Performances of different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in a single-center cohort from Turkey

Objective Sensitivity and specificity of SLE classification criteria may vary in different populations and clinical settings. In this study, we aimed to compare the performances of three criteria sets/rules (1997, 2012, and 2019) in a large cohort of patients and relevant diseased controls. Methods...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Lupus 2022-10, Vol.31 (12), p.1536-1543
Hauptverfasser: Torun, Ege Sinan, Bektaş, Erdem, Kemik, Fatih, Bektaş, Murat, Çetin, Çiğdem, Yalçinkaya, Yasemin, Artim Esen, Bahar, Gül, Ahmet, Inanç, Murat
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1543
container_issue 12
container_start_page 1536
container_title Lupus
container_volume 31
creator Torun, Ege Sinan
Bektaş, Erdem
Kemik, Fatih
Bektaş, Murat
Çetin, Çiğdem
Yalçinkaya, Yasemin
Artim Esen, Bahar
Gül, Ahmet
Inanç, Murat
description Objective Sensitivity and specificity of SLE classification criteria may vary in different populations and clinical settings. In this study, we aimed to compare the performances of three criteria sets/rules (1997, 2012, and 2019) in a large cohort of patients and relevant diseased controls. Methods The medical records of consecutive SLE patients and diseased controls were reviewed for clinical and laboratory features relevant to all sets of criteria. Criteria sets/rules were analyzed based on sensitivity, positive predictive value, specificity, and negative predictive value, using clinical diagnosis with at least 6 months of follow-up as the gold standard. A subgroup analysis was performed in ANA positive patients. Results A total of 393 SLE patients and 308 non-SLE diseased controls were included. Sensitivity was 78.4% for 1997 criteria and was more than 90% for both 2012 (91.9%) and 2019 (94.4%) criteria. Specificity was the highest (95.1%) for 1997 ACR criteria, 91.5% for 2012 SLICC criteria and 91.2% for 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, sensitivity of each criteria increased by 1%, 0.8%, and 2.2%, respectively. Specificity of 1997 criteria decreased by 2% and specificity of 2012 and 2019 criteria both decreased to less than 90%. Conclusion EULAR/ACR criteria were more sensitive than 1997 criteria and had a comparable performance with SLICC criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, the presence of false positive results (originated from patients with Sjögren’s disease and antiphospholipid syndrome mainly) decreased the specificity of both SLICC and EULAR/ACR criteria.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/09612033221126866
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2715442043</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_09612033221126866</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2725968118</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c297t-9bf18dfa6d1be8cbffd38e1b88997f873ebb4d819340d28b45ff364c785fb1ae3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU9r3DAQxUVoIJs_HyA3QS69ONFIXks-ltCkhUB6SM9GlkdZbWxro5Gh--2jZQuFlp6Gx_u9x8Bj7BrELYDWd6JtQAqlpASQjWmaE7aCWuuqGPITWx386gCcsXOirRBCQdus2K8fmHxMk50dEo-eD8F7TDhn7kZLFHxwNoc4c5dCxhQsLzinPWWcguPjsluIY9rnDU42RyoqzNxyCvPriJUrTZi4i5uYMvcpTvxlSW-4v2Sn3o6EV7_vBfv58PXl_lv19Pz4_f7LU-Vkq3PV9h7M4G0zQI_G9d4PyiD0xrSt9kYr7Pt6MNCqWgzS9PXae9XUTpu178GiumCfj727FN8XpNxNgRyOo50xLtRJDeu6lqJWBb35C93GJc3lu0LJddsYAFMoOFIuRaKEvtulMNm070B0hy26f7Yomdtjhuwr_mn9f-ADMVGL-A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2725968118</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performances of different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in a single-center cohort from Turkey</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Torun, Ege Sinan ; Bektaş, Erdem ; Kemik, Fatih ; Bektaş, Murat ; Çetin, Çiğdem ; Yalçinkaya, Yasemin ; Artim Esen, Bahar ; Gül, Ahmet ; Inanç, Murat</creator><creatorcontrib>Torun, Ege Sinan ; Bektaş, Erdem ; Kemik, Fatih ; Bektaş, Murat ; Çetin, Çiğdem ; Yalçinkaya, Yasemin ; Artim Esen, Bahar ; Gül, Ahmet ; Inanç, Murat</creatorcontrib><description>Objective Sensitivity and specificity of SLE classification criteria may vary in different populations and clinical settings. In this study, we aimed to compare the performances of three criteria sets/rules (1997, 2012, and 2019) in a large cohort of patients and relevant diseased controls. Methods The medical records of consecutive SLE patients and diseased controls were reviewed for clinical and laboratory features relevant to all sets of criteria. Criteria sets/rules were analyzed based on sensitivity, positive predictive value, specificity, and negative predictive value, using clinical diagnosis with at least 6 months of follow-up as the gold standard. A subgroup analysis was performed in ANA positive patients. Results A total of 393 SLE patients and 308 non-SLE diseased controls were included. Sensitivity was 78.4% for 1997 criteria and was more than 90% for both 2012 (91.9%) and 2019 (94.4%) criteria. Specificity was the highest (95.1%) for 1997 ACR criteria, 91.5% for 2012 SLICC criteria and 91.2% for 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, sensitivity of each criteria increased by 1%, 0.8%, and 2.2%, respectively. Specificity of 1997 criteria decreased by 2% and specificity of 2012 and 2019 criteria both decreased to less than 90%. Conclusion EULAR/ACR criteria were more sensitive than 1997 criteria and had a comparable performance with SLICC criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, the presence of false positive results (originated from patients with Sjögren’s disease and antiphospholipid syndrome mainly) decreased the specificity of both SLICC and EULAR/ACR criteria.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0961-2033</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1477-0962</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/09612033221126866</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Antiphospholipid syndrome ; Autoimmune diseases ; Classification ; Lupus ; Medical records ; Patients ; Sjogren's syndrome ; Systemic lupus erythematosus</subject><ispartof>Lupus, 2022-10, Vol.31 (12), p.1536-1543</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c297t-9bf18dfa6d1be8cbffd38e1b88997f873ebb4d819340d28b45ff364c785fb1ae3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4842-0683</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/09612033221126866$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09612033221126866$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Torun, Ege Sinan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bektaş, Erdem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kemik, Fatih</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bektaş, Murat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Çetin, Çiğdem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yalçinkaya, Yasemin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Artim Esen, Bahar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gül, Ahmet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inanç, Murat</creatorcontrib><title>Performances of different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in a single-center cohort from Turkey</title><title>Lupus</title><description>Objective Sensitivity and specificity of SLE classification criteria may vary in different populations and clinical settings. In this study, we aimed to compare the performances of three criteria sets/rules (1997, 2012, and 2019) in a large cohort of patients and relevant diseased controls. Methods The medical records of consecutive SLE patients and diseased controls were reviewed for clinical and laboratory features relevant to all sets of criteria. Criteria sets/rules were analyzed based on sensitivity, positive predictive value, specificity, and negative predictive value, using clinical diagnosis with at least 6 months of follow-up as the gold standard. A subgroup analysis was performed in ANA positive patients. Results A total of 393 SLE patients and 308 non-SLE diseased controls were included. Sensitivity was 78.4% for 1997 criteria and was more than 90% for both 2012 (91.9%) and 2019 (94.4%) criteria. Specificity was the highest (95.1%) for 1997 ACR criteria, 91.5% for 2012 SLICC criteria and 91.2% for 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, sensitivity of each criteria increased by 1%, 0.8%, and 2.2%, respectively. Specificity of 1997 criteria decreased by 2% and specificity of 2012 and 2019 criteria both decreased to less than 90%. Conclusion EULAR/ACR criteria were more sensitive than 1997 criteria and had a comparable performance with SLICC criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, the presence of false positive results (originated from patients with Sjögren’s disease and antiphospholipid syndrome mainly) decreased the specificity of both SLICC and EULAR/ACR criteria.</description><subject>Antiphospholipid syndrome</subject><subject>Autoimmune diseases</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Lupus</subject><subject>Medical records</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Sjogren's syndrome</subject><subject>Systemic lupus erythematosus</subject><issn>0961-2033</issn><issn>1477-0962</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kU9r3DAQxUVoIJs_HyA3QS69ONFIXks-ltCkhUB6SM9GlkdZbWxro5Gh--2jZQuFlp6Gx_u9x8Bj7BrELYDWd6JtQAqlpASQjWmaE7aCWuuqGPITWx386gCcsXOirRBCQdus2K8fmHxMk50dEo-eD8F7TDhn7kZLFHxwNoc4c5dCxhQsLzinPWWcguPjsluIY9rnDU42RyoqzNxyCvPriJUrTZi4i5uYMvcpTvxlSW-4v2Sn3o6EV7_vBfv58PXl_lv19Pz4_f7LU-Vkq3PV9h7M4G0zQI_G9d4PyiD0xrSt9kYr7Pt6MNCqWgzS9PXae9XUTpu178GiumCfj727FN8XpNxNgRyOo50xLtRJDeu6lqJWBb35C93GJc3lu0LJddsYAFMoOFIuRaKEvtulMNm070B0hy26f7Yomdtjhuwr_mn9f-ADMVGL-A</recordid><startdate>202210</startdate><enddate>202210</enddate><creator>Torun, Ege Sinan</creator><creator>Bektaş, Erdem</creator><creator>Kemik, Fatih</creator><creator>Bektaş, Murat</creator><creator>Çetin, Çiğdem</creator><creator>Yalçinkaya, Yasemin</creator><creator>Artim Esen, Bahar</creator><creator>Gül, Ahmet</creator><creator>Inanç, Murat</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4842-0683</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202210</creationdate><title>Performances