Systemic lupus erythematosus and the economic perspective: a systematic literature review and points to consider

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic, disabling, progressive disease, with many associated comorbidities, affecting patients during prime working years resulting in a high economic burden on society, producing high direct, indirect and intangible costs. In this article, our goals are two-fold. First, we review and discuss studies published in the period 2002–2012 concerning costs of SLE and point out gaps in the published literature. Second, we propose further research studies to advance our understanding of the economic perspective in SLE in the current area of new and emerging therapies. The literature evaluating disease costs in SLE remains limited and to date has only included a small number of countries. Despite these limitations, available studies indicate that SLE has significant socio-economic ramifications. Future studies are needed, especially to assess novel biologic therapies which have been made available or currently under investigation for SLE. An interesting approach in these new economic evaluations in SLE may be represented by the selection of the targets of the treatment to include in the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses. Future treat-to-target strategies will likely include evaluation of their pharmacoeconomic implications

Protected Health Information filter (Philter): accurately and securely de-identifying free-text clinical notes.

There is a great and growing need to ascertain what exactly is the state of a patient, in terms of disease progression, actual care practices, pathology, adverse events, and much more, beyond the paucity of data available in structured medical record data. Ascertaining these harder-to-reach data elements is now critical for the accurate phenotyping of complex traits, detection of adverse outcomes, efficacy of off-label drug use, and longitudinal patient surveillance. Clinical notes often contain the most detailed and relevant digital information about individual patients, the nuances of their diseases, the treatment strategies selected by physicians, and the resulting outcomes. However, notes remain largely unused for research because they contain Protected Health Information (PHI), which is synonymous with individually identifying data. Previous clinical note de-identification approaches have been rigid and still too inaccurate to see any substantial real-world use, primarily because they have been trained with too small medical text corpora. To build a new de-identification tool, we created the largest manually annotated clinical note corpus for PHI and develop a customizable open-source de-identification software called Philter ("Protected Health Information filter"). Here we describe the design and evaluation of Philter, and show how it offers substantial real-world improvements over prior methods

Scaling theory of two-dimensional metal-insulator transitions

We discuss the recently discovered two-dimensional metal-insulator transition in zero magnetic field in the light of the scaling theory of localization. We demonstrate that the observed symmetry relating conductivity and resistivity follows directly from the quantum critical behavior associated with such a transition. In addition, we show that very general scaling considerations imply that any disordered two dimensional metal is a perfect metal, but most likely not a Fermi liquid.Comment: 4 pages, no figures, REVTEX. Minor corrections adde

Individualized decision aid for diverse women with lupus nephritis (IDEA-WON): A randomized controlled trial.

BackgroundTreatment decision-making regarding immunosuppressive therapy is challenging for individuals with lupus. We assessed the effectiveness of a decision aid for immunosuppressive therapy in lupus nephritis.Methods and findingsIn a United States multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial (RCT), adult women with lupus nephritis, mostly from racial/ethnic minority backgrounds with low socioeconomic status (SES), seen in in- or outpatient settings, were randomized to an individualized, culturally tailored, computerized decision aid versus American College of Rheumatology (ACR) lupus pamphlet (1:1 ratio), using computer-generated randomization. We hypothesized that the co-primary outcomes of decisional conflict and informed choice regarding immunosuppressive medications would improve more in the decision aid group. Of 301 randomized women, 298 were analyzed; 47% were African-American, 26% Hispanic, and 15% white. Mean age (standard deviation [SD]) was 37 (12) years, 57% had annual income of <$40,000, and 36% had a high school education or less. Compared with the provision of the ACR lupus pamphlet (n = 147), participants randomized to the decision aid (n = 151) had (1) a clinically meaningful and statistically significant reduction in decisional conflict, 21.8 (standard error [SE], 2.5) versus 12.7 (SE, 2.0; p = 0.005) and (2) no difference in informed choice in the main analysis, 41% versus 31% (p = 0.08), but clinically meaningful and statistically significant difference in sensitivity analysis (net values for immunosuppressives positive [in favor] versus negative [against]), 50% versus 35% (p = 0.006). Unresolved decisional conflict was lower in the decision aid versus pamphlet groups, 22% versus 44% (p < 0.001). Significantly more patients in the decision aid versus pamphlet group rated information to be excellent for understanding lupus nephritis (49% versus 33%), risk factors (43% versus 27%), medication options (50% versus 33%; p ≤ 0.003 for all); and the ease of use of materials was higher in the decision aid versus pamphlet groups (51% versus 38%; p = 0.006). Key study limitations were the exclusion of men, short follow-up, and the lack of clinical outcomes, including medication adherence.ConclusionsAn individualized decision aid was more effective than usual care in reducing decisional conflict for choice of immunosuppressive medications in women with lupus nephritis.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT02319525

