Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000: Key Indexing Terms
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000: Key Indexing Terms
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000: Key Indexing Terms
ABSTRACT. Objective. To describe the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K),
a modification of SLEDAI to reflect persistent, active disease in those descriptors that had previously
only considered new or recurrent occurrences, and to validate SLEDAI-2K against the original SLEDAI
as a predictor for mortality and as a measure of global disease activity in the clinic.
Methods. All visits in our cohort of 960 patients were used to correlate SLEDAI-2K against the origi-
nal SLEDAI, and the whole cohort was used to validate SLEDAI-2K as a predictor of mortality. A sub-
group of 212 patients with SLE followed at the Lupus Clinic who had 5 regular visits, 3–6 months apart,
in 1991-93 was also included. An uninvolved clinician evaluated each patient record and assigned a
clinical activity level. The SLEDAI score was calculated from the database according to both the orig-
inal and modified definitions.
Results. SLEDAI-2K correlated highly (r = 0.97) with SLEDAI. Both methods for SLEDAI scoring
predicted mortality equally (p = 0.0001), and described similarly the range of disease activity as recog-
nized by the clinician.
Conclusion. SLEDAI-2K, which allows for persistent activity in rash, mucous membranes, alopecia,
and proteinuria, is suitable for use in clinical trials and studies of prognosis in SLE. (J Rheumatol
2002;29:288–91)
The Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index However, this group made other modifications to the SLEDAI
(SLEDAI) was developed and validated as a clinical index for such as adding scleritis and episcleritis as descriptors of active
the measurement of disease activity in SLE and has been used disease with high activity weighting of 8. These manipula-
as a global measure of disease activity in SLE since its intro- tions were made without validation of the new index with the
duction in 19851,2. This index was modeled on clinicians’ same rigorous methodological approach as the derivation of
global judgment. It was developed with a panel of experi- the original index, nor did they validate this index against the
enced rheumatologists with expertise in SLE, using well original SLEDAI.
established group techniques and index development method- Our aims were: (1) to describe SLEDAI 2000 (SLEDAI-
ology. The index has been used successfully by both expert 2K), a modification of SLEDAI to reflect persistent, active dis-
clinicians3 and trainees4, and has been shown to be valuable in ease in those descriptors that had previously only considered
both research and clinical settings5,6. It has also been shown to new or recurrent occurrences; and (2) to validate SLEDAI-2K
be time sensitive7. against the original SLEDAI, (a) as a predictor for mortality
The variables proteinuria, rash, alopecia, and mucous and (b) as a measure of global disease activity in the clinic.
membrane lesions are counted as active in the SLEDAI only
at their first occurrence, or upon recurrence. This was done to MATERIALS AND METHODS
distinguish active from chronic lesions, the latter more likely University of Toronto Lupus Clinic. All visits for patients registered in our
to represent damage. cohort were included to compare the scores calculated for the original
Intuitively, physicians would prefer to use these descriptors SLEDAI and SLEDAI-2K. The whole cohort was also used to validate the
SLEDAI-2K against the original SLEDAI at presentation as a predictor of
as active any time they are present. Indeed the SELENA trial
mortality (Table 1).
group modified the SLEDAI to insure that the descriptors of
Table 1. Characteristics of total cohort.
organ system involvement reflected ongoing disease activity8.
Patients (n) 960
From The University of Toronto Lupus Clinic, Centre for Prognosis Female/male (%) 