Classification of primary antiphospholipid syndrome as systemic lupus erythematosus: Analysis of a cohort of 214 patients

Objectives

To assess the limitations of the SLICC (Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics) classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), in patients with primary antiphospholipid syndrome (PAPS).

Methods

Retrospective study of a cohort of APS patients (Sydney criteria). We successively excluded patients with (1) at least one “SLE-specific” manifestation (biopsy-proven SLE nephropathy, arthritis, cutaneous, or neurologic SLE manifestations, pericarditis, autoimmune haemolytic anaemia, oral and nasal ulcers, non-scarring alopecia, anti-dsDNA, and anti-Sm antibodies), (2) any other autoimmune connective tissue disease, and/or (3) antinuclear antibodies >1/320. Careful file review confirmed PAPS among the remaining patients. We then assessed the number of SLICC criteria each patient met.

Results

Among these 214 APS patients, we excluded 85 with at least one SLE-specific manifestation, 8 with another connective tissue disease, and 21 with antinuclear antibodies >1/320, leaving 100 patients with primary APS. Among them, 28% met at least 4 SLICC classification criteria including one clinical and one immunological criterion (antiphospholipid antibodies, aPL, by definition) and could thus theoretically be classified with SLE. Fourteen had an arterial phenotype (50%), 9 a history of catastrophic APS (32%), and 18 a triple-positive profile for aPL (64%). None had developed SLE during a median follow-up of 12 [6.5–17] years.

Conclusion

Because 28% of our patients with longstanding and strictly defined PAPS could be mistakenly classified as SLE, they were at risk of deleterious therapeutic management. We therefore suggest that any future classification for SLE should specifically require at least one SLE-specific criterion for patients with aPL.