%PDF-1.4
%
44 0 obj
<>
endobj
41 0 obj
<>
endobj
115 0 obj
<>stream
Acrobat Distiller 4.05 for Macintosh
2005-04-07T15:44:26Z
2024-03-28T11:54:54-07:00
QuarkXPressª: AdobePS 8.8.0 (301)
2024-03-28T11:54:54-07:00
application/pdf
Heather
2004-730.may
uuid:95025529-1dd1-11b2-0a00-6008271d5700
uuid:9502552c-1dd1-11b2-0a00-bf0000000000
endstream
endobj
30 0 obj
<>
endobj
31 0 obj
<>
endobj
45 0 obj
<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 18 0 R/Type/Page>>
endobj
1 0 obj
<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 20 0 R/Type/Page>>
endobj
4 0 obj
<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 22 0 R/Type/Page>>
endobj
7 0 obj
<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 24 0 R/Type/Page>>
endobj
130 0 obj
[134 0 R]
endobj
131 0 obj
<>stream
1 g
/GS0 gs
0 792 m
0 792 l
f
q
13.5 787.5 585 -783 re
W n
q
0 792.03 612 -792 re
W n
BT
0 0 0 1 k
/GS1 gs
/T1_0 1 Tf
-0.00011 Tc -0.00211 Tw 10 0 0 10 54 734.8264 Tm
(2K at presentation, cumulative steroid dose, and use of anti-)Tj
0.02209 Tw 0 -1.2 TD
(malarial drugs were not associated with the development of)Tj
0.10629 Tw T*
[(A)128.9 (VN. )54.8 (A)128.9 (VN was associated with a shorter disease duration)]TJ
0.1703 Tw T*
(\(HR = 0.91\), and use of immunosuppressive medications)Tj
0 Tc 0.0249 Tw T*
(\(HR = 3.55\). )Tj
/T1_1 1 Tf
-0.00011 Tc 0 Tw 0 -2.4 TD
(DISCUSSION)Tj
/T1_0 1 Tf
0.00639 Tc 0.3685 Tw 0 -1.2 TD
[(W)79.9 (e earlier proposed a measure to summarize disease)]TJ
-0.00011 Tc 0.11639 Tw T*
(activity \(measured by the SLEDAI-2K\) over multiple vis-)Tj
-0.0002 Tc 0 Tw T*
(its)Tj
0 Tc 7.5 0 0 7.5 63.4458 630.1265 Tm
(5)Tj
-0.00011 Tc -0.01939 Tw 10 0 0 10 67.1958 626.8264 Tm
[(. )17.7 (The adjusted mean SLEDAI-2K \(AMS\) is equivalent to)]TJ
-0.0045 Tw -1.3196 -1.2 Td
(the area under the curve of the SLEDAI-2K by time divided)Tj
0.1525 Tw T*
[(by time interval. )17.8 (The relationship between )54.9 (AMS and sur-)]TJ
0.1584 Tw T*
(vival was evaluated and it was found that with increased)Tj
0.02499 Tw T*
(AMS, the risk for death is also increased. )Tj
0.0955 Tw 1.2 -1.2 Td
[(Our study evaluated the relationship between )54.9 (AMS and)]TJ
0.2319 Tw -1.2 -1.2 Td
(the presence of other outcomes, specifically presence of)Tj
0.13429 Tw T*
[(overall damage, CAD, and )54.8 (A)128.9 (VN. )17.7 (The study group of 575)]TJ
0.0356 Tw T*
[(patients had very stringent followup restrictions. )17.6 (There was)]TJ
0.354 Tw T*
(long enough disease duration and followup within the)Tj
0.0015 Tc 0.3734 Tw T*
[(University of )17.8 (T)69.9 (oronto Lupus Clinic to have suf)17.8 (ficient)]TJ
-0.00011 Tc 0.01939 Tw T*
[(patients with the various outcomes under investigation. )17.7 (The)]TJ
0.14799 Tw T*
[(patients selected did not dif)17.7 (fer from those not selected in)]TJ
0.02499 Tw T*
(their demographic distribution \(data not shown\).)Tj
0.3611 Tw 1.2 -1.21 Td
[(As with survival, the comparison of )54.8 (AMS between)]TJ
0.0199 Tc 0.411 Tw -1.2 -1.21 Td
(patients with and without an outcome needs to be)Tj
-0.00011 Tc 0.08141 Tw 0 -1.21 TD
[(approached with caution. )17.7 (T)69.9 (o predict the outcome, it would)]TJ
-0.0219 Tw T*
[(be inaccurate to simply compare )54.9 (AMS at the time of the out-)]TJ
-0.0271 Tw T*
[(come related event to the )54.8 (AMS at the last patient visit for the)]TJ
0.01151 Tw T*
[(non-event group. )17.8 (The non-event group possibly would have)]TJ
0.0536 Tw T*
(had a greater number of clinic visits, which would, in turn,)Tj
0.0202 Tw T*
[(af)17.7 (fect the )54.8 (AMS. Generally)64.8 (, it was found that the more visits)]TJ
0.0714 Tw T*
[(a patient had, the greater the possibility for the )54.9 (AMS to be)]TJ
0.1205 Tw T*
(lower compared to a patient with fewer visits. In order to)Tj
0.118 Tw T*
[(remove this bias, )54.8 (AMS could be evaluated at similar time)]TJ
0.099 Tw T*
[(intervals and then compared. )17.7 (This breakdown and ensuing)]TJ
-0.0202 Tw T*
(series of statistical tests is not robust. It falls short in its abil-)Tj
-0.00819 Tw T*
(ity to detect statistical significance since for any time period)Tj
0.0434 Tw T*
(there is a small number of events. It also fails to look at all)Tj
0.0083 Tc 0.36659 Tw T*
[(the patients in a single analysis. )54.7 (A)-570 (more appropriate)]TJ
-0.00011 Tc 0.2039 Tw T*
(approach is the use of time-dependent covariate survival)Tj
0.0065 Tw T*
(regression. In such an analysis, some or all of the independ-)Tj
-0.0146 Tw T*
[(ent variables, in this case )54.8 (AMS, change from visit to visit, in)]TJ
-0.0184 Tw T*
(contrast to variables that remain fixed over time, such as sex)Tj
-0.00391 Tw T*
[(or SLEDAI-2K at presentation. )17.8 (The survival analysis evalu-)]TJ
0.0347 Tw T*
(ates how the presence or absence of the outcome after each)Tj
0.1459 Tw T*
(point in time is predicted by the independent variables at)Tj
0.004 Tw T*
[(that point in time. Finally)64.8 (, the p values are computed to rep-)]TJ
0.02499 Tw T*
(resent the entire spectrum of time under investigation.)Tj
0.0466 Tw 1.2 -1.2 Td
[(Risk of damage increases with increases in )54.8 (AMS, age at)]TJ
0.1163 Tw -1.2 -1.2 Td
(diagnosis, disease duration, and use of corticosteroids and)Tj
0.10471 Tw 0 -1.2 TD
[(immunosuppressive medications. )17.7 (While the )54.8 (AMS incorpo-)]TJ
0.0321 Tw T*
(rates the disease activity at presentation, it appears that dis-)Tj
-0.005 Tc -0.0009 Tw T*
(ease activity over time is more important to the development)Tj
-0.0051 Tc 0.06 Tw T*
(of damage, as SLEDAI-2K at presentation was not retained)Tj
0.06841 Tw 26.4 63.85 Td
[(in the multivariate analysis. )54.8 (AMS is an independent predic-)]TJ
0.1456 Tw T*
[(tor along with age at diagnosis or disease duration. )17.6 (While)]TJ
0.07159 Tw T*
[(there is a significant interaction between )54.7 (AMS and medica-)]TJ
-0.0172 Tw T*
[(tion use, )54.8 (AMS, corticosteroids and immunosuppressive med-)]TJ
0.14191 Tw T*
(ications are each independent risk factors for the develop-)Tj
0.02499 Tw T*
(ment of damage.)Tj
-0.00011 Tc 0.11549 Tw 1.2 -1.2 Td
[(Increased )54.9 (AMS, age at diagnosis, disease duration, and)]TJ
0.0056 Tc 0.36929 Tw -1.2 -1.2 Td
(use of immunosuppressive medications all lead to an)Tj