of different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in a single-center cohort from Turkey</title><author>Torun, Ege Sinan ; Bektaş, Erdem ; Kemik, Fatih ; Bektaş, Murat ; Çetin, Çiğdem ; Yalçinkaya, Yasemin ; Artim Esen, Bahar ; Gül, Ahmet ; Inanç, Murat</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c297t-9bf18dfa6d1be8cbffd38e1b88997f873ebb4d819340d28b45ff364c785fb1ae3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Antiphospholipid syndrome</topic><topic>Autoimmune diseases</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Lupus</topic><topic>Medical records</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Sjogren's syndrome</topic><topic>Systemic lupus erythematosus</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Torun, Ege Sinan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bektaş, Erdem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kemik, Fatih</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bektaş, Murat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Çetin, Çiğdem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yalçinkaya, Yasemin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Artim Esen, Bahar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gül, Ahmet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inanç, Murat</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Lupus</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Torun, Ege Sinan</au><au>Bektaş, Erdem</au><au>Kemik, Fatih</au><au>Bektaş, Murat</au><au>Çetin, Çiğdem</au><au>Yalçinkaya, Yasemin</au><au>Artim Esen, Bahar</au><au>Gül, Ahmet</au><au>Inanç, Murat</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performances of different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in a single-center cohort from Turkey</atitle><jtitle>Lupus</jtitle><date>2022-10</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>1536</spage><epage>1543</epage><pages>1536-1543</pages><issn>0961-2033</issn><eissn>1477-0962</eissn><abstract>Objective Sensitivity and specificity of SLE classification criteria may vary in different populations and clinical settings. In this study, we aimed to compare the performances of three criteria sets/rules (1997, 2012, and 2019) in a large cohort of patients and relevant diseased controls. Methods The medical records of consecutive SLE patients and diseased controls were reviewed for clinical and laboratory features relevant to all sets of criteria. Criteria sets/rules were analyzed based on sensitivity, positive predictive value, specificity, and negative predictive value, using clinical diagnosis with at least 6 months of follow-up as the gold standard. A subgroup analysis was performed in ANA positive patients. Results A total of 393 SLE patients and 308 non-SLE diseased controls were included. Sensitivity was 78.4% for 1997 criteria and was more than 90% for both 2012 (91.9%) and 2019 (94.4%) criteria. Specificity was the highest (95.1%) for 1997 ACR criteria, 91.5% for 2012 SLICC criteria and 91.2% for 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, sensitivity of each criteria increased by 1%, 0.8%, and 2.2%, respectively. Specificity of 1997 criteria decreased by 2% and specificity of 2012 and 2019 criteria both decreased to less than 90%. Conclusion EULAR/ACR criteria were more sensitive than 1997 criteria and had a comparable performance with SLICC criteria. When only ANA positive patients were analyzed, the presence of false positive results (originated from patients with Sjögren’s disease and antiphospholipid syndrome mainly) decreased the specificity of both SLICC and EULAR/ACR criteria.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/09612033221126866</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4842-0683</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0961-2033
ispartof Lupus, 2022-10, Vol.31 (12), p.1536-1543
issn 0961-2033
1477-0962
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2715442043
source SAGE Complete A-Z List
subjects Antiphospholipid syndrome
Autoimmune diseases
Classification
Lupus
Medical records
Patients
Sjogren's syndrome
Systemic lupus erythematosus
title Performances of different classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in a single-center cohort from Turkey
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T04%3A50%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performances%20of%20different%20classification%20criteria%20for%20systemic%20lupus%20erythematosus%20in%20a%20single-center%20cohort%20from%20Turkey&rft.jtitle=Lupus&rft.au=Torun,%20Ege%20Sinan&rft.date=2022-10&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=1536&rft.epage=1543&rft.pages=1536-1543&rft.issn=0961-2033&rft.eissn=1477-0962&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/09612033221126866&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2725968118%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2725968118&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_09612033221126866&rfr_iscdi=true