3.1 Patient characteristics
Sixty-two patients were included in the study (88.7% female). The mean age (SD) was 36.8 ± 11.9 years and mean SLE duration was 7.1 (3.8-12.7) years. At the baseline, 31 patients presented active LN. Baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, disease scores and current treatment are summarized (table 1).
Table 1. Baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, disease scores and medications
Variables#
|
Total
(n=62)
|
Active LN
(n=31)
|
Inactive LN
(n=31)
|
P
|
Age (years)
|
36.8 ± 11.9
|
36.7 ± 13.2
|
36.9 ± 10.5
|
0.926
|
Female
|
55 (88.7)
|
26 (83.9)
|
29 (93.5)
|
0.425
|
Caucasian
|
52 (83.9)
|
25 (80.6)
|
27 (87.1)
|
0.730
|
Disease duration (years)
|
7.1 (3.8 – 12.7)
|
6.5 (1.0 – 11.3)
|
8.4 (4.3 – 14.2)
|
0.149
|
SLE Clinical characteristics
|
|
|
|
|
Mucocutaneous
|
58 (93.5)
|
29 (93.5)
|
29 (93.5)
|
1.000
|
Musculoskeletal
|
29 (46.8)
|
12 (38.7)
|
17 (54.8)
|
0.309
|
Serositis
|
18 (29.0)
|
7 (22.6)
|
11 (35.5)
|
0.401
|
Neuropsychiatric
|
3 (4.8)
|
1 (3.2)
|
2 (6.5)
|
1.000
|
Hematological
|
40 (64.5)
|
22 (71.0)
|
18 (58.1)
|
0.426
|
Autoantibodies
|
|
|
|
|
Anti-dsDNA
|
50 (80.6)
|
26 (83.9)
|
24 (77.4)
|
0.748
|
Anti-Sm
|
17 (28.8)
|
9 (31.0)
|
8 (26.7)
|
0.934
|
Anti-Ro
|
19 (32.2)
|
11 (3.9)
|
8 (26.7)
|
0.518
|
Anti-La
|
9 (15.3)
|
8 (27.6)
|
1 (3.3)
|
0.012
|
Anti-nRNP
|
17 (28.8)
|
8 (27.6)
|
9 (30.0)
|
1.000
|
aPL
|
4 (6.6)
|
3 (10.0)
|
1 (3.2)
|
0.354
|
Sjögren’s syndrome
|
4(6.5)
|
3(9.7)
|
1(3.2)
|
0.612
|
Renal pathology (ISN/RPS)
|
|
|
|
0.039
|
III
|
35 (56.4)
|
17 (54.8)
|
18 (58.1)
|
|
IV
|
13 (21.0)
|
3 (9.7)
|
10 (31.2) *
|
|
III + V or IV + V
|
4 (6.4)
|
3 (9.7)
|
1 (3.2)
|
|
V
|
10 (16.1)
|
8 (25.8) *
|
2 (6.4)
|
|
Disease activity and damage scores
|
SLEDAI-2K
|
8 (2 – 16)
|
16 (10 – 18)
|
2 (0 – 4)
|
<0.001
|
Renal SLEDAI
|
6 (0 – 12)
|
12 (8 – 12)
|
0 (0 – 4)
|
<0.001
|
rSLAM-R
|
2 (0 – 2)
|
2 (2 – 3)
|
0 (0 – 2)
|
<0.001
|
Renal SLICC
|
4 (0 – 8)
|
8 (6 – 11)
|
0 (0 – 1)
|
<0.001
|
SDI
|
0 (0 – 1)
|
0 (0 – 1)
|
0 (0 – 1)
|
0.229
|
Laboratory parameters
|
C3 (mg/dl)
|
92 (65 – 121)
|
70 (54 – 94)
|
111 (89 – 135)
|
<0.001
|
C4 (mg/dl)
|
15 (8.8 – 22.3)
|
10 (5 – 15)
|
22 (15 – 29)
|
<0.001
|
UPCR
|
0.68 (0.28 – 1.95)
|
1.84 (0.95 – 3.36)
|
0.29 (0.09 – 0.46)
|
<0.001
|
eGFR
|
103.5 (87 – 121)
|
93 (72 – 126)
|
107 (91 – 121)
|
0.379
|
Serum creatinine level (mg/dl)
|
0.82 (0.63 – 0.88)
|
0.76 (0.54 – 1.03)
|
0.74 (0.63 – 0.54)
|
0.070
|
Current medication
|
Hydroxychloroquine
|
51 (82.3)
|
24 (77.4)
|
27 (87.1)
|
0.506
|
Azathioprine
|
8 (12.9)
|
1 (3.2)
|
7 (22.6)
|
0.053
|
Mycophenolate mofetil
|
29 (46.8)
|
9 (29.0)
|
20 (64.5)
|
0.011
|
Prednisone
|
19 (30.6)
|
11 (35.4)
|
8 (25.8)
|
0.582
|
Calcineurin inhibitors
|
1 (1.6)
|
1 (3.2)
|
0 (0.0)
|
1.000
|
aPL: antiphospholipid, either IgG anti-cardiolipin or the lupus anticoagulant; C: complement; eGFR: estimated glomerular filtration rate, estimated by Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) (34); ISN/RPS: International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society; LN: lupus nephritis; renal SLICC: Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Renal Activity/Response Exercise; rSLAM-R: renal Systemic Lupus Activity Measure Revised; SDI, American College of Rheumatology/Systemic Lupus International Collaborative Clinics SLE damage index; SLE: systemic lupus erythematosus; SLEDAI: SLE disease activity index; UPCR: urine protein-creatinine ratio