-0.00011 Tc 0.16499 Tw T*
(increased risk of CAD. Men are also at greater risk than)Tj
0.00101 Tw T*
[(women. )54.8 (As with the damage, SLEDAI-2K at presentation is)]TJ
0.1629 Tw T*
[(not a predictor of CAD. Rather)39.7 (, the disease activity over)]TJ
0.0199 Tc 0.47971 Tw T*
(time is a predictor for the development of CAD.)Tj
-0.00011 Tc -0.0291 Tw T*
[(Interestingly)64.8 (, use of corticosteroids and antimalarials did not)]TJ
0.0659 Tw T*
(contribute to an increased risk for CAD in the multivariate)Tj
0.07069 Tw T*
[(analysis. )17.7 (This may be due to the correlation between )54.8 (AMS)]TJ
0.01489 Tw T*
(and medication use. In the case of the development of dam-)Tj
0.0593 Tw T*
(age, each of these risk factors was significant. For CAD, it)Tj
0.02499 Tw T*
[(appears that )54.8 (AMS accounts for all their predictive ability)64.8 (.)]TJ
0.10181 Tw 1.2 -1.2 Td
[(In the development of first )54.9 (A)128.9 (VN, )54.9 (AMS does not play a)]TJ
0.0183 Tc 0.3566 Tw -1.2 -1.2 Td
(significant role. Shorter disease duration and use of)Tj
-0.00011 Tc 0.37379 Tw T*
(immunosuppressive medications are associated with an)Tj
0.2449 Tw T*
[(increased risk of )54.8 (A)128.9 (VN. )17.7 (This indicates that this outcome)]TJ
0.0379 Tw T*
(tends to occur early in the disease course and the risk of its)Tj
0.02499 Tw T*
(first occurrence diminishes with time. )Tj
-0.0101 Tc -0.0177 Tw 1.2 -1.2 Td
(From our previous study and results obtained here we con-)Tj
0.0878 Tw -1.2 -1.2 Td
[(clude that )54.8 (AMS is a risk factor for major outcomes in SLE.)]TJ
0.0106 Tw T*
[(Only with the presence of )55 (A)128.9 (VN did we not see a relationship. )]TJ
-0.0251 Tc 0.2585 Tw 1.2 -1.2 Td
[(Thus )54.8 (AMS reflects disease activity over time and is an)]TJ
0.15781 Tw -1.2 -1.2 Td
(important predictor of major outcomes in patients with SLE.)Tj
-0.0361 Tw T*
(AMS should be included in the description of patients with SLE.)Tj
/T1_1 1 Tf
-0.00011 Tc 0 Tw 0 -2.4 TD
(REFERENCES)Tj
/T1_0 1 Tf
0.02499 Tw 8 0 0 8 325 353.0264 Tm
[(1.)-875.1 (Gladman DD, Koh DR, Urowitz MB, Farewell )17.7 (VT)73.9 (. Lost to )]TJ
1.675 -1.225 Td
(follow-up study in SLE. Lupus 2000;9:363-7.)Tj
-1.675 -1.225 Td
[(2.)-875.1 (Uribe )54.8 (AG, )54.8 (Alarcon GS, Sanchez ML, et al. Systemic lupus )]TJ
1.675 -1.225 Td
(erythematosus in three ethnic groups. XVIII. Factors predictive of)Tj
0 -1.225 TD
[(poor compliance with study visits. )54.8 (Arthritis Rheum )]TJ
0 Tc 0 Tw T*
(2004;51:258-63.)Tj
-0.00011 Tc 0.02499 Tw -1.675 -1.225 Td
[(3.)-875.1 (Petri M. Hopkins lupus cohort. 1999 update. Rheum Dis Clin North)]TJ
0 Tc 1.675 -1.225 Td
(Am 2000;26:199-213.)Tj
-0.00011 Tc -1.675 -1.225 Td
[(4.)-875.1 (Gladman DD, Ibanez D, Urowitz MB. Systemic lupus )]TJ
1.675 -1.225 Td
(erythematosus disease activity index 2000. J Rheumatol)Tj
0 Tc 0 Tw T*
(2002;29:288-91.)Tj
-0.00011 Tc 0.02499 Tw -1.675 -1.225 Td
[(5.)-875.1 (Iba\226ez D, Urowitz MB, Gladman DD. Summarizing disease )]TJ
1.675 -1.225 Td
[(features over time: I. )54.8 (Adjusted mean SLEDAI derivation and)]TJ
T*
(application to an index of disease activity in lupus. J Rheumatol)Tj
0 Tc 0 Tw T*
(2003;30:1977-82.)Tj
-0.00011 Tc 0.02499 Tw -1.675 -1.225 Td
[(6.)-875.1 (Lee P)110.7 (, Urowitz MB, Bookman )54.8 (AA, et al. Systemic lupus )]TJ
1.675 -1.225 Td
[(erythematosus. )54.8 (A)-220.1 (review of 1)36.8 (10 cases with reference to nephritis,)]TJ
T*
(the nervous system, infections, aseptic necrosis and prognosis. )Tj
0 Tc T*
(Q J Med 1977;46:1-32.)Tj
-0.00011 Tc -1.675 -1.225 Td
[(7.)-875.1 (Gladman D, Ginzler E, Goldsmith C, et al. )17.7 (The development and)]TJ
1.675 -1.225 Td
(initial validation of the SLICC/ACR damage index for SLE.)Tj
T*
(Arthritis Rheum 1996;39:363-9.)Tj
-1.675 -1.225 Td
[(8.)-875.1 (Bruce IN, Gladman DD, Urowitz MB. Premature atherosclerosis in)]TJ
1.675 -1.225 Td
[(SLE. Rheum Dis Clin North )54.8 (Am 2000;26:257-78.)]TJ
-1.675 -1.225 Td
[(9.)-875.1 (Gladman DD, Urowitz MB, Chaudhry-Ahluwalia )17.7 (V)128.9 (, Ibanez D,)]TJ
1.675 -1.225 Td
(Bogoch ER. Outcome of symptomatic osteonecrosis in 95 patients)Tj
T*
(with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 2001;28:2226-9.)Tj
ET
0 0 0 1 K
53.468 76.5 m
558.468 76.5 l
S
0 0 0 0 k
494.29 69.365 64.178 -15.665 re
f*
BT
0 0 0 1 k
/T1_2 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 8 0 0 8 545.468 56.4344 Tm
(827)Tj
ET
0 0 0 0 k
53.532 70.5 203 -15.665 re
f*
BT
0 0 0 1 k
/T1_2 1 Tf
-0.00011 Tc 0.02499 Tw 8 0 0 8 54.532 57.5695 Tm
(Iba\226ez, et al: SLEDAI-2K)Tj
ET
0 0 0 0 k
/GS0 gs
101.631 81.583 407.5 -10.833 re
f*
0.5 w
/GS1 gs
101.631 81.583 407.5 -10.833 re
S
Q
Q
q
0 0 612 792 re
W n
BT
0 g
/GS2 gs
/T1_3 8 Tf
108.828 74 Td
(Personal non-commercial use only. The Journal of Rheumatology Copyright\
\251 2005. All rights reserved.)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
/GS2 gs
/T1_4 1 Tf
10 0 0 10 540 17 Tm
( )Tj
0 0.48627 0.77255 rg
/GS2 gs
-7.22298 0 Td
(www.jrheum.org)Tj
0 g
/GS2 gs
-16.72996 0 Td
(Downloaded on March 28, 2024 from )Tj
ET
endstream
endobj
24 0 obj
<>stream
8;Z]"$P(&s#_p%m"hDq,'N(!Z7,)8j>LmVsn:+83!WMd[M5KB/G6pI6DnQfSS>HUph99&F(,,O15V
/pHN2Y=BEYXRN:.W%LWub.+*;9>k6Af>qeru@5MT9kuK*lI&Z#^4j`@[PD,ouuL
Y1b%?M0s=Cs0jYjcN%A3H'S~>
endstream
endobj
28 0 obj
[/Indexed/DeviceRGB 255 27 0 R]
endobj
27 0 obj
<>stream
J,g]g+e/h_!_gCtO=0f)$P%cIi8Zdfc5&3j_8$7g.@L`YKUJNGBP\poR=_;Dl'P(T
(7Boo^^S:71(MN]ZQX/+Cbu.lK"p74pe1T%s.DY%&\1TdJhr54.M9au6>79n6`Q:4
PbLSZTLEE(8E@'*1mg_*eTnN*;*'V3+gm-EEetX%;Bo$ur2ss*N`.-!.kG_q6GDD'
dKoL!8Ka#EV,@V!\j8ZFbp6EE<9cn=N6j0nf;(&;QU6bUD')c@\
9-d\DA=cZ0Q>gIM$$;cd2O@&a;X,Nn_aP(]I1aRc(K1^ue>
gF/(+GaKo$qneLWDrQ#;5\S(\$q'4Q,85`-8;S(=Z"WSBOV*FM)4,?B],R
endstream
endobj
51 0 obj
<>
endobj
71 0 obj
<>
endobj
49 0 obj
<>
endobj
87 0 obj
<>
endobj
121 0 obj
<>
endobj
52 0 obj
<>
endobj
79 0 obj
<>stream
HtTkPWf`уݭnBEbhta`A^0 h@@D`Б%\fW6ɝb~V֭:uv}8fk8>#,xC"/,E}DP`'.̴Xfˎoh#ph)\`W&ӛ(N'q9F]usKku]S>S1u1*~S>EaZ]VLQ-> z>BWRݩj=St8FkDmJz
啉qoiuZqjN}v*/..l
‱6{[-ƱvZ',n`
z#0?,Sam߈lVٜy!InδUADHdvmh[A0[eNqοDKeƚlO<ݞ=4Ŕ0sL\|tѾ:_Ydw+Q3i٬L}EȒ@|J#-$Roo#VVq:٬t{UzNVprRzo
WoK@q
@Yv
$EC#,OȁmT-Tՙ&V+T:x8PCTTW#NQ/3eSY\
2
ql%7pCRET 8sӹflӓY:V7DΡNJ=oD