Global research collaboration in a pandemic-challenges and opportunities: the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review discusses the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) Global Rheumatology Alliance (GRA), the reason for its formation, the challenges with running the registry, and future opportunities for global collaborative research in rheumatology. RECENT FINDINGS: The GRA has been successful in collecting and publishing a large volume of case data on patients with rheumatic disease with COVID-19. In addition, the GRA has published reviews, opinion pieces, and patient-directed summaries of research to further assist in disseminating timely and accurate information about COVID-19 in rheumatic diseases. There have been numerous challenges in the journey but they have been addressed through a collaborative problem-solving approach. SUMMARY: The initial objectives of the GRA to describe the outcomes in patients with rheumatic disease who developed COVID-19 have been achieved. There has been extensive use of the data in the clinic and also to try and understand the mechanisms of disease and opportunities for drug repurposing. There remain numerous important areas for research which the GRA will continue to pursue as the pandemic evolves

Approaches for estimating minimal clinically important differences in systemic lupus erythematosus

A minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is an important concept used to determine whether a medical intervention improves perceived outcomes in patients. Prior to the introduction of the concept in 1989, studies focused primarily on statistical significance. As most recent clinical trials in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have failed to show significant effects, determining a clinically relevant threshold for outcome scores (that is, the MCID) of existing instruments may be critical for conducting and interpreting meaningful clinical trials as well as for facilitating the establishment of treatment recommendations for patients. To that effect, methods to determine the MCID can be divided into two well-defined categories: distribution-based and anchor-based approaches. Distribution-based approaches are based on statistical characteristics of the obtained samples. There are various methods within the distribution-based approach, including the standard error of measurement, the standard deviation, the effect size, the minimal detectable change, the reliable change index, and the standardized response mean. Anchor-based approaches compare the change in a patient-reported outcome to a second, external measure of change (that is, one that is more clearly understood, such as a global assessment), which serves as the anchor. Finally, the Delphi technique can be applied as an adjunct to defining a clinically important difference. Despite an abundance of methods reported in the literature, little work in MCID estimation has been done in the context of SLE. As the MCID can help determine the effect of a given therapy on a patient and add meaning to statistical inferences made in clinical research, we believe there ought to be renewed focus on this area. Here, we provide an update on the use of MCIDs in clinical research, review some of the work done in this area in SLE, and propose an agenda for future research

Economic insecurities and patient-reported outcomes in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in the USA: a cross-sectional analysis of data from the California Lupus Epidemiology Study

Background Social determinants of health are consistently associated with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) outcomes. However, social determinants of health are typically measured with conventional socioeconomic status factors such as income or education. We assessed the association of economic insecurities (ie, food, housing, health care, and financial insecurity) with patient-reported outcomes in a cohort of patients with SLE.Methods In this cross-sectional analysis, data were derived from the California Lupus Epidemiology Study based in the San Francisco Bay Area, CA, USA. Participants were recruited between Feb 25, 2015, and Jan 10, 2018, from rheumatology clinics. Inclusion criteria were Bay Area residency; oral fluency in English, Spanish, Cantonese, or Mandarin; 18 years or older; ability to provide informed consent; and a physician confirmed SLE diagnosis. Food, housing, health care, and financial economic insecurities were assessed by validated screening tools. Patient-reported outcomes were obtained using PROMIS, Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders (known as Neuro-QoL) Cognitive Function short form, Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-8, and General Anxiety Disorder (GAD)-7 instruments. Poverty was defined as household income of 125% or less of the federal poverty limit. Lower education was defined as less than college-graduate education. The association of economic insecurities with patient-reported outcomes was assessed by multivariable linear regression models adjusting for demographics, SLE disease characteristics, and comorbidities. We tested for interactions of insecurities with poverty and education.Findings The final cohort included 252 participants. Mean age was 49·7 (SD 13·4) years, 228 (90%) of 252 were women and 24 (10%) were men. 80 (32%) individuals self-identified as Asian, 26 (10%) as Black, 101 (40%) as White, eight (3%) as mixed race, and 37 (15%) as other race; 59 (23%) self-identified as Hispanic. 135 (54%) individuals had at least one insecurity. Insecurities were highly prevalent, and more common in those with poverty and lower education. Adjusted multivariate analyses revealed that participants with any insecurity had significantly worse scores across all measured patient-reported outcomes. For physical function, no insecurity had an adjusted mean score of 48·9 (95% CI 47·5–50·3) and any insecurity had 45·7 (44·3–47·0; p=0·0017). For pain interference, no insecurity was 52·0 (50·5–53·5) and any insecurity was 54·4 (53·0–55·8; p=0·031). For fatigue, no insecurity was 50·5 (48·8–52·3) and any insecurity was 54·9 (53·3–56·5; p=0·0005). For sleep disturbance, no insecurity was 49·9 (48·3–51·6) and any insecurity was 52·9 (51·4–54·5; p=0·012). For cognitive function, no insecurity was 49·3 (47·7–50·9) and any insecurity was 45·6 (44·1–47·0; p=0·0011). For PHQ-8, no insecurity was 4·4 (3·6–5·1) and any insecurity was 6·1 (5·4–6·8; p=0·0013). For GAD-7, no insecurity was 3·3 (2·6–4·1) and any insecurity was 5·2 (4·5–5·9; p=0·0008). Individuals with more insecurities had worse patientreported outcomes. There were no statistically significant interactions between insecurities and poverty or education. Interpretation Having any economic insecurity was associated with worse outcomes for people with SLE regardless of poverty or education. The findings of this study provide insight into the relationship between economic insecurities and SLE outcomes and underscore the need to assess whether interventions that directly address these insecurities can reduce health disparities in SL