PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 42680545

Longitudinal comparison of treat-to-target states and clinical outcomes in patients with late-onset versus early-onset systemic lupus erythematosus.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We compared demographic and clinical characteristics between patients with late-onset (LO) and early-onset (EO) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and examined their longitudinal associations with treatment targets and long-term outcomes, irreversible organ damage accrual and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: We analyzed prospectively collected data from patients enrolled in the Asia Pacific Lupus Collaboration cohort. Patients diagnosed with SLE at age >50 years were classified as LO-SLE and compared with those diagnosed at age ≤50 years (EO-SLE). Longitudinal associations with treatment targets (LLDAS and DORIS remission), organ damage accrual (SLICC/ACR Damage Index), and HRQoL (SF36v2 physical and mental component summary (PCS and MCS) scores) were examined using multivariable multilevel logistic, recurrent-event survival, and linear mixed-effects models, respectively. Disease activity, flares, medication exposure, and other clinical characteristics were also compared between groups. RESULTS: Among 3,917 patients studied, 346 (8.8%) had LO-SLE. Compared with EO-SLE, patients with LO-SLE had lower disease activity, lower glucocorticoid and immunosuppressant exposure, and higher attainment of treatment targets; LO-SLE was associated with higher odds of attaining LLDAS (OR: 2.33 (1.66, 3.28)) and DORIS remission (OR: 2.22 (1.45, 3.38)). However, they were at a greater risk of damage accrual (HR:1.82 (1.50, 2.21)) and lower PCS scores, meaning poorer physical health (regression coefficient (RC) = -3.63 (-4.58, -2.68)) but not MCS (RC= 0.68 (-.50, 1.86)). CONCLUSION: Despite higher attainment of treatment targets, patients with LO-SLE experienced greater damage accrual and poorer physical health, suggesting that disease activity targets alone may not fully capture outcome risk in LO-SLE.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Worawit Louthrenoo, Alberta Hoi, Vera Golder, Yi-Hsing Chen, Jiacai Cho, Aisha Lateef, Laniyati Hamijoyo, Yeong-Jian Jan Wu, Sandra V Navarra, Leonid Zamora, Zhanguo Li, Sargunan Sockalingam, Yasuhiro Katsumata, Yanjie Hao, Zhuoli Zhang, B M D B Basnayake, Madelynn Chan, Jun Kikuchi, Yuko Kaneko, Tsutomu Takeuchi, Shereen Oon, Sang-Cheol Bae, Kristine Pek Ling Ng, Sean O'Neill, Geraldine Hassett, Fiona Goldblatt, Tze-Chin Tan, Nicola Tugnet, Cherica Tee, Michael Tee, Mark Sapsford, Chiu Wai Shirley Chan, Chak Sing Lau, Naoaki Ohkubo, Yusuke Miyazaki, Yoshiya Tanaka, Mandana Nikpour, Eric F Morand, Rangi Kandane-Rathnayake. 2026-09-01. Longitudinal comparison of treat-to-target states and clinical outcomes in patients with late-onset versus early-onset systemic lupus erythematosus.. https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.2026-0047

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article