Table 1.
Demographic and clinical data on patients with childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus from Cohorts Ls and Lu
| Cohort Ls (n = 47) | Cohort Lu (n = 39) | |
|---|---|---|
| Characteristic | Active SLE serum | Active LN urine |
| Age at diagnosis, years | 15 (10.5–17.5) | 14 (12–16) |
| Disease duration, years | 5 (3–9) | 3 (1–4.5) |
| Female sex, n (%) | 41 (87.2) | 31 (79.5) |
| White race, n (%) | 27 (57.4) | 18 (46.2) |
| Hispanic ethnicity, n (%) | 18 (38.3) | 6 (15.4) |
| Total SLEDAI-2K score | 13 (10–17) | 17 (12–20) |
| Active renal involvement, n (%) | 24 (51.1) | 39 (100) |
| Biopsy-proven, n (%) | 14a (93.3) | 37 (94.9) |
| SLEDAI-R score | 8 (4–12) | 12 (8–12) |
| ISN/RPS class of LN, III/IV/V, n (%) | 3/9/6a (21.4/64.3/42.9) | 5/16/12 (13.5/43.2/32.4) |
| eGFR < 75 ml/minute/1.73 m2, n (%) | 1a (3.3) | 2 (5.1) |
| Active extrarenal involvement, n (%) | 46 (97.9) | 38 (97.4) |
| Medications, n (%) | ||
| Oral or intravenous steroids | 40 (85.1) | 35 (89.7) |
| Hydroxychloroquine | 41 (87.2) | 32 (82) |
| Other immunosuppressant | 26 (55.3) | 27 (69.2) |
| Laboratory tests | ||
| Positive anti-dsDNA, n (%) | 18a (60) | 31 (79.5) |
| C3, mg/dl | 83.6a (59.5–114.8) | 65 (45.4–93.3) |
| C4, mg/dl | 10.6a (7–16.2) | 8.6 (4.5–11.1) |
| Random urine protein/creatinine | 0.26a (0.12–1.8) | 2.1 (1.1–5.3) |
| Active urinary sediment, n (%) | 14a (46.7) | 32 (82.1) |
Abbreviations: Cohort L s Longitudinal serum cohort, Cohort L u Longitudinal urine cohort, eGFR Estimated glomerular filtration rate, ISN/RPS International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society, LN Lupus nephritis, SLEDAI-2K Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000, SLEDAI-R Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 renal domain score, SLE Systemic lupus erythematosus
All table values are expressed as median (IQR) for continuous variables and number (percent) for categorical variables
aNote that certain data only available for SLE patients with serum from Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center (n = 30), not Brazilian patients (n = 17). Percentages in table were calculated from patients with available values for these characteristics