# Variables described as mean ± standard deviation, median (25th-75th percentiles) or n (%)
* Statistically significant association by residual test adjusted to 5% significance
The level of uVCAM-1 was measured at 1 to 4 visits per patient over a mean course of 12.9 months period (range 6.5-21.5) with an average time (SD) between the visits of 4.3 ± 1.0 months, for a total of 233 visits. There were 15 missed visits: two patients contributed only one visit due to pregnancy and death from infection; the other losses occurred because the patients did not return for evaluation within the expected period.
3.2 uVCAM-1 differentiates between active and inactive lupus nephritis
The uVCAM-1 levels were higher in patients with active LN at the inclusion compared to inactive patients (Median=125.3 ng/mgCr; 25th-75th percentiles: 46.9-249.6 vs. 28.7 ng/mgCr; 25th-75th percentiles: 8.8 – 47.8, P<0.001).
During follow-up, uVCAM-1 levels were higher in patients with active LN compared to those with partial or complete renal response (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between patients with partial and complete renal response (P=0.132), but there was a tendency to lower levels of uVCAM-1 in the complete response (figure 1).
ROC analyses were performed to define the best cutoff of uVCAM-1 and traditional biomarkers to differentiate between active and inactive LN. The AUCs and best cutoff values are shown as well as the combinations of these biomarkers (table 2).
Table 2. Combination of conventional biomarkers and urinary soluble VCAM-1 for the diagnosis of active LN*
Analyte
|
AUC (CI 95%)
|
Cutoff
|
Sensitivity
|
Specificity
|
Accuracy
|
VCAM-1
|
0.84 (0.75-0.94)
|
> 47.2
|
74.2%
|
74.2%
|
74.2%
|
C3
|
0.79 (0.68-0.91)
|
< 93
|
74.2%
|
67.7%
|
71.0%
|
C4
|
0.84 (0.74-0.94)
|
< 16
|
87.1%
|
74.2%
|
77.4%
|
Anti-dsDNA
|
0.65 (0.51-0.79)
|
> 1/10
|
51.6%
|
74.2%
|
64.5%
|
UPCR
|
0.97 (0.93-1.00)
|
>0.55
|
100%
|
93,5%
|
96,8%
|
C3 + C4
|
-
|
-
|
87.1%
|
67.7%
|
77.4%
|
C3 + C4 + Anti-dsDNA
|
-
|
-
|
90.3%
|
61.3%
|
75.8%
|
VCAM-1 + C3
|
-
|
-
|
93.5%
|
51.6%
|
72.6%
|
VCAM-1 + C4
|
-
|
-
|
96.8%
|
58.1%
|
77.4%
|
VCAM-1 + Anti-dsDNA
|
-
|
-
|
83.9%
|
54.8%
|
69.4%
|
VCAM-1 + C3 + C4
|
-
|
-
|
96.8%
|
51.6%
|
74.2%
|
VCAM-1 + C3 + C4 + Anti-dsDNA
|
-
|
-
|
96.8%
|
45.2%
|
71.0%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AUC: area under the curve; C: complement; CI: confidence interval; UPCR: urine protein-creatinine ratio; VCAM-1: vascular cell adhesion molecule-1
*Active LN was defined as: proteinuria (UPCR ≥0.5) plus active urinary sediment (hematuria, leukocyturia or cellular hematic/granular casts)
A significant correlation was found between uVCAM-1 levels and SLEDAI-2k, renal SLEDAI, renal SLAM-R, renal SLICC, C3, C4, anti-dsDNA, UPCR and hematuria (table 3).
Table 3. Correlations between urinary soluble VCAM-1 and other LN biomarkers/disease scores
LN biomarkers/disease scores
|
VCAM-1
|
|
SLEDAI-2k
|
0.597***
|
SDI
|
0.118
|
Renal SLEDAI
|
0.569***
|
Renal SLAM-R
|
0.470***
|
Renal SLICC
|
0.620***
|
Anti-dsDNA
|
0.342**
|
C3
|
-0.344**
|
C4
|
-0.382**
|
Serum creatinine
|
0.108
|
eGFR
|
-0.072
|
UPCR
|
0.654***
|
Leukocyturia
|
0.187
|
Hematuria
|
0.388**
|
|
|
|
Spearman’s correlation coefficients
*P value <0.05; **P value <0.01; ***P value <0.001
C: complement; LN: lupus nephritis; SDI: American College of Rheumatology/Systemic Lupus International Collaborative Clinics SLE Damage Index; SLEDAI: Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index; renal SLAM-R: renal Systemic Lupus Activity Measure revised; renal SLICC: Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics renal activity/response exercise; eGFR: estimated glomerular filtration rate; UPCR: urine protein-creatinine ratio
A Poisson regression model adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, C3 and C4 levels and anti-dsDNA showed a prevalence ratio of 1.97 (95% confidence interval =1.08 to 3.61, P=0.028) for high uVCAM-1 levels, correlated with of active LN.
In patients with active LN at baseline, there was no significant difference in uVCAM-1 levels according to the class of nephritis III, IV, III + V or IV + V and V [35,13, 4 and 10 patients in each group, consecutively] (P=0.207). Similarly, there was no difference between proliferative forms (with or without class V) [52 patients] versus pure membranous nephritis [10 patients] (median=100.4 ng/mgCr; 25th-75th percentiles: 40.5-224.1 vs 191.5 ng/mgCr; 25th-75th percentiles: 66.5-288.4; P=0.295).
3.3 uVCAM-1 is a marker of disease activity and treatment response
We analyzed the levels of uVCAM-1 when the patient changed his LN status (inactive-active or active-inactive) and when it remained the same (inactive-inactive) regarding the last study visit (mean four months ago). During the observation period, only one patient remained with active nephritis at all visits in spite of the treatment (data not showed) and two patients contributed only with one visit. The levels of uVCAM-1 dropped significantly in patients with active LN who went into remission (inactive) and significantly increased in patients who went into activity. In patients who remained inactive, there was no significant change (figure 2). Table 4 shows the mean, standard error and 95% confidence interval of the uVCAM-1a levels shown in figure 2.
Table 4. Mean, standard error and 95% CI of uVCAM-1 showed in figure 2
Group
|
Time
(months)
|
Mean
|
SE
|
95% CI
|
Lower
|
Bounder
|
Inactive-Inactive
|
- 4
|
35.9
|
9.12
|
21.9
|
59.1
|
0
|
33.5
|
7.72
|
21.3
|
56.7
|
Active-Inactive
|
- 4
|
128.0
|
15.8
|
100.6
|
162.9
|
0
|
87.8
|
15.7
|
61.9
|
124.6
|
Inactive-Active
|
-4
|
52.9
|
17.7
|
27.5
|
101.8
|
0
|
75.1
|
12.2
|
54.5
|
103.3
|
CI: confidence interval; SE: standard error; uVCAM-1: urinary vascular cell adhesion molecule-1
During the follow-up, seven patients who entered the study with inactive LN presented reactivation of nephritis. Urine samples from before, during and after the flare were prospectively collected. uVCAM-1 levels peaked during the flare (figure 3). Statistically significant difference was found between uVCAM-1 levels at the flare as compared to 8 months before the flare time point (P=0.003). Figure 3 also shows the traditional nephritis biomarkers (C3, C4, anti-dsDNA and UPCR) at the same time point in relation to the flare, for the same seven patients.