 patients. A novel method was devised based on counts of systems with defined transitions in score (BILAG-2004 systems tally, BST). It has six components (systems with major deterioration, systems with minor deterioration, systems with persistent significant activity, systems with major improvement, systems with minor improvement and systems with persistent minimal or no activity). This was further simplified (simplified BST, sBST) into three components (systems with active/worsening disease, systems with improving disease and systems with persistent minimal or no activity). Both versions had expected associations with change in therapy. ROC curve analyses demonstrated that both versions had similar good performance characteristics (areas under the curve >0.80) in predicting increase in therapy.Conclusion. The BST and sBST provide alternative approaches to representing BILAG-2004 disease activity longitudinally. Further validation of their use is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. To examine SLEDAI-2000 cut-off scores for definition of active SLE and to determine the sensitivity to change of SLEDAI-2000 for the assessment of SLE disease activity and minimal clinically meaningful changes in score.Methods. Data from two multi-centre studies were used in the analysis: in a cross-sectional and a longitudinal fashion. At every assessment, data were collected on SLEDAI-2000 and treatment. The cross-sectional analysis with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves was used to examine the appropriate SLEDAI-2000 score to define active disease and increase in therapy was the reference standard. In the longitudinal analysis, sensitivity to change of SLEDAI-2000 was assessed with multinomial logistic regression. ROC curves analysis was used to examine possible cut-points in score changes associated with change in therapy, and mean changes were estimated.Results. In the cross-sectional analysis, the most appropriate cut-off scores for active disease were 3 or 4. In the longitudinal analysis, the best model for predicting treatment increase was with the change in SLEDAI-2000 score and the score from the previous visit as continuous variables. The use of cut-points was less predictive of treatment change than the use of continuous score. The mean difference in the change in SLEDAI-2000 scores, adjusted for prior score, between patients with treatment increase and those without was 2.64 (95% CI 2.16, 3.14).Conclusions. An appropriate SLEDAI-2000 score to define active disease is 3 or 4. SLEDAI-2000 index is sensitive to change. The use of SLEDAI-2000 as a continuous outcome is recommended for comparative purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objective: To determine the construct and criterion validity of the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 (BILAG-2004) index for assessing disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)., Methods: Patients with SLE were recruited into a multicenter cross-sectional study. Data on SLE disease activity (scores on the BILAG-2004 index, Classic BILAG index, and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 [SLEDAI-2K]), investigations, and therapy were collected. Overall BILAG-2004 and overall Classic BILAG scores were determined by the highest score achieved in any of the individual systems in the respective index. Erythrocyte sedimentation rates (ESRs), C3 levels, C4 levels, anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) levels, and SLEDAI-2K scores were used in the analysis of construct validity, and increase in therapy was used as the criterion for active disease in the analysis of criterion validity. Statistical analyses were performed using ordinal logistic regression for construct validity and logistic regression for criterion validity. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated., Results: Of the 369 patients with SLE, 92.7% were women, 59.9% were white, 18.4% were Afro-Caribbean and 18.4% were South Asian. Their mean +/- SD age was 41.6 +/- 13.2 years and mean disease duration was 8.8 +/- 7.7 years. More than 1 assessment was obtained on 88.6% of the patients, and a total of 1,510 assessments were obtained. Increasing overall scores on the BILAG-2004 index were associated with increasing ESRs, decreasing C3 levels, decreasing C4 levels, elevated anti-dsDNA levels, and increasing SLEDAI-2K scores (all P < 0.01). Increase in therapy was observed more frequently in patients with overall BILAG-2004 scores reflecting higher disease activity. Scores indicating active disease (overall BILAG-2004 scores of A and B) were significantly associated with increase in therapy (odds ratio [OR] 19.3, P < 0.01). The BILAG-2004 and Classic BILAG indices had comparable sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV., Conclusion: These findings show that the BILAG-2004 index has construct and criterion validity.

Objective: To test the interrater reliability of the revised British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 (BILAG-2004) index for the assessment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) activity., Methods: Patients with SLE were recruited from 11 centers. Two physician raters separately assessed the patients' disease activity using the BILAG-2004 index in routine clinical practice. Scores ranged from A (for very active disease) to E (for inactivity). Two reliability exercises were performed. Changes were made to the index after the first exercise (E1), and additional training was provided to the raters before the second exercise (E2). E1 and E2 involved 12 and 14 raters, respectively. Interrater reliability was assessed using kappa statistics and intraclass correlation coefficients. Levels of agreement and the extent of major disagreement were also examined. Major disagreement was defined as a score difference between raters of A versus C, D, or E or B versus D or E., Results: For each exercise, 97 patients were recruited. In E1, the mean age of the patients was 42.3 years (range 18.5-82.2 years), 89.7% were women, and 74.2% were white, 8.2% were Afro-Caribbean, and 13.4% were South Asian, and in E2, the mean age was 43.7 years (range 17.7-75 years), 90.7% were women, and 68% were white, 15.5% were Afro-Caribbean, and 11.3% were South Asian. The mean disease duration was 9.4 years (range 0-32.1 years) for patients in E1 and 10 years (range 0-34.8 years) in E2. There was improvement in the interrater reliability and the level of agreement from E1 to E2. Further improvement was achieved after removal of poorly performing items., Conclusion: The BILAG-2004 index is a reliable tool to assess SLE activity. The use of a well-defined glossary and training of raters are essential to ensure the optimal performance of the index.