Lupus & antiphospholipid syndrome
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Risk Probability Index: ready for routine use? Results from a Chinese cohort
Authors' conclusion
SLERPI performed well in patients with SLE, particularly for the earlier diagnosis of SLE.
Study context
- Population
- Chinese cohort of patients with SLE and without SLE (controls)352 SLE, 385 controls
- Comparison
- Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Risk Probability Index (SLERPI) vs ACR-1997, SLICC-2012 and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR-2019 classification criteria
- Outcome
- Classification performance for SLE
Performance
As reported in the abstract
| Test or model | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|
| SLERPI | 98.3% (95% CI 96.3% to 99.4%) | 89.4% (95% CI 85.8% to 92.2%) |
SLERPI
Sensitivity98.3% (95% CI 96.3% to 99.4%)
Specificity89.4% (95% CI 85.8% to 92.2%)
Further findings
| Outcome | SLERPI |
|---|---|
| Performance after excluding pSS and UCTD from controls | |
| Specificity | 94.3% (95% CI 91.0% to 96.6%) |
| Accuracy | 96.5% (95% CI 95.0% to 97.9%) |
Performance after excluding primary Sjogren's syndrome (pSS) and undifferentiated connective tissue disease (UCTD) from controls
- Both outperformed the EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria
pSS and UCTD controls meeting criteria
- Significantly more pSS and UCTD patients met SLERPI than other classification criteria
Time to SLERPI classification vs clinical diagnosis
- Same
- 261
- Earlier
- 23
- Later
- 9
Time to SLERPI classification vs EULAR/ACR-2019
- Same
- 280
- Earlier
- 8
- Later
- 1
Original publication
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Risk Probability Index: ready for routine use? Results from a Chinese cohort. Lupus Sci Med. Published 11 September 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →