Thu0286 the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (Slicc) Frailty Index (Slicc-Fi) Predicts Damage Accrual in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (Sle) Patients. Data From a Multi-Ethnic, Multi-Center Us Lupus Cohort

Abstract

Background:The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) Frailty Index (SLICC-FI) has been developed as a predictor of outcomes in SLE patients1-3. It combines disease activity, damage, comorbidities and health-related quality of life measures.Objectives:To evaluate the SLICC-FI as a predictor of damage accrual in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients.Methods:Patients from a multi-ethnic, multi-center US lupus cohort were included. Damage was ascertained with the SLICC/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) damage index (SDI) at last visit. The first visit in which the SLICC-FI could be derived was considered as the baseline visit. Univariable and multivariable Poisson regression models were performed to determine the association between the baseline SLICC-FI and last SDI, adjusted for sex, age at diagnosis, ethnicity, insurance, prednisone daily dose, antimalarial and immunosuppressive drug use at baseline. Age and gender were included a priori in the multivariable model, the other variables were included if they had a p<0.10 in the univariable models.Results:Of the 503 patients included, 454 (90.3%) were female with mean (SD) age 37.1 (12.5) years at diagnosis; 174 (34.6%) were African-American, 144 (28.6%) were Caucasians, 86 (17.1%) Hispanics (Texas), and 99 (19.7%) were Hispanics (Puerto Rico). The mean (SD) baseline SLICC-FI was 0.26 (0.06). The final mean (SD) SDI score was 1.9 (2.2). Higher SLICC-FI scores at baseline predicted greater damage accrual in the univariable analysis [Estimate=5.058, (SE=0.498); p<0.0001]. The SLICC-FI remained associated with damage accrual in the multivariable model, after adjustment for possible confounders [Estimate= 3.561 (SE=0.538); p<0.0001].Conclusion:The SLICC-FI predicts damage accrual in SLE patients from a multi-ethnic cohort, supporting the importance of this index in the evaluation of SLE patients, combining several aspects of the disease.References:[1]Legge A, Kirkland S, Rockwood K, et al. Construction of a Frailty Index as a Novel Health Measure in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. J Rheumatol. 2020; 47: 72-81[2]Legge A, Kirkland S, Rockwood K, et al. Evaluating the Properties of a Frailty Index and Its Association With Mortality Risk Among Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71: 1297-107[3]Legge A, Kirkland S, Rockwood K, et al. Prediction of Damage Accrual in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Using the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Frailty Index (SLICC-FI). Arthitis Rheumatol. Epub ahead of print 2019 Oct 21.Disclosure of Interests:Manuel F. Ugarte-Gil Grant/research support from: Jannsen, Pfizer, Jyoti Dubey: None declared, Gerald McGwin: None declared, Luis Vila: None declared, Graciela S Alarcon: None declared

VEGF Gene Polymorphism And Study On Genetic Susceptibility Of Neuropsychiatric Lupus

“…Asians have a higher proportion of SLE than Non-Spanish Caucasus [11]. Asians have a higher incidence of lupus nephritis, which is close to patients in the African Caribbean [12].…”

The SLICC-FI Predicts Damage Accrual in SLE Patients. Data From the Almenara Lupus Cohort

“…8 In addition, the association between SLICC-FI and damage accrual has been corroborated in the Chicago Study of Lupus Vascular and Bone Long-Term Endpoints (SOLVABLE) 13 study and in the LUMINA cohort, a multi-ethnic, multi-center US cohort. 14…”

“…8 In addition, the association between SLICC-FI and damage accrual has been corroborated in the Chicago Study of Lupus Vascular and Bone Long-Term Endpoints (SOLVABLE) 13 study and in the LUMINA cohort, a multiethnic, multi-center US cohort. 14 Components of social vulnerability, such as low socioeconomic status, housing instability, and social isolation, behave similarly to health deficits by accumulating slowly over time and having a strong association with adverse health outcomes, so could be successfully included as health deficits in an FI. 15 There is ongoing debate regarding whether social variables should be included within the frailty index, or if these extrinsic factors should be considered separately, as we prefer.…”