Figures
Abstract
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune disease and despite the improvement in the survival in the past few decades, the morbidity due to disease damage remains significant. The objectives of this study were to investigate the disease damagepattern and determine the associated factors of damage in the multi-ethnic Malaysian SLE patients. We consecutively 424SLE patients who attended a consistent follow-up at the National University of Malaysia Medical Centre and Putrajaya Hospital were recruited. Disease damage was assessed using the SLICC/ACR (Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology) Damage Index (SDI) scores. Information on their demographics and disease characteristics were obtained from the clinical record. Univariate analysis was performed and the best model of independent predictors of disease damage was determined by multivariate logistic regression analysis. A total of 182 patients (42.9%) had disease damage (SDI ≥1). A significantly higher number of Indian patients had disease/organ damage and they predominantly developed steroid-induced diabetes mellitus (SDM). Patients with corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis (CIOP) were more likely to be Malayswhile majority of patients who developed malignancy were Chinese (p<0.05). In the univariate and multivariate analyses, disease damage was significantly associated with age, Indian ethnicity, lower mean cumulative C3 level, neuropsychiatry lupus (NPSLE), and antiphospholipid syndrome (APLS). Patients who had ever and early treatment with hydroxychloroquine(HCQ)were less likely to develop disease damage while more patients who had received oral prednisolone ≥1mg/kg daily over 2 weeks had disease damage (p<0.05). In conclusion, there were inter-ethnic differences in the damage pattern and risks among SLE patients.
Citation: Shaharir SS, Hussein H, Rajalingham S, Mohamed Said MS, Abdul Gafor AH, Mohd R, et al. (2016) Damage in the Multiethnic Malaysian Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Cohort: Comparison with Other Cohorts Worldwide. PLoS ONE 11(11): e0166270. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166270
Editor: Masataka Kuwana, JAPAN
Received: August 16, 2016; Accepted: October 25, 2016; Published: November 15, 2016
Copyright: © 2016 Shaharir et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disease which is characterized by multi-system organ inflammation. Despite a remarkable improvement in the management of SLE and improved survival in the past few decades [1], however, the morbidity due to organ damage sequelae remains significant. In view of this, apart from disease activity and quality of life, measurement of disease damage is very important as part of a standard assessment in the management of SLE patients.
The Systemic Lupus Erythematosus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology (SLICC/ACR) damage index for SLE is a well validated tool to assess accumulated damage index (DI) since the onset of the disease [2]. The damage includes non-reversible changes in organs and systems affected by the disease process itself, its therapy, or inter-current illness. The SLICC/ACR damage index is highly reproducible and has been shown to have a good agreement with prospective and retrospective measurement of DI [3]. Disease damage measured with SLICC/ACR damage index is well correlated with mortality [4] and quality of life in patients with SLE [5]. In addition, a different pattern of organ damage such as renal, neuropsychiatry, cardiovascular and pulmonary damage also predicts poorer prognosis and mortality [2, 6].
Disease outcome in SLE is largely influenced by various factors which include genetic, socio-cultural, behavioural and environment [7]. Ethnicity was considered as part of a genetic marker and it is well established that Asian and Non-Caucasian SLE patients generally exhibit more severe lupus and poorer outcome [8–11]. Several studies have evaluated the systemic damage among SLE patients from various ethnic backgrounds. The LUMINA (LUpus in MInorities: NAture vs nurture) cohort revealed a different disease outcome and damage among their Caucasian, Hispanic and African-American SLE patients [8,9] while GLADEL study group demonstrated the influence of the multi-nationality and ethnicity among SLE patients in Latin America towards the disease outcome [12]. However, the data on morbidity and burden of SLE in Asia is still lacking and majority of the studies which addressed this issue were mainly from Orientals or Chinese ethnicity [13–15].
Malaysia is a multi-racial Southeast Asian country which comprises of three major ethnic groups. The largest ethnic composition is Malay, followed by Chinese and Indian. The catchment area of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre (UKMMC) and Putrajaya Hospital comprised of Malays (45.9%), Chinese (43.2%) and Indians (10.3%) [16].
Previous studies which were performed in a tertiary centre in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia have demonstrated that the prevalence of SLE was seen to be higher in Chinese population, followed by Malays. On the other hand, prevalence of SLE among Malaysian Indians are generally low ranging from 7–11.6% only [17,18]. This was in contrast to Rheumatoid Arthritis in which Indians were predominantly affected as the reported prevalence of RA among them were 54.5% [19].
Although SLE was less common among Indians in Malaysia, they have lower survival rate as compared to other ethnicities [17]. However, this study was done almost two decades ago and the trend may have changed, parallel with the progress in the overall lupus management and care. Herein we described the differences in the disease damage pattern among our multi-ethnic SLE cohort and highlighted the factors contributing to irreversible damage among them.
Methodology
This was a cross-sectional study involving SLE patients attending a regular follow up and monitoring at the Rheumatology and Nephrology/SLE Clinic in National University of Malaysia Medical Centre (UKMMC) and Putrajaya Hospital, Malaysia. Consecutive patients with minimum disease duration of 6 months were enrolled from August 2013 until January 2015. All patients fulfilled at least 4 criteria from the American College of Rheumatology Classification Criteria for SLE 1997 [20]or renal biopsy consistent with lupus nephritis (LN). The local ethic committee of National University Malaysia Medical Centre and Ministry of Health, Malaysia have approved the study (FF-2013-337 and NMRR-14-386-19203). Informed written consent was taken from the patients and this procedure has been approved by the ethic committee of National University Malaysia Medical Centre and Ministry of Health Malaysia.
Clinical and laboratory evaluation
Detailed demographic data were collected including age, gender and self-reported ethnicity. Information on the disease characteristics (onset of disease, system involvement in lupus and duration of disease) were obtained from the medical records. The presence of autoantibodies including anti-DsDNA and antiphospholipid antibodies including lupus anticoagulant (LA) and anti cardiolipin (ACL) antibodies were determined from the medical records. The mean cumulative of complement levels (C3 and C4) were determined by calculating the mean of cumulative complement C3 and C4 levels which were done routinely at least 6–12 monthly during their clinical follow-up.
The information on the type of immunosuppressants used at any point of SLE disease course or follow up such as mycophenolic acid (MMF), cyclosporine A (CyA), azathioprine and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) were determined from the clinical records and electronic pharmacy prescriptions. The history of oral prednisolone ≥1mg/kg daily for over two weeks usage and early HCQ use (less than 3months after SLE diagnosis) was obtained from the medical records. Cumulative exposure to glucocorticoids and cyclophosphamide (CYC) was also calculated. For patients with disease damage (SDI ≥1), the cumulative dose of corticosteroids and CYC were calculated until the date of organ damage development was confirmed. Meanwhile, for patients without disease damage, the cumulative corticosteroids and CYC were calculated until the date of the last visit to the clinic.
Disease damage assessment
The presence of disease damage was assessed by the rheumatologists and determined from the medical records. Itwas measured using the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology damage index (SDI) [2]. This index documents cumulative and irreversible damage, irrespective of its cause, in 12 different organ systems. Apart from damage that is resulted from previous disease activity, the SLICC damage index also measures the irreversible damage due to treatment or medications including corticosteroid induced osteoporosis (CIOP), diabetes mellitus and cataracts. To be scored, each manifestation must be present for at least 6 months. The category of damage and the onset of damage from the date of diagnosis were determined from the medical records. As part of a standard follow up monitoring protocol, a regular bone mineral density scan was performed at least every 2 years in patients who were on long term corticosteroids. Diagnosis of osteoporotic fractures were based clinical history of fracture in the typical sites (neck of femur, spine, wrist) with trivial trauma which was associated with low bone mineral density (T score less than -1). Subsequently, patients were dichotomized into the presence and absence of damage based on a cutoff of the SDI score of 1.
Statistical analysis
Features from the different parameters were compared between those with disease damage (SDI ≥1) and without disease damage (SDI = 0) using standard statistical tests. All normally distributed numerical data will be expressed as mean ±SD and continuous variables were analyzed with students T test. Non-normally distributed data will be expressed as median ± Inter-quartile range (IQR) and continuous variables were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U test. Chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Significance was taken as p<0.05. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the odds ratio of the each independent predictors of disease damage in LN. All factors which were found to be significantly associated with disease damage (p< 0.05) during the univariate analysis were included in the regression. All statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS program version 22.0.
Results
A total of 424patients were included into the study. The cohort’s mean age was 38.9 ± 13.5 years with mean disease duration of 9.2 ± 6.8 years. Their mean age at SLEdiagnosis was29.7 ± 13.2 years and majority of them were women (n = 390, 92%). Our cohort consisted of a multi-ethnic populations with predominant Malays (n = 265, 62.5%), followed by Chinese (n = 137, 32.3%), Indians (n = 18, 4.2%), and others (n = 4, 0.9%).
Majority of them had lupus nephritis (n = 272, 64.5%), followed by haematological (n = 264, 62.4%), musculoskeletal (n = 250, 59.4%), mucocutaneous (n = 187, 44.5%), neuropsychiatric lupus (NPSLE) (n = 57 (13.5%) and serositis (n = 45, (10.7%). A total of36 (8.5%) patients had antiphospholipid syndrome (APLS).
Disease Damage among SLE patients
A total of 182 patients (42.9%) had disease damage (SDI ≥1) with a mean of onset of damage was 5.8 ± 4.8 years from the diagnosis of SLE. The median SLICC/ACR damage index (SDI) was 1 (IQR 1).Table 1 illustrates the system domain of disease damage in the lupus cohort.
Although only 4.2% (n = 18) in our cohort was Indians, however, approximately two-third (n = 12/18, 66.7%) of them had disease damage. This proportion was significantly higher as compared to other ethnicities(42.1%), p = 0.04. Indian patients also have a higher mean SLICC score as compared to other ethnicities. Table 2 illustrates the comparisons of the demographics, disease characteristics, treatment, mean SDI scores and disease damage prevalence between the 3 major ethnics in our cohort.
Indian patients predominantly developed steroid-induced Diabetes Mellitus (SDM) as 33.3% of them developed this complication, as compared to only 6.9% from other ethnicities (p = 0.002). Malay ethnicity was associated with corticosteroid induced osteoporosis (CIOP) as 79.2% (n = 19/24) of patient with CIOP were Malays as compared to only 20.8% (n = 5/24) from other ethnicities (p = 0.02). Majority of the osteoporotic fractures occurred at the spinal region (n = 22/24 cases) while two of them had neck of femur fractures. 85.7% (n = 6) of patients who developed malignancy were Chinese while one of them was Malay (14.3%), p = 0.01.
Since our cohort consisted of a minority of Indian ethnicity, comparisons was also made between the two major ethnic groups, ie Malays and Chinese, while excluding the Indian patients. Disease damage prevalence was higher among Malays (n = 121, 45.7%) compared to the Chinese patients (n = 49, 35.8%), p = 0.07. More Malay patients developed CIOP (n = 19,7.2%) compared to the Chinese (n = 4, 2.9%), p = 0.06. Apart from that, pulmonary damage was more also more prevalent among the Malays (n = 16, 6%) as compared to the Chinese patients (n = 3, 2.2%), p = 0.07. Otherwise, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of other disease damage domains between Malays and Chinese patients.
Factors associated with disease damage in SLE
On univariate analyses, a significantly higher proportion of male patients had disease damage (21/34, 61.8%) as compared to female patients (160/390, 41.0%), p = 0.02. On univariate analyses, presence of disease damage (SDI ≥ 1)was significantly associated with older age, longer disease duration, neuropsychiatry lupus (NPSLE), APLS, positive LA,use oral prednisolone more than 1mg/kg daily over more than 2 weeks, and lower cumulative C3 levels (p<0.05).
Patients who were treated with hydroxychloroquine and received early hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) treatment (started less than 3 months after diagnosis)were less likely to develop disease damage (p<0.01). On the other hand, significantly more patients who had ever received oral prednisolone of ≥1mg/kg daily over 2 weeks had disease damage. Table 3 summarized the demographic and disease characteristics between SLE patients with and without disease damage.
On multivariable logistic regression analysis, after all significant factors (p<0.05) were included in the analysis, the independent predictors of disease damage among our SLE cohort were age, Indian ethnicity, lower mean cumulative complement C3 level, NPSLE and APLS(all p<0.05). On the other hand, patients who had ever received HCQ and early HCQ treatment were protected against developing disease damage (Table 4).
Discussion
Information on lupus disease progression and damage from South Asian region remains limited and this study is attempted to fill the knowledge gap in this regard. We have presented the prevalence, type and the risk factors of damage in a large multi-ethnic SLE cohort from two Rheumatology centres in Malaysia. Although a direct comparison may not be accurate due to different population selection, disease characteristics (such as disease duration and severity) and study design, our patients demonstrated a comparatively similar prevalence of damage with the two other Asian Chinese cohort [13,14]. In contrast, Pakistani patients were demonstrated to have a markedly high damage rate at 76% but they had longer disease duration of 15 years [21].
The most important finding in our study was that despite Indians were rarely affected by SLE, they were more likely to develop disease damage as compared to other ethnicities. Indians also predominantly develop steroid-induced diabetes mellitus (SDM) complication and this observation can partly be explained by the genetic predisposition to develop insulin resistance among Indian ethnicity [22, 23]. In fact, the prevalence of DM Type 2 among Indians was almost double that of other ethnicities in Malaysia [24]. Our study also demonstrated that Malays tend to develop CIOP with fracture while majority of patients who developed malignancy were Chinese. The predilection of certain ethnicities to develop different types of disease damage need further larger studies as to whether there is a genetic basis to this unique observation remain largely unknown.
The pattern of organ damage in our cohort was similar to those reported for many of other SLE studies, in which musculoskeletal (MSK) was the commonest system affected [10, 13–15,25–32]. Of note, avascular necrosis (AVN) was the most frequent complication that occurred in the MSK domain followed by corticosteroid induced osteoporosis (CIOP) with fractures. This observation was concordant with the Korean and Hong Kong Chinese lupus cohorts [14, 15]. Interestingly, Australian lupus study also found that AVN was more prevalent among their Asian lupus patients [33]. In contrast, many other European [10,32,34] studies reported a more frequent erosive or deforming arthritis. Further investigations were needed to delineate the possible genetic preponderance or other factors associated with the higher risk of AVN among Asians.
Renal involvement and damage were more common in our lupus cohort with no appreciable ethnic differences. The Korean [15]and South Asian Chinese [13, 14]studies reported a lower prevalence of renal damage which was approximately 8%-14.5% despite having a high prevalence of LN. On the other hand, the Pakistani lupus study showed higher renal damage of 37.5% [21]. The discrepancies can be explained by other various factors such as different treatment protocol and a wide spectrum of different histological renal changes which have influence in determining the outcome of LN [35,36].
The striking disparity in the damage pattern in our study was that the prevalence of SDM (18.3%) was higher in our cohort of patients in contrast to other studies which reported the be less than 10%[9–10,13–15,21,27,28]. The pathogenesis of SDM is complex with the interplay of B-cell dysfunction, genetics and lifestyle influences. In our study, it is possible that the steroid use had actually unmasked the underlying DM type 2 as the high prevalence of SDM among our patients was also parallel with the increasing prevalence of DM type 2 among the general population in Malaysia, which is reported to be 22.9% [37].
Various studies have identified factors associated with damage and our results were in agreement with the previous findings that older age [8,15,26,27,30,38], NPSLE [30,31,39] and APLS [40]were associated with damage. Table 5 further illustrates the prevalence of disease damage and the associated risk factors in other SLE cohorts worldwide.
The use of corticosteroids have been well established to be associated with disease damage [27,29,42,43]. Our study failed to demonstrate any significant association between cumulative and duration of corticosteroid, which were coincide with other studies [32] but the use of high dose oral prednisolone of more than 1mg/kg daily over 2 weeks was a significant predictor of damage. Prednisolone use of more than 30mg daily was also found to be associated with damage in a Cuban lupus cohort [42] while prednisone at the dose of 10-30mg daily was protective against new damage in the LUMINA cohort [9]. However, the use of high dose steroids in our study may also reflect the severity of the disease which also carries higher risk of subsequent damage.
We also demonstrated the early use of HCQ potentially protects against damage and this finding concurred with the Toronto Lupus cohort [44] which showed early protective effect of HCQ among their patients. Antimalarial agents have been used to treat SLE in over 50 years and since 1990s, there is well-established evidence of its various benefits including anti-thrombotic, anti-hyperlipidaemic, prevention of disease flares and damage in lupus [38]. Our previous studies have also found that the use of HCQ was associated with less disease damage in a small lupus nephritis cohort [35] and was associated with less SDM complication [45].
Active disease was an important factor of disease damage in many other previous studies [8, 14, 25]. However, our study did not measure the cumulative disease activity using the standard validated disease activity indices therefore we were unable to demonstrate such association. Nonetheless, low cumulative complement C3 level was demonstrated to be an independent predictor of disease damage and as low C3 is one of the active disease markers, thus this finding further support the notion of high disease activity in predicting damage in SLE. However, since this was a retrospective study and the interval of complement C3 and C4 measurements varied between subjects, therefore, this could lead to bias in our findings.
There were several limitations in our study as some of the other important potential risk factors associated with accrual damage were not evaluated in this study such as cumulative disease activity, flares, and socio-economic status [8, 12]. The health-seeking behaviour and accessibility to the Rheumatology care centres which may also have influence in the outcome of the disease are also not addressed in our study. The retrospective design of our study has a very limited capability to examine the direct causal relationship and the predictors of damage accrual. Notwithstanding these limitations, our study is the first multi-ethnic South Asian lupus cohort which evaluates the association of possible risk factors of damage among patients with SLE. Future prospective studies in large multi-ethnic cohorts should examine this further.
In conclusion, based on this study, the pattern of disease damage in our lupus cohort was slightly unique from other SLE cohorts of other regions with higher percentages of SDM and renal damage observed. The independent factors that were identified to be associated with the disease damage in our SLE patients were age, Indian ethnicity, APLS, NPSLE and mean complement C3 levels. On the other hand, HCQ use and early treatment with HCQ significantly reduces the risk of damage in lupus.
Acknowledgments
This study was approved by the National University of Malaysia [study code number:FF-2013-337] and Ministry of Health Malaysia [study code number: NMRR-14-386-19203]. We thank Dr. HJ Ding for assistance in this study.
Author Contributions
- Conceptualization: SSS.
- Data curation: SSS.
- Formal analysis: SSS.
- Funding acquisition: SSS.
- Investigation: SSS HH SR MSMS AHAG R. Mohd R. Mustafar.
- Methodology: SSS HH.
- Project administration: SSS.
- Resources: SSS.
- Software: SSS.
- Supervision: HH.
- Validation: SSS HH SR MSMS.
- Visualization: SSS.
- Writing – original draft: SSS HH SR.
- Writing – review & editing: SSS HH SR MSMS AHAG R. Mohd R. Mustafar.
References
- 1. Kasitanon N, Magder LS, Petri M (2006) Predictors of survival in systemic lupus erythematosus. Medicine (Baltimore) 85:147–56.
- 2. Gladman D, Ginzler E, Goldsmith C, Fortin P, Liang M, Urowitz M, et al (1996) The development and initial validation of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology damage index for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 39:363–9. pmid:8607884
- 3. Bernatsky S, Clarke A, Abrahamowicz M, Neville C, Karp I, Pineau CA (2005) A comparison of prospective and retrospective evaluations of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index for systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 32:820–3. pmid:15868615
- 4. Gladman DD, Goldsmith CH, Urowitz MB, Bacon P, Fortin P, Ginzler E, et al (2000) The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology (SLICC/ACR) Damage Index for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus International Comparison. J Rheumatol 27:373–6. pmid:10685799
- 5. Mok CC, Ho LY, Cheung MY, Yu KL, To CH (2009) Effect of disease activity and damage on quality of life in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a 2-year prospective study. Scand J Rheumatol 38:121–7. pmid:18991189
- 6. Mok CC, Ho LY, Yu KL, To CH (2013) Relationship between individual organ damage and mortality of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE): A prospective cohort study of 679 patients. Ann Rheum Dis 71:545.
- 7. Alarcon GS (2011) Multiethnic lupus cohorts: what have they taught us? Reumatol Clin 7:3–6. pmid:21794772
- 8. Alarcon GS, McGwin G Jr, Bartolucci AA, Roseman J, Lisse J, Fessler BJ, et al (2001) Systemic lupus erythematosus in three ethnic groups. IX. Differences in damage accrual. Arthritis Rheum 44:2797–806. pmid:11762940
- 9. Toloza SM, Roseman JM, Alarcon GS, McGwin G Jr, Uribe AG, Fessler BJ, et al (2004). Systemic lupus erythematosus in a multiethnic US cohort (LUMINA): XXII. Predictors of time to the occurrence of initial damage. Arthritis Rheum 50:3177–86. pmid:15476246
- 10. Cooper GS, Treadwell EL, St Clair EW, Gilkeson GS, Dooley MA (2007) Sociodemographic associations with early disease damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 57:993–9. pmid:17665464
- 11. Thumboo J, Wee H-L (2006) Systemic lupus erythematosus in Asia: is it more common and more severe? APLAR Journal of Rheumatology 9:320–6.
- 12. Pons-Estel BA, Catoggio LJ, Cardiel MH, Soriano ER, Gentiletti S, Villa AR, et al (2004) The GLADEL multinational Latin American prospective inception cohort of 1,214 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: ethnic and disease heterogeneity among "Hispanics". Medicine (Baltimore) 83:1–17.
- 13. Thumboo J, Feng PH, Soh CH, Boey ML, Thio S, Fong KY (2000). Validation of a Chinese version of the Medical Outcomes Study Family and Marital Functioning Measures in patients with SLE. Lupus 9:702–7. pmid:11199926
- 14. Mok CC, Ho CT, Wong RW, Lau CS (2003) Damage accrual in southern Chinese patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 30:1513–9. pmid:12858450
- 15. Sung YK, Hur NW, Sinskey JL, Park D, Bae SC (2007) Assessment of damage in Korean patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 34:987–91. pmid:17361986
- 16.
Current Population Estimates, Malaysia, 2014–2016. In: Department of Statistics Malaysia, Official Portal [Internet]. Malaysia 2016: [about 2 screens]. Available: https://www.statistics.gov.my/index.php?r=column/cthemeByCat&cat=155&bul_id=OWlxdEVoYlJCS0hUZzJyRUcvZEYxZz09&menu_id=L0pheU43NWJwRWVSZklWdzQ4TlhUUT09
- 17. Wang F, Wang CL, Tan CT, Manivasagar M (1997) Systemic lupus erythematosus in Malaysia: a study of 539 patients and comparison of prevalence and disease expression in different racial and gender groups. Lupus 6:248–53. pmid:9104731
- 18. Jasmin R, Sockalingam S, Cheah T, Goh K (2013) Systemic lupus erythematosus in the multiethnic Malaysian population: disease expression and ethnic differences revisited. Lupus 22:967–71. pmid:23846232
- 19. Shahrir M, Shahdan M, Shahid M, Sulaiman W, Mokhtar AM, Othman M, et al. Multicentre survey of rheumatoid arthritis patients from Ministry of Health Rheumatology Centers in Malaysia. Int J Rheum Dis. 2008;11:287–92
- 20. Hochberg MC (1997) Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 40:1725.
- 21. Rabbani MA, Habib HB, Islam M, Ahmad B, Majid S, Saeed W, et al (2009) Survival analysis and prognostic indicators of systemic lupus erythematosus in Pakistani patients. Lupus 18:848–55. pmid:19578112
- 22. Ramachandran A, Snehalatha C, Kapur A, Vijay V, Mohan V, Das AK, et al (2001) High prevalence of diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance in India: National Urban Diabetes Survey. Diabetologia 44:1094–101. pmid:11596662
- 23. Tan VM, Wu T, Henry CJ, Lee YS (2015) Glycaemic and insulin responses, glycaemic index and insulinaemic index values of rice between three Asian ethnic groups. Br J Nutr 113:1228–36. pmid:25789978
- 24. Letchuman GR, Wan Nazaimoon WM, Wan Mohamad WB, Chandran LR, Tee GH, Jamaiyah H, et al (2010) Prevalence of diabetes in the Malaysian National Health Morbidity Survey III 2006. Med J Malaysia 65:180–6. pmid:21939164
- 25. Rivest C, Lew RA, Welsing PM, Sangha O, Wright EA, Roberts WN, et al (2000). Association between clinical factors, socioeconomic status, and organ damage in recent onset systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 27:680–4. pmid:10743808
- 26. Molad Y, Gorshtein A, Wysenbeek AJ, Guedj D, Majadla R, Weinberger A, et al (2002) Protective effect of hydroxychloroquine in systemic lupus erythematosus. Prospective long-term study of an Israeli cohort. Lupus 11:356–61. pmid:12139373
- 27. Zonana-Nacach A, Camargo-Coronel A, Yanez P, de Lourdes Sanchez M, Jimenez-Balderas FJ, Aceves-Avila J, et al (1998) Measurement of damage in 210 Mexican patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: relationship with disease duration. Lupus 7:119–23. pmid:9580342
- 28. Gladman DD, Urowitz MB, Rahman P, Ibanez D, Tam LS (2003) Accrual of organ damage over time in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 30:1955–9. pmid:12966597
- 29. Estevez Del Toro M, Chico Capote A, Hechavarria R, Jimenez Paneque R, Kokuina E (2010) Damage in cuban patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Relation with disease features. Reumatol Clin 6:11–5.
- 30. Goncalves MJ, Sousa S, Ines LS, Duarte C, Borges J, Silva C, et al (2015) Characterization of damage in Portuguese lupus patients: analysis of a national lupus registry. Lupus 24:256–62. pmid:25318970
- 31. Yee CS, Su L, Toescu V, Hickman R, Situnayake D, Bowman S, et al (2015) Birmingham SLE cohort: outcomes of a large inception cohort followed for up to 21 years. Rheumatology (Oxford) 54:836–43.
- 32. Conti F, Ceccarelli F, Perricone C, Leccese I, Massaro L, Pacucci VA, et al (2016) The chronic damage in systemic lupus erythematosus is driven by flares, glucocorticoids and antiphospholipid antibodies: results from a monocentric cohort. Lupus 25:719–26. pmid:26821965
- 33. Golder V, Connelly K, Staples M, Morand E, Hoi A (2013) Association of Asian ethnicity with disease activity in SLE: an observational study from the Monash Lupus Clinic. Lupus 22:1425–30. pmid:23942610
- 34. Chambers SA, Allen E, Rahman A, Isenberg D (2009) Damage and mortality in a group of British patients with systemic lupus erythematosus followed up for over 10 years. Rheumatology (Oxford) 48:673–5.
- 35. Shaharir S, Ghafor AA, Said MM, Kong N (2014) A descriptive study of the factors associated with damage in Malaysian patients with lupus nephritis. Lupus 23:436–42. pmid:24399814
- 36. Hiramatsu N, Kuroiwa T, Ikeuchi H, Maeshima A, Kaneko Y, Hiromura K, et al (2008) Revised classification of lupus nephritis is valuable in predicting renal outcome with an indication of the proportion of glomeruli affected by chronic lesions. Rheumatology (Oxford) 47:702–7.
- 37. Wan Nazaimoon WM, Md Isa SH, Wan Mohamad WB, Khir AS, Kamaruddin NA, Kamarul IM, et al (2013) Prevalence of diabetes in Malaysia and usefulness of HbA1c as a diagnostic criterion. Diabet Med 30:825–8. pmid:23413941
- 38. Bruce IN, O'Keeffe AG, Farewell V, Hanly JG, Manzi S, Su L, et al (2015) Factors associated with damage accrual in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: results from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) Inception Cohort. Ann Rheum Dis 74:1706–13. pmid:24834926
- 39. Jonsen A, Bengtsson AA, Nived O, Ryberg B, Sturfelt G (2002) Outcome of neuropsychiatric systemic lupus erythematosus within a defined Swedish population: increased morbidity but low mortality. Rheumatology (Oxford) 41:1308–12.
- 40. Ruiz-Irastorza G, Egurbide M, Ugalde J, Aguirre C (2004) High impact of antiphospholipid syndrome on irreversible organ damage and survival of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arch Intern Med 164:77–82. pmid:14718326
- 41. Zonana-Nacach A, Barr SG, Magder LS, Petri M (2000) Damage in systemic lupus erythematosus and its association with corticosteroids. Arthritis Rheum 43:1801–8. pmid:10943870
- 42. Estévez del Toro Miguel CC A, Hechavarría Rafael, Jiménez Paneque Rosa and Kokuina Elena (2010) Damage in Cuban patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.Relation with disease features. Reumatol Clin 6:11–5.
- 43. Petri M, Purvey S, Fang H, Magder LS (2012) Predictors of organ damage in systemic lupus erythematosus: the Hopkins Lupus Cohort. Arthritis Rheum 64:4021–8. pmid:22932985
- 44. Akhavan PS, Su J, Lou W, Gladman DD, Urowitz MB, Fortin PR (2013) The early protective effect of hydroxychloroquine on the risk of cumulative damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 40:831–41. pmid:23588942
- 45. Shaharir SS, Gafor AH, Said MS, Kong NC (2015) Steroid-induced diabetes mellitus in systemic lupus erythematosus patients: analysis from a Malaysian multi-ethnic lupus cohort. Int J Rheum Dis 18:541–7. pmid:25294584