Gary Hill

Bio: Gary Hill is an academic researcher from University of Pennsylvania. The author has contributed to research in topics: Lupus erythematosus & Lupus nephritis. The author has an hindex of 4, co-authored 4 publications receiving 3327 citations.

The Classification of Glomerulonephritis in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Revisited

Abstract: The currently used classification reflects our understanding of the pathogenesis of the various forms of lupus nephritis, but clinicopathologic studies have revealed the need for improved categorization and terminology. Based on the 1982 classification published under the auspices of the World Health Organization (WHO) and subsequent clinicopathologic data, we propose that class I and II be used for purely mesangial involvement (I, mesangial immune deposits without mesangial hypercellularity; II, mesangial immune deposits with mesangial hypercellularity); class III for focal glomerulonephritis (involving or = 50% of total number of glomeruli) either with segmental (class IV-S) or global (class IV-G) involvement, and also with subdivisions for active and sclerotic lesions; class V for membranous lupus nephritis; and class VI for advanced sclerosing lesions]. Combinations of membranous and proliferative glomerulonephritis (i.e., class III and V or class IV and V) should be reported individually in the diagnostic line. The diagnosis should also include entries for any concomitant vascular or tubulointerstitial lesions. One of the main advantages of the current revised classification is that it provides a clear and unequivocal description of the various lesions and classes of lupus nephritis, allowing a better standardization and lending a basis for further clinicopathologic studies. We hope that this revision, which evolved under the auspices of the International Society of Nephrology and the Renal Pathology Society, will contribute to further advancement of the WHO classification.

Tubulointerstitial nephritis and glomerulonephritis in Brown-Norway rats immunized with heterologous glomerular basement membrane.

Abstract: Tubulointerstitial nephritis and glomerulonephritis were produced in Brown-Norway rats (BN) by a single immunization with 2 mg of lyophilized bovine glomerular basement membrane. Tubulointerstitial nephritis was evident before glomerulonephritis. Antibody first bound to tubular basement membranes (TBM), and then the renal cortex was infiltrated with inflammatory cells. The TBM was split, and many renal tubules, especially proximal tubules, were destroyed. Approximately 14 days after the beginning of the tubular phase, antibody was observed to be bound to glomerular basement membranes (GBM) in linear fashion. There was epithelial and mesangial cell proliferation, splitting and reduplication of GBM, crescent formation, and glomerular scarring and atrophy.

Systemic lupus erythematosus

Abstract: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a clinically heterogeneous disease, which is autoimmune in origin and is characterized by the presence of autoantibodies directed against nuclear antigens. It is a multi-system disease, and patients can present in vastly different ways. Prevalence varies with ethnicity, but is estimated to be about 1 per 1000 overall with a female to male ratio of 10:1. The clinical heterogeneity of this disease mirrors its complex aetiopathogenesis, which highlights the importance of genetic factors and individual susceptibility to environmental factors. SLE can affect every organ in the body. The most common manifestations include rash, arthritis and fatigue. At the more severe end of the spectrum, SLE can cause nephritis, neurological problems, anaemia and thrombocytopaenia. Over 90% of patients with SLE have positive anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA). Significant titres are accepted to be of 1:80 or greater. SLE is a relapsing and remitting disease, and treatment aims are threefold: managing acute periods of potentially life-threatening ill health, minimizing the risk of flares during periods of relative stability, and controlling the less life-threatening, but often incapacitating day to day symptoms. Hydroxychloroquine and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are used for milder disease; corticosteroids and immunosuppressive therapies are generally reserved for major organ involvement; anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody is now used in patients with severe disease who has not responded to conventional treatments. Despite enormous improvements in prognosis since the introduction of corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs, SLE continues to have a significant impact on the mortality and morbidity of those affected.

Derivation and validation of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus.

Abstract: Objective The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) group revised and validated the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria in order to improve clinical relevance, meet stringent methodology requirements, and incorporate new knowledge regarding the immunology of SLE. Methods The classification criteria were derived from a set of 702 expert-rated patient scenarios. Recursive partitioning was used to derive an initial rule that was simplified and refined based on SLICC physician consensus. The SLICC group validated the classification criteria in a new validation sample of 690 new expert-rated patient scenarios. Results Seventeen criteria were identified. In the derivation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (49 versus 70; P = 0.0082) and had greater sensitivity (94% versus 86%; P < 0.0001) and equal specificity (92% versus 93%; P = 0.39). In the validation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (62 versus 74; P = 0.24) and had greater sensitivity (97% versus 83%; P < 0.0001) but lower specificity (84% versus 96%; P < 0.0001). Conclusion The new SLICC classification criteria performed well in a large set of patient scenarios rated by experts. According to the SLICC rule for the classification of SLE, the patient must satisfy at least 4 criteria, including at least one clinical criterion and one immunologic criterion OR the patient must have biopsy-proven lupus nephritis in the presence of antinuclear antibodies or antidouble-stranded DNA antibodies. (Less)

The Classification of Glomerulonephritis in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Revisited

Abstract: The currently used classification reflects our understanding of the pathogenesis of the various forms of lupus nephritis, but clinicopathologic studies have revealed the need for improved categorization and terminology. Based on the 1982 classification published under the auspices of the World Health Organization (WHO) and subsequent clinicopathologic data, we propose that class I and II be used for purely mesangial involvement (I, mesangial immune deposits without mesangial hypercellularity; II, mesangial immune deposits with mesangial hypercellularity); class III for focal glomerulonephritis (involving or = 50% of total number of glomeruli) either with segmental (class IV-S) or global (class IV-G) involvement, and also with subdivisions for active and sclerotic lesions; class V for membranous lupus nephritis; and class VI for advanced sclerosing lesions]. Combinations of membranous and proliferative glomerulonephritis (i.e., class III and V or class IV and V) should be reported individually in the diagnostic line. The diagnosis should also include entries for any concomitant vascular or tubulointerstitial lesions. One of the main advantages of the current revised classification is that it provides a clear and unequivocal description of the various lesions and classes of lupus nephritis, allowing a better standardization and lending a basis for further clinicopathologic studies. We hope that this revision, which evolved under the auspices of the International Society of Nephrology and the Renal Pathology Society, will contribute to further advancement of the WHO classification.

Pathologic Classification of Diabetic Nephropathy

Abstract: Although pathologic classifications exist for several renal diseases, including IgA nephropathy, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, and lupus nephritis, a uniform classification for diabetic nephropathy is lacking. Our aim, commissioned by the Research Committee of the Renal Pathology Society, was to develop a consensus classification combining type1 and type 2 diabetic nephropathies. Such a classification should discriminate lesions by various degrees of severity that would be easy to use internationally in clinical practice. We divide diabetic nephropathy into four hierarchical glomerular lesions with a separate evaluation for degrees of interstitial and vascular involvement. Biopsies diagnosed as diabetic nephropathy are classified as follows: Class I, glomerular basement membrane thickening: isolated glomerular basement membrane thickening and only mild, nonspecific changes by light microscopy that do not meet the criteria of classes II through IV. Class II, mesangial expansion, mild (IIa) or severe (IIb): glomeruli classified as mild or severe mesangial expansion but without nodular sclerosis (Kimmelstiel-Wilson lesions) or global glomerulosclerosis in more than 50% of glomeruli. Class III, nodular sclerosis (Kimmelstiel-Wilson lesions): at least one glomerulus with nodular increase in mesangial matrix (Kimmelstiel-Wilson) without changes described in class IV. Class IV, advanced diabetic glomerulosclerosis: more than 50% global glomerulosclerosis with other clinical or pathologic evidence that sclerosis is attributable to diabetic nephropathy. A good interobserver reproducibility for the four classes of DN was shown (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.84) in a test of this classification.

American College of Rheumatology guidelines for screening, treatment, and management of lupus nephritis

Abstract: In the United States, approximately 35% of adults with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) have clinical evidence of nephritis at the time of diagnosis; with an estimated total of 50–60% developing nephritis during the first 10 years of disease [1–4]. The prevalence of nephritis is significantly higher in African Americans and Hispanics than in Caucasians, and is higher in men than in women. Renal damage is more likely to develop in non-Caucasian groups [2–4]. Overall survival in patients with SLE is approximately 95% at 5 years after diagnosis and 92% at 10 years [5, 6]. The presence of lupus nephritis significantly reduces survival, to approximately 88% at 10 years, with even lower survival in African Americans [5, 6]. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) last published guidelines for management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in 1999 [7]. That publication was designed primarily for education of primary care physicians and recommended therapeutic and management approaches for many manifestations of SLE. Recommendations for management of lupus nephritis (LN) consisted of pulse glucocorticoids followed by high dose daily glucocorticoids in addition to an immunosuppressive medication, with cyclophosphamide viewed as the most effective immunosuppressive medication for diffuse proliferative glomerulonephritis. Mycophenolate mofetil was not yet in use for lupus nephritis and was not mentioned. Since that time, many clinical trials of glucocorticoids-plus-immunosuppressive interventions have been published, some of which are high quality prospective trials, and some not only prospective but also randomized. Thus, the ACR determined that a new set of management recommendations was in order. A combination of extensive literature review and the opinions of highly qualified experts, including rheumatologists, nephrologists and pathologists, has been used to reach the recommendations. The management strategies discussed here apply to lupus nephritis in adults, particularly to those receiving care in the United States of America, and include interventions that were available in the United States as of April 2011. While these recommendations were developed using rigorous methodology, guidelines do have inherent limitations in informing individual patient care; hence the selection of the term “recommendations.” While they should not supplant clinical judgment or limit clinical judgment, they do provide expert advice to the practicing physician managing patients with lupus nephritis.