Faculty Bibliography

Background/Purpose: Lupus nephritis continues to be the complication with the highest standardized mortality ratio in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), and a late diagnosis associates with worse outcomes. Clinicians traditionally rely on proteinuria to drive decisions regarding renal biopsy and subsequent management. Since threshold levels for such determinations are variable but critically important, this study leveraged the well-phenotyped multi-center multi- racial Accelerating Medicines Partnership (AMP) lupus nephritis cohort, to address whether urine protein to creatinine ratios (UPCR) between.5 and 1 differ from higher ratios with regard to clinical, serologic and histologic variables.
Method(s): 239 patients fulfilling ACR or SLICC criteria for SLE with a random or 24 hr uPCR > or =.5 and histologic biopsy Class III, IV, V, or mixed were consecutively enrolled in AMP at the time of renal biopsy and demographics, clinical history, medications, disease activity as assessed by the hybrid SELENA-SLEDAI were recorded. Patients with biopsy Classes I, II and VI were ineligible. Patients were followed at 3, 12, 26 and 52 weeks.
Result(s): At baseline, 38 patients had a UPCR < 1 (A), 113 had a UPCR 1-3 (B), and 88 had a UPCR > 3 (C). There were 14 additional patients with UPCR < 1, and 11 patients with UPCR > 1 who had biopsy class I or II. In group A, there were significantly more male patients (44% A; 23% B; 26% C, p=0.012) with no differences in age, race or ethnicity. Neither the SLEDAI nor serologic parameters (anti-dsDNA, C3, or C4) distinguished among the groups. Those in group C had a significantly increased creatinine and decreased hemoglobin and albumin compared to the other two groups (Table 1). Patients in group A trended toward having an increased frequency of proliferative histology (Table 2). This trend was not observed when considering patients for whom this was their first biopsy, but was significant for repeat biopsy patients (56% A; 41% B; 24% C, p=0.03). The activity index was independent of UPCR regardless of biopsy number. However, those in group C had a significantly higher chronicity index than those with lower UPCR. This correlation was shown for patients with a repeat biopsy (r=0.2299, p=0.003) but not first biopsy patients (r=0.0891, p=0.45). Although medications did not differ at baseline among the groups, at 12 weeks, for each group significantly more patients were taking Mycophenolate Mofetil than at the time of biopsy (Table 3).
Conclusion(s): A significant proportion of both first and recurrent biopsies in patients with a UPCR < 1 have proliferative histology and accompanying activity scores similar to that of patients with nephrotic range proteinuria. These results support renal biopsy at thresholds lower than a UPCR of 1 since histologic findings can inform therapeutic decisions

Background/Purpose: Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) represent a unique population in considering risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with biologic, genetic, demographic, clinical and treatment issues all at play. By the nature of their chronic inflammatory autoimmune condition and regular use of immunosuppressive medications, these individuals would traditionally be considered at high risk of contracting the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and having a worse prognosis. Accordingly, we aimed to characterize patients with SLE affected by COVID-19 in New York City (NYC) and analyze associations of comorbidities and medications on outcomes.
Method(s): Patients with SLE and COVID-19 (confirmed by RT-PCR testing), were identified through a longitudinal survey of an established NYU lupus cohort, query of New York University Langone Health and Bellevue Hospitals systems and referrals from rheumatologists at those institutions. All patients were age 18 or older and met SLE classification criteria or carried a rheumatologist's diagnosis of SLE. Only English-, Spanish- or Mandarin-speaking patients were included in the study. Data were prospectively collected via a web-based questionnaire and review of electronic medical records. Baseline characteristics and medications were compared between the hospitalized and ambulatory patients with COVID-19. A logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of hospital admission.
Result(s): A total of 41 SLE patients were confirmed COVID-19 positive by RT-PCR. The patients were predominantly female and encompassed the major racial/ethnic demographics seen in NYC. The most common symptoms of COVID-19+ patients were cough (78.4%), fever (64.9%), and shortness of breath (64.9%). Of those SLE patients with COVID-19, 24 (59%) were hospitalized, 4 required ICU level of care, and 4 died, all of hypoxic respiratory failure, Table 1. Hospitalized patients tended to be older, non-white, Hispanic, and have higher BMI, antiphospholipid syndrome, a history of lupus nephritis and at least one medical comorbidity, Table 2. There was no difference between the groups in use of hydroxychloroquine, systemic steroids or immunosuppressants. Logistic regression analysis identified the following independent predictors of being hospitalized with COVID-19: race (OR = 7.78 for non-white vs. white; 95% CI: 1.13 to 53.58; p=0.037), the presence of at least one comorbidity (OR=4.66; 95% CI: 1.02 to 21.20; p=0.047), and BMI (OR = 1.08 per increase in kg/m2; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.18; p=0.096).
Conclusion(s): Patients with SLE and COVID-19 have a high rate of hospitalization but similar mortality rate to the general population in NYC. Risk factors such as non-white race, higher BMI, and the presence of one or more comorbidities were identified as independent predictors of hospitalization in SLE patients who develop COVID-19. The use of hydroxychloroquine and immunosuppressants did not appear to influence the outcomes of patients with SLE in the setting of COVID-19. Further studies are needed to understand additional risk factors for poor COVID-19 outcomes in patients with SLE

Background/Purpose: Treatment of lupus nephritis relies on renal histopathological features. However, renal biopsies do not capture patient-specific active biological pathways. Urine proteomic biomarkers could revolutionize the diagnosis and management of lupus nephritis by predicting active intrarenal biological pathways and can be noninvasively monitored over time.
Method(s): One thousand proteins were quantified (RayBiotech) in a total of 112 longitudinal urine samples from 30 SLE patients with active lupus nephritis and 7 healthy controls (HC). The proteins and molecular pathways detected in the urine proteome at the time of biopsy were then analyzed with respect to lupus nephritis class, response to treatment after 1 year, histopathological features (activity and chronicity indeces), and trajectory over time (baseline and week 12, 26, and 52). The intrarenal expression of candidate biomarkers was evaluated using single cell transcriptomics of renal biopsies from patients with active lupus nephritis.
Result(s): There were 237 proteins (FDR < 10%) enriched in the urine of patients with lupus nephritis reflecting several molecular pathways involving chemotaxis, extracellular matrix remodeling, and activation of neutrophils and platelets. Hierarchical clustering using urine proteomics segregated SLE patients into 2 groups, with 80% of complete responders clustering together. This finding could not be similarly reproduced using standard features including baseline proteinuria, creatinine, histologic activity or chronicity scores, or class, indicating unique informative features of urine proteomics (Fig. 1). Patients with proliferative lupus nephritis (class III or IV) had stronger activation of chemotaxis pathways. IL-16 was the urinary protein most significantly increased in proliferative disease compared to membranous (FC 6, p=0.002) (Fig. 2A). Assessment of urine proteins that correlated with histologic activity kidney highlighted IL-16 as the single most strongly correlated protein with histologic activity (r=0.69, p=9.5.10-5; Fig. 2B). IL-16 concentration was independent of the amount of proteinuria and progressively diminished over time in patients who were responding to immunosuppression (Fig. 2C). Single cell RNA sequencing revealed significant intrarenal expression of IL16 by all infiltrating immune cells and highlighted IL16 as the second most expressed cytokine in lupus nephritis kidneys out of a compendium of 236 cytokines (Fig. 3A-B).
Conclusion(s): Urine proteomics can noninvasively identify active and biologically relevant pathways in lupus nephritis. Integrated urine proteomics and renal single cell transcriptomics revealed that IL-16, a CD4 ligand with chemotactic and proinflammatory functions, was one of the most expressed cytokine in lupus nephritis. As a urine proteomic biomarker, IL-16 may predict renal histological activity and could be monitored over time to assess response to immunosuppression. Urinary IL-16 is independent of proteinuria thus potentially providing actionable clinical information that is not captured by currently used biomarkers. Further studies are ongoing to validate these findings

BACKGROUND Patients receiving immunosuppressive therapies might be more susceptible to COVID-19. Conversely, an exaggerated inflammatory response to the SARS-CoV-2 infection might be blunted by certain forms of immunosuppression, which could be protective. Indeed, there are data from animal models demonstrating that complement may be a part of the pathophysiology of coronavirus infections. There is also evidence from an autopsy series demonstrating complement deposition in the lungs of patients with COVID-19. This raises the question of whether patients on anti-complement therapy could be protected from COVID-19. CASE REPORT Case 1 is a 39-year-old woman with an approximately 20-year history of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), who had recently been switched from treatment with eculizumab to ravulizumab prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Case 2 is a 54-year-old woman with a cadaveric renal transplant for lupus nephritis, complicated by thrombotic microangiopathy, who was maintained on eculizumab, which she started several months before she developed the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Case 3 is a 60-year-old woman with a 14-year history of PNH, who had been treated with eculizumab since 2012, and was diagnosed with COVID-19 at the time of her scheduled infusion. All 3 patients had a relatively mild course of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS We see no evidence of increased susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 in these patients on anti-complement therapy, which might actually have accounted for the mild course of infection. The effect of anti-complement therapy on COVID-19 disease needs to be determined in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND:Although hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is a mainstay of treatment for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), ocular toxicity can result from accumulated exposure. As the longevity of patients with SLE improves, data are needed to balance the risk of ocular toxicity and the risk of disease flare, especially in older patients with quiescent disease. Accordingly, this study was initiated to examine the safety of HCQ withdrawal in older SLE patients. METHODS:Data were obtained by retrospective chart review at three major lupus centers in New York City. Twenty-six patients who discontinued HCQ and thirty-two patients on HCQ matched for gender, race/ethnicity, and age were included in this study. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a lupus flare classified by the revised version of the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus: National Assessment version of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SELENA-SLEDAI) Flare composite index, within 1 year of HCQ withdrawal or matched time of continuation. RESULTS:Five patients (19.2%) in the HCQ withdrawal group compared to five (15.6%) in the HCQ continuation group experienced a flare of any severity (odds ratio [OR] = 1.28; 95% CI 0.31, 5.30; p = 0.73). There were no severe flares in either group. The results were similar after adjusting for length of SLE, number of American College of Rheumatology criteria, low complement levels, and SELENA-SLEDAI score, and in a propensity score analysis (OR = 1.18; 95% CI 0.23, 6.16; p = 0.84). The analysis of time to any flare revealed a non-significant earlier time to flare in the HCQ withdrawal group (log-rank p = 0.67). Most flares were in the cutaneous and musculoskeletal systems, but one patient in the continuation group developed pericarditis. The most common reason for HCQ withdrawal was retinal toxicity (42.3%), followed by patient's preference (34.6%), other confirmed or suspected adverse effects (15.4%), ophthalmologist recommendation for macular degeneration (3.8%), and rheumatologist recommendation for quiescent SLE (3.8%). CONCLUSIONS:In this retrospective study of older stable patients with SLE on long-term HCQ, withdrawal did not significantly increase the risk of flares.

Lupus nephritis, one of the most serious manifestations of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), has both a heterogeneous clinical and pathological presentation. For example, proliferative nephritis identifies a more aggressive disease class that requires immunosuppression. However, the current classification system relies on the static appearance of histopathological morphology which does not capture differences in the inflammatory response. Therefore, a biomarker grounded in the disease biology is needed to understand the molecular heterogeneity of lupus nephritis and identify immunologic mechanism and pathways. Here, we analyzed the patterns of 1000 urine protein biomarkers in 30 patients with active lupus nephritis. We found that patients stratify over a chemokine gradient inducible by interferon-gamma. Higher values identified patients with proliferative lupus nephritis. After integrating the urine proteomics with the single-cell transcriptomics of kidney biopsies, it was observed that the urinary chemokines defining the gradient were predominantly produced by infiltrating CD8 T cells, along with natural killer and myeloid cells. The urine chemokine gradient significantly correlated with the number of kidney-infiltrating CD8 cells. These findings suggest that urine proteomics can capture the complex biology of the kidney in lupus nephritis. Patient-specific pathways may be noninvasively tracked in the urine in real time, enabling diagnosis and personalized treatment.

The Accelerating Medicines Partnership (AMP) Lupus Network was established as a partnership between the NIH, pharmaceutical companies, non-profit stakeholders and lupus investigators across multiple academic centers to apply high throughput technologies to the analysis of renal tissue, urine and blood from patients with lupus nephritis (LN). The AMP network provides publicly accessible data to the community with the goal of generating new scientific hypotheses and improving diagnostic and therapeutic tools so as to improve disease outcomes. We present here a description of the structure of the AMP Lupus Network and a summary of the preliminary results from the Phase 1 studies. The successful completion of Phase 1 sets the stage for analysis of a large cohort of LN samples in Phase 2 and provides a model for establishing similar discovery cohorts.

BACKGROUND:Variability remains a challenge in lupus anticoagulant (LA) testing. OBJECTIVE:To validate LA test performance between Antiphospholipid Syndrome Alliance for Clinical Trials and International Networking (APS ACTION) Core laboratories and examine agreement in LA status between Core and local/hospital laboratories contributing patients to this prospective registry. METHODS:Five Core laboratories used the same analyser, protocol, and characterised samples for LA validation. Non-anticoagulated registry samples were retested at the corresponding regional Core laboratories and anticoagulated samples at a single Core laboratory. Categorical agreement and discrepancies in LA status between Core and local/hospital laboratories were analysed. RESULTS:Clotting times for the reference/characterised plasmas used for normalised ratios were similar between Core laboratories (CV <4%); precision and agreement for LA positive/negative plasma were similar (all CV ≤5%) in the four laboratories that completed both parts of the validation exercise. 418 registry samples underwent LA testing. Agreement for LA positive/negative status between Core and local/hospital laboratories was observed in 87% (115/132) non-anticoagulated and 77% (183/237) anticoagulated samples. However, 28.7% (120/418) of samples showed discordance between the Core and local/hospital laboratories or equivocal LA results. Some of the results of the local/hospital laboratories might have been unreliable in 24.7% (41/166) and 23% (58/252) of the total non-anticoagulated and anticoagulated samples, respectively. Equivocal results by the Core laboratory might have also contributed to discordance. CONCLUSIONS:Laboratories can achieve good agreement in LA performance by use of same reagents, analyser type, and protocols. The standardised Core laboratory results underpin accurate interpretation of APS ACTION clinical data. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.