PRACA ORYGINALNA
Assessment of hematologic indices for diagnosis in juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus
1
Department of Pediatric Rheumatology, Umraniye Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
2
Department of Pediatrics, Umraniye Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
Data nadesłania: 02-02-2024
Data ostatniej rewizji: 23-03-2024
Data akceptacji: 05-04-2024
Data publikacji online: 19-04-2024
Autor do korespondencji
Gülcan Özomay Baykal
Department of Pediatric Rheumatology, Umraniye Training and Research Hospital, Elmalıkent Mahallesi Adem Yavuz Caddesi No: 1 34764 Ümraniye, Istanbul, Turkey
Department of Pediatric Rheumatology, Umraniye Training and Research Hospital, Elmalıkent Mahallesi Adem Yavuz Caddesi No: 1 34764 Ümraniye, Istanbul, Turkey
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE
DZIEDZINY
SLE, zespół Sjögrena i zespół antyfosfolipidowy - etiologia, patogeneza, obraz kliniczny i leczenieOcena aktywności choroby i jakości życia w chorobach reumatycznych
STRESZCZENIE
Introduction:
The aim was to present effective approaches utilizing novel hematological parameters for early diagnosis of juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (jSLE).
Material and methods:
Our study at Ümraniye Training and Research Hospital involved a jSLE patient cohort from 2016 to 2022 and matched healthy controls aligning with sex and age. We use the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) for disease activity. Our approach was to analyze leukocyte, neutrophil, lymphocyte, monocyte, and platelet counts, along with ratios such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), and monocyte-to-platelet ratio (MPR). We also explored novel indices: the systemic inflammatory index (SII), systemic inflammation response index (SIRI), and aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI) to identify relationships between systemic indices and jSLE activity.
Results:
Upon comparative analysis with the healthy control group, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients exhibited significantly elevated levels of the hematological parameters NLR, SII, and SIRI (p-values: 0.010, 0.048, 0.025, respectively). Among SLE patients, neutrophil, lymphocyte, and platelet distribution width (PDW) values were notably higher, while hemoglobin, red blood cell distribution width (RDW), and procalcitonin (PCT) values were significantly lower. In comparison, C-reactive protein (CRP) and sedimentation values were markedly elevated in the SLE group in contrast to the healthy control cohort. Patients with significantly elevated disease activity had notably higher values of NLR (p = 0.010) and SII (p = 0.048). Among patients with positive anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA), elevated levels of NLR, SII, and SIRI were noted (p-values: 0.018, 0.021, 0.035).
Conclusions:
In this study, the novel hematological markers SII, SIRI, and AISI were found to effectively reflect inflammation in SLE patients, exhibit associations with high disease activity, and demonstrate heightened sensitivity in detecting cases with high disease activity.
The aim was to present effective approaches utilizing novel hematological parameters for early diagnosis of juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (jSLE).
Material and methods:
Our study at Ümraniye Training and Research Hospital involved a jSLE patient cohort from 2016 to 2022 and matched healthy controls aligning with sex and age. We use the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) for disease activity. Our approach was to analyze leukocyte, neutrophil, lymphocyte, monocyte, and platelet counts, along with ratios such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), and monocyte-to-platelet ratio (MPR). We also explored novel indices: the systemic inflammatory index (SII), systemic inflammation response index (SIRI), and aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI) to identify relationships between systemic indices and jSLE activity.
Results:
Upon comparative analysis with the healthy control group, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients exhibited significantly elevated levels of the hematological parameters NLR, SII, and SIRI (p-values: 0.010, 0.048, 0.025, respectively). Among SLE patients, neutrophil, lymphocyte, and platelet distribution width (PDW) values were notably higher, while hemoglobin, red blood cell distribution width (RDW), and procalcitonin (PCT) values were significantly lower. In comparison, C-reactive protein (CRP) and sedimentation values were markedly elevated in the SLE group in contrast to the healthy control cohort. Patients with significantly elevated disease activity had notably higher values of NLR (p = 0.010) and SII (p = 0.048). Among patients with positive anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA), elevated levels of NLR, SII, and SIRI were noted (p-values: 0.018, 0.021, 0.035).
Conclusions:
In this study, the novel hematological markers SII, SIRI, and AISI were found to effectively reflect inflammation in SLE patients, exhibit associations with high disease activity, and demonstrate heightened sensitivity in detecting cases with high disease activity.
REFERENCJE (32)
1.
Lam GK, Petri M. Assessment of systemic lupus erythematosus. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005; 23 (5 Suppl 39): S120–S132, DOI: 10.5114/reum.2019.91275.
2.
Suszek D, Górak A, Majdan M. Differential approach to peri- pheral blood cell ratios in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and various manifestations. Rheumatol Int 2020; 40: 1625–1629, DOI: 10.1007/s00296-020-04669-3.
3.
Aringer M, Costenbader K, Daikh D, et al. 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology Classification Criteria for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatol 2019; 71: 1400–1412, DOI: 10.1002/art.40930.
4.
Petri M. Disease activity assessment in SLE: do we have the right instruments? Ann Rheum Dis 2007; 66 Suppl 3 (Suppl 3): iii61-iii64, DOI: 10.1136/ard.2007.078477.
5.
Urowitz MB, Isenberg DA, Wallace DJ. Safety and efficacy of hCDR1 (Edratide) in patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus: results of phase II study. Lupus Sci Med 2015; 2: e000104, DOI: 10.1136/lupus-2015-000104.
6.
Osei-Bimpong A, Meek JH, Lewis SM. ESR or CRP? A compari- son of their clinical utility. Hematology 2007; 12: 353–357, DOI: 10.1080/10245330701340734.
7.
Gaitonde S, Samols D, Kushner I. C-reactive protein and systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 59: 1814–1820, DOI: 10.1002/art.24316.
8.
Mikdashi J, Nived O. Measuring disease activity in adults with systemic lupus erythematosus: the challenges of administrative burden and responsiveness to patient concerns in clinical research. Arthritis Res Ther 2015; 17: 183, DOI: 10.1186/s13075-015-0702-6.
9.
Winthrop KL, Weinblatt ME, Bathon J, et al. Unmet need in rheumatology: reports from the Targeted Therapies meeting 2019. Ann Rheum Dis 2020; 79: 88–93, DOI: 10.1136/ annrheumdis-2019-216151.
10.
Dörner T, Furie R. Novel paradigms in systemic lupus erythematosus. Lancet 2019; 393: 2344–2358, DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30546-X.
11.
Soliman WM, Sherif NM, Ghanima IM, El-Badawy MA. Neutrophil to lymphocyte and platelet to lymphocyte ratios in systemic lupus erythematosus: relation with disease activity and lupus nephritis. Reumatol Clin (Engl Ed) 2020; 16: 255–261, DOI: 10.5114/reum.2019.91275.
12.
Koh CH, Bhoo-Pathy N, Ng KL, et al. Utility of pre-treatment neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio and platelet–lymphocyte ratio as prognostic factors in breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2015; 113: 150–158, DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.183.
13.
Jaszczura M, Góra A, Grzywna-Rozenek E, et al. Analysis of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, platelet to lymphocyte ratio and mean platelet volume to platelet count ratio in children with acute stage of immunoglobulin A vasculitis and assessment of their suitability for predicting the course of the disease. Rheumatol Int 2019; 39: 869–878, DOI: 10.1007/ s00296-019-04274-z.
14.
Weening JJ, D’Agati VD, Schwartz MM, et al. The classification of glomerulonephritis in systemic lupus erythematosus revisited. Kidney Int 2004; 65: 521–530, DOI: 10.1111/ j.1523-1755.2004.00443.x.
15.
Gladman DD, Ibañez D, Urowitz MB. Systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index 2000. J Rheumatol 2002; 29: 288–291, DOI: 10.1097/BOR.0000000000000843.
16.
Ermurat S, Tezcan D. Sistemik Lupus Eritematozus Hastalarında inflamasyon Belirteci ve Yüksek Hastalık aktivite Göstergesi Olarak Yeni hematolojik indeksler. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2022; 48: 189–196, DOI: 10.32708/uutfd.1110778.
17.
Hu ZD, Sun Y, Guo J, et al. Red blood cell distribution width and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio are positively correlated with disease activity in primary Sjögren’s syndrome. Clin Biochem 2014; 47: 287–290, DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.08.022.
18.
Liu P, Li P, Peng Z, et al. Predictive value of the neutrophil- to-lymphocyte ratio, monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-neutrophil ratio, and neutrophil-to-monocyte ratio in lupus nephritis. Lupus 2020; 29: 1031–1039, DOI: 10.1177/0961203320929753.
19.
Huang H, Liu Q, Zhu L, et al. Prognostic value of preopera- tive systemic immune-inflammation index in patients with cervical cancer. Sci Rep 2019; 9: 3284, DOI: 10.1038/ s41598-019-39150-0.
20.
Ohno Y. Role of systemic inflammatory response markers in urological malignancy. Int J Urol 2019; 26: 31–47, DOI: 10.1111/iju.13801.
21.
Çakır N, Koc AN. Gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase-platelet ratio, systemic immune inflammation index, and system inflammation response index in invasive Aspergillosis. Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) 2021; 67: 1021–1025, DOI: 10.1590/ 1806-9282.20210475.
22.
Cremer J, Martin M, Redl H, et al. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome after cardiac operations. Ann Thorac Surg 1996; 61: 1714–1720, DOI: 10.1016/0003-4975(96)00055-0.
23.
Zinellu A, Mangoni AA. A systematic review and meta-analy- sis of the association between the neutrophil, lymphocyte, and platelet count, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio and COVID-19 progression and mortality. Expert Rev Clin Immunol 2022; 18: 1187–1202, DOI: 10.1080/1744666X.2022.2120472.
24.
Hamad DA, Aly MM, Abdelhameid MA, et al. Combined blood indexes of systemic inflammation as a mirror to admission to intensive care unit in COVID-19 patients: A multicentric study. J Epidemiol Glob Health 2022; 12: 64–73, DOI: 10.1007/s44197-021-00021-5.
25.
Muhammad S, Fischer I, Naderi S, et al. Systemic Inflammatory Index is a novel predictor of intubation requirement and mortality after SARS-CoV-2i. Pathogens 2021; 10: 58, DOI: 10.3390/pathogens10010058.
26.
Satis S. New inflammatory marker associated with disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis: The Systemic Immune- Inflammation Index. Curr Health Sci J 2021; 47: 553–557, DOI: 10.12865/CHSJ.47.04.11.
27.
Zahorec R. Ratio of neutrophil to lymphocyte counts – rapid and simple parameter of systemic inflammation and stress in critically ill. Bratisl Lek Listy 2001; 102: 5–14, DOI: 10.1163/ 156855901750265178.
28.
Qin B, Ma N, Tang Q, et al. Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were useful markers in assessment of inflammatory response and disease activity in SLE patients. Mod Rheumatol 2016; 26: 372–376, DOI: 10.3109/14397595.2015.1091136.
29.
Ahsen A, Ulu MS, Yuksel S, et al. As a new inflammatory marker for familial Mediterranean fever: neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. Inflammation 2013; 36: 1357–1362, DOI: 10.1007/s10753-013-9675-2.
30.
Wu Y, Chen Y, Yang X, et al. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were associated with disease activity in patients with systemic lupus eryt- hematosus. Int Immunopharmacol 2016; 36: 94–99, DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2016.04.006.
31.
Wang L, Wang C, Jia X, et al. Relationship between neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and systemic lupus erythematosus: A meta-analysis. Clinics [Internet] 2020; 75: e1450, DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2020/e1450.
32.
Yavuz S, Ece A. Mean platelet volume as an indicator of disease activity in juvenile SLE. Clin Rheumatol 2014; 33: 637–641, DOI: 10.1007/s10067-014-2540-3.
Copyright: © Narodowy Instytut Geriatrii, Reumatologii i Rehabilitacji w Warszawie. This is an Open Access journal, all articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
Udostępnij
ARTYKUŁ POWIĄZANY
| eISSN: | 2084-9834 |
| ISSN: | 0034-6233 |
Przetwarzamy dane osobowe zbierane podczas odwiedzania serwisu. Realizacja funkcji pozyskiwania informacji o użytkownikach i ich zachowaniu odbywa się poprzez dobrowolnie wprowadzone w formularzach informacje oraz zapisywanie w urządzeniach końcowych plików cookies (tzw. ciasteczka). Dane, w tym pliki cookies, wykorzystywane są w celu realizacji usług, zapewnienia wygodnego korzystania ze strony oraz w celu monitorowania ruchu zgodnie z Polityką prywatności. Dane są także zbierane i przetwarzane przez narzędzie Google Analytics (więcej).
Możesz zmienić ustawienia cookies w swojej przeglądarce. Ograniczenie stosowania plików cookies w konfiguracji przeglądarki może wpłynąć na niektóre funkcjonalności dostępne na stronie.
Możesz zmienić ustawienia cookies w swojej przeglądarce. Ograniczenie stosowania plików cookies w konfiguracji przeglądarki może wpłynąć na niektóre funkcjonalności dostępne na stronie.
