ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 2380

Characterizing SLE Patients into Type 1 and Type 2 Disease States: Insights from a Single Lupus Cohort

Angela Hu1, Lauren Erdman2, Dennisse Bonilla3, Qixuan Li3, Laura Patricia Whittall Garcia3, Dafna Gladman4 and Zahi Touma5, 1University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, 3University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada, 4University of Toronto, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada, 5University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2024

Keywords: Disease Activity, Patient reported outcomes, Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 18, 2024

Title: SLE – Diagnosis, Manifestations, & Outcomes Poster III

Session Type: Poster Session C

Session Time: 10:30AM-12:30PM

Background/Purpose: It has been proposed that SLE may be divided into Type 1 and Type 2 states. Type 1 manifestations are well captured in disease activity scores (e.g. SLEDAI-2K). Type 2 manifestations include fatigue, pain, depression, brain fog. These do not always correlate with conventional lupus disease activity, but can be pervasive and dominate in patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Patients may be classified into four disease states: Minimal (low type 1 activity, low type 2 activity), High Type 1 (high type 1 and low type 2), High Type 2 (low type 1, high type 2) and Mixed (high type 1 and high type 2). Our primary aim was to define the prevalence of patients who can be classified into the four states. Our secondary aim was to identify variables that predict each disease state.

Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of a single cohort of SLE patients who participated in a trial studying cognitive impairment and recruited prospectively since 2016. Type 1 activity was defined as a clinical SLEDAI-2K of >0 (excluding C3, C4 dsDNA levels). As there is no clear definition of Type 2 activity, we aimed to define this based on different PRO measures: Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories (BDI-II and BAI), Lupus Quality of Life (Lupus QoL), Fatigue Severity Score (FSS), Perceived Deficits Questionnaire (PDQ-20) for subjective cognitive impairment, Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). We conducted a Similarity Network Fusion (SNF) analysis that used spectral clustering to generate participant subtypes and hypothesized that distinct groups would emerge (Figure 1). For our secondary aim, we included variables such as patient characteristics, SLICC/ACR damage index (SDI), antibodies, medications.

Results: 259 patients were included in the final analysis. Four distinct patient phenotypes emerged: Minimal (32 patients; 12.4%), High Type 1 (81 patients; 31.3%), High Type 2 (50 patients; 19.3%), and Mixed (96 patients; 37.1%). Patients with High Type 2 state had poorer median PRO scores in all measured outcomes (all p-values significant to < 0.0001): PDQ20 (39.5 vs 20), BDI (20.2 vs 6.2), BAI (21 vs 6), SF-36 Mental Component Summary (36.5 vs 54.8) and SF-36 Physical Component Summary (32.2 vs 51.2), FSS (5.56 vs 3.11) and all Lupus QoL domains. Statistically significant variables (p< 0.05 after Bonferroni correction) differentiating the four states included low C3/C4, elevated dsDNA, chromatin antibody presence, glucocorticoid dose and treatment with glucocorticoids within 3 months. The presence of these variables was associated with a High Type 1 and Mixed state (Table 1).

Conclusion: We identified that patients may be categorized into disease states based on Type 1 and Type 2 characteristics – Minimal 13%, High Type 1 31%, High Type 2 19% and Mixed 37%. High Type 2 patients uniformly scored poorly in all PRO domains. Multiple laboratory markers (low C3/4, elevated dsDNA, presence of chromatin antibody) as well as glucocorticoid use were found to predict High Type 1 or Mixed states.

Supporting image 1

Figure 1. Definitions of Type 1 and Type 2 States and use of Similarity Network Fusion to generate the four disease states: Type 2 (top left), Type 1 (top right), Minimal (bottom right) and Mixed (bottom left).
PDQ_20: Perceived Deficits Questionnaire
BDI-II: Beck Depression Inventory
BAI: Beck Anxiety Inventory
FSS: Fatigue Severity Score
SF_36: Short Form Health Survey
LupusQoL: Lupus Quality of Life

Supporting image 2

Table 1. Variables associated with Type 1 and Mixed State and their associated p-values.


Disclosures: A. Hu: None; L. Erdman: None; D. Bonilla: None; Q. Li: None; L. Whittall Garcia: None; D. Gladman: AbbVie, 2, 5, Amgen, 2, 5, AstraZeneca, 2, BMS, 2, Celgene, 2, 5, Eli Lilly, 2, 5, Galapagos, 2, 5, Gilead, 2, 5, Janssen, 2, 5, Novartis, 2, 5, Pfizer, 2, 5, UCB, 2, 5; Z. Touma: None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Hu A, Erdman L, Bonilla D, Li Q, Whittall Garcia L, Gladman D, Touma Z. Characterizing SLE Patients into Type 1 and Type 2 Disease States: Insights from a Single Lupus Cohort [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2024; 76 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/characterizing-sle-patients-into-type-1-and-type-2-disease-states-insights-from-a-single-lupus-cohort/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2024

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/characterizing-sle-patients-into-type-1-and-type-2-disease-states-insights-from-a-single-lupus-cohort/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology