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: 3051

Is Frailty a Relevant Concept in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)?

Patricia P. Katz1, James Andrews2, Edward H. Yelin1 and Jinoos Yazdany1, 1Medicine/Rheumatology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, 2Rheumatology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Meeting: 2016 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 28, 2016

Keywords: functional status, Morbidity and mortality and 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: Tuesday, November 15, 2016

Title: ARHP V: Epidemiology and Public Health

Session Type: ARHP Concurrent Abstract Session

Session Time: 2:30PM-4:00PM

Background/Purpose: Frailty, a syndrome of weight loss, weakness, slowness, exhaustion, and inactivity, has been examined primarily in geriatric cohorts and is associated with poor health outcomes, including mortality. Components of the frailty syndrome are relevant to SLE, but frailty has not been examined in SLE.

Methods: In an in-person research visit (2008-2009), frailty components defined by Fried1 were assessed: unintentional weight loss, slow gait (based on 4-meter walk using sex and height criteria), weakness (grip strength, gender and BMI criteria), exhaustion (2 specific questions), and inactivity (physical activity questionnaire). Accumulation of 3+ deficits classifies an individual as “frail,” one or two deficits as “pre-frail,” and none as “robust.” Outcomes examined were physical function, cognitive function, and mortality. Physical function was measured with the SF-36 Physical Functioning subscale (score range 0-100) and the Valued Life Activities (VLA) disability scale (range 0-3). Cognitive functioning was measured with a 12-test battery. Scores on each test below -1.0 SD of age-adjusted population norms were considered “impaired.” Subjects were classified as cognitively impaired if they were impaired on ≥1/3 of indices completed. Mortality was determined as of December 2015. Differences in function and two-year changes in function were examined using multiple regression analyses controlling for age, SLE duration, race/ethnicity, glucocorticoid use, obesity, self-reported SLE activity and damage, and, for longitudinal analyses, baseline function. Analyses include women (n=138).

Results:  Mean age was 48 (±12) years, mean SLE duration 16 (±9) years. 65% were white, non-Hispanic. 24% of the sample was classified as frail, and 48% as pre-frail (Table 1). Frail women had significantly worse physical function than robust and pre-frail women and were more likely to have cognitive impairment (Table 2). Frail women were also more likely to experience declines in function and onset of cognitive impairment. Mortality rates were significantly higher in the frail group (frail 16.7%; pre-frail 4.1%; robust 2.3%). Odds (95% CI) of death for frail women were elevated, even after adjusting for age, SLE duration, and baseline disease damage (5.1 [0.5, 51.3]).

Conclusion: Prevalence of frailty in this sample of women with lupus was more than double the prevalence in older adults. Frailty was associated with poor physical and cognitive function, functional declines, and mortality. 1 Fried J et al. Gerontol A Med Sci 2001; 56A:M146-M156  

Table 1. Prevalence of frailty components and categorization, compared to other cohorts

Older community-dwelling adults

Women with lupus

Fried, 20011

Collard, 20122

Shamliyan, 20133

Age

48.5 ± 12.6

≥ 65

≥65

≥65

n

138

5317

56,183 (20 studies)

— (24 studies)

Frailty components

Weight loss

22%

6%

—

—

Exhaustion

45%

17%

—

—

Slow gait

9%

20%

—

—

Weakness

38%

20%

—

—

Inactive

29%

22%

—

—

Frailty classification*

Robust (0)

28%

46%

46%

—

Pre-frail (1, 2)

48%

47%

44%

—

Frail (3+)

24%

7%

10%

14%

1 Fried J et al. Gerontol A Med Sci 2001; 56A:M146-M156 2 Collard R et al. J Am Geriatrics Soc 2012; 60:1487-1492 (systematic review) 3 Shamliyan T et al. Ageing Res Rev 2013; 12:719-736 (systematic review) *Frailty category: Presence of no deficits = Robust; 1 or 2 deficits = Pre-frail; ≥3 deficits = Frail

   

Table 2. Functioning by frailty classification: Cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses

Cross-sectional, multivariate

Longitudinal, multivariate

Frailty classification

VLA mean difficulty

SF-36 PF

Cognitive

 impairment

VLA mean difficulty

SF-36 PF

Cognitive

impairment

Robust (n = 42, 28%)

— (reference)

— (reference)

— (reference)

— (reference)

— (reference)

— (reference)

Pre-frail (n = 66, 48%)

0.32 (<.0001)

-5.3 (.0009)

2.0 (0.6, 6.5)

 

0.09 (.07)

–2.1 (.24)

4.4 (0.4, 50.4)

Frail (n = 30,24%)

0.65 (<.0001)

-11.7 (<.0001)†

4.4 (1.01, 19.6)

 

0.32 (.001)

-8.0 (.002)

26.2 (1.0, 716.4)

• For VLA and SF-36PF, values are beta (p-value) from multiple linear regression • For cognitive impairment, values are odds ratio (95% confidence interval) from multiple logistic regression
• Cross-sectional multivariate analyses controlled for age, duration, low education, race, oral steroids, obesity, Systemic Lupus Activity Questionnaire (SLAQ), and Brief Index of Lupus Damage (BILD)
• Longitudinal analyses: Baseline frailty component/category predicting change in function 2 years later. Controlled for age, duration, low education, race, oral steroids, obesity, SLAQ, BILD, and baseline value of function

Disclosure: P. P. Katz, None; J. Andrews, None; E. H. Yelin, None; J. Yazdany, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Katz PP, Andrews J, Yelin EH, Yazdany J. Is Frailty a Relevant Concept in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)? [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016; 68 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/is-frailty-a-relevant-concept-in-systemic-lupus-erythematosus-sle/. 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 2016 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/is-frailty-a-relevant-concept-in-systemic-lupus-erythematosus-sle/

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