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.

/pdf/systemic-lupus-erythematosus-34b38trluu.pdf

Systemic lupus erythematosus

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)

/pdf/derivation-and-validation-of-the-systemic-lupus-3ua8eoavoo.pdf

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

Complement. First of two parts.

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.

/pdf/the-classification-of-glomerulonephritis-in-systemic-lupus-4qgi5j1hw3.pdf

The Classification of Glomerulonephritis in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Revisited

The American Society for Apheresis (ASFA) Journal of Clinical Apheresis (JCA) Special Issue Writing Committee is charged with reviewing, updating, and categorizing indications for the evidence-based use of therapeutic apheresis in human disease. Since the 2007 JCA Special Issue (Fourth Edition), the Committee has incorporated systematic review and evidence-based approaches in the grading and categorization of apheresis indications. This Seventh Edition of the JCA Special Issue continues to maintain this methodology and rigor to make recommendations on the use of apheresis in a wide variety of diseases/conditions. The JCA Seventh Edition, like its predecessor, has consistently applied the category and grading system definitions in the fact sheets. The general layout and concept of a fact sheet that was used since the fourth edition has largely been maintained in this edition. Each fact sheet succinctly summarizes the evidence for the use of therapeutic apheresis in a specific disease entity. The Seventh Edition discusses 87 fact sheets (14 new fact sheets since the Sixth Edition) for therapeutic apheresis diseases and medical conditions, with 179 indications, which are separately graded and categorized within the listed fact sheets. Several diseases that are Category IV which have been described in detail in previous editions and do not have significant new evidence since the last publication are summarized in a separate table. The Seventh Edition of the JCA Special Issue serves as a key resource that guides the utilization of therapeutic apheresis in the treatment of human disease. J. Clin. Apheresis 31:149-162, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Guidelines on the Use of Therapeutic Apheresis in Clinical Practice—Evidence-Based Approach from the Writing Committee of the American Society for Apheresis: The Sixth Special Issue

Amylose AL et maladies par dépôts d'immunoglobulines monoclonales

Renal failure develops in approximately 45% of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). In nephrology departments treating patients with the most severe renal involvement, myeloma cast nephropathy (MCN) represents 63–87% of cases assessed by renal biopsy1. In the autopsy series studied by Ivanyi, MCN was found in 32% (18 of 57), renal amyloidosis in 11 % (six) and kappa light chain deposits (LCD) in 5% (three)2. Thus, MCN is the most frequent lesion in myeloma patients and is the major cause of renal failure. However, cast nephropathy is not specifiic to myeloma since it can be observed, albeit very rarely, in non-myeloma patients (see ref. 1). In recent decades MM and renal failure are discovered simultaneously more and more frequently. Nephrologists should therefore be aware of the diagnosis of MM, and the management of these patients requires close collaboration between hematologists and nephrologists.

Philippe Lesavre

Papers

Amylose AL et maladies par dépôts d'immunoglobulines monoclonales

Myeloma cast nephropathy: clinical presentation

Jean Berger 17 septembre 1930, Valdoie (90) - 22 mai 2011, Paris

Letter to the EditorThe Authors Reply