4.3 Article

Disease evolution in late-onset and early-onset systemic lupus erythematosus

期刊

LUPUS
卷 26, 期 11, 页码 1190-1196

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0961203317696593

关键词

SLE; late onset; prognosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective The objective of this study was to compare clinical features, disease activity, and outcome in late-onset versus early-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) over 5 years of follow up Method Patients with SLE since 1970 were followed prospectively according to standard protocol and tracked on a computerized database. Patients entering the cohort within one year of diagnosis constitute the inception cohort. Patients with late-onset (age at diagnosis 50) disease were identified and matched 1:2 based on gender and first clinic visit (5) years with patients with early-onset disease (age at diagnosis 18-40 years). Results A total of 86 patients with late-onset disease (84.9% female, 81.4% Caucasian, mean age at SLE diagnosis +/- SD 58.05 +/- 7.30) and 169 patients with early-onset disease (86.4% female, 71% Caucasian, mean age at SLE diagnosis +/- SD 27.80 +/- 5.90) were identified. At enrollment, late-onset SLE patients had a lower total number of American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria, with less renal and neurologic manifestations. Mean SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) scores were lower in late-onset SLE, especially renal features and anti-dsDNA positivity. Over 5 years, mean SLEDAI-2K scores decreased in both groups, while mean Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/ACR Damage Index (SDI) scores increased more significantly in the late-onset group; they developed more cardiovascular, renal, and ocular damage, and had higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. Conclusion Although the late-onset SLE group had a milder presentation and less active disease, with the evolution of disease, they developed more organ damage likely as a consequence of cardiovascular risk factors and aging.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据