Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Criteria for steroid-sparing ability of interventions in systemic lupus erythematosus: Report of a consensus meeting

  • Matthew H. Liang*
  • , Paul Fortin
  • , Matthias Schneider
  • , Michal Abrahamowicz
  • , Graciela S. Alarcón
  • , James Balow
  • , Elizabeth Benito-Garcia
  • , Heike Bischoff-Ferrari
  • , Stefano Bombardieri
  • , Jill Buyon
  • , Gamal Chehab
  • , Leslie Crofford
  • , Paola De Pablo
  • , John M. Esdaile
  • , Rebecca Fischer-Betz
  • , Dafna Gladman
  • , Gabor Illei
  • , Kent Johnson
  • , Joachim Kalden
  • , Munther Khamashta
  • Takao Koike, Michael Lockshin, Susan Manzi, Joseph McCune, Alain Meyrier, Jamal Mikdashi, Andrew Moore, Marta Mosca, Michelle Petri, Charlotte Phillips, Neal Roberts, Peter Schur, Josef Smolen, E. William St.Clair, Vibeke Strand
*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

In the absence of any biologic rationale or clinical data for establishing a steroid dosage for suppressing the initial inflammatory manifestations of SLE or for tapering the steroid dosage, this exercise provides a model and empirical data with which to standardize one of the most difficult aspects of SLE clinical trials. The committee views this as a work-in-progress. Studies of steroid prescribing in SLE suggest that physician characteristics are more important determinants than patient characteristics (5); our exercise confirms the variation of dosing. Not standardizing the use of steroids in clinical trials threatens both the internal and external validity of such trials (6). For example, the assembly of a homogenous population needs to take into account baseline steroid use. Since steroids affect every relevant outcome in SLE, including mortality, disease activity, pain, and quality of life, equal distribution of steroid use and steroid dosage is crucial. Because most SLE trials are small, stratified randomization should be considered, since the lack of a statistically significant difference may be the result of small sample sizes and a lack of power. Even with comparable study groups at baseline, differential steroid use postrandomization would likely bias the results, and again, statistical adjustment may not be successful. With small numbers of subjects reporting differential steroid use, quantitative conclusions may not be possible. Detailed predefined protocolized steroid use can eliminate this source of bias but may also lead to dropouts or to noncompliance. Using the response criteria developed by the ACR for global or overall disease activity (4), patients who drop out because of the need for increased steroid dosages can be classified as nonresponders. Future work in this area might profitably examine the choice of the initial steroid and tapering regimen on outcomes, the use of this scheme in the separation of therapies in clinical trials, and the determinants of both the dosage and duration of steroids in specific SLE phenotypes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3427-3431
Number of pages5
JournalArthritis and Rheumatism
Volume50
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2004

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Rheumatology
  • Immunology
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Criteria for steroid-sparing ability of interventions in systemic lupus erythematosus: Report of a consensus meeting'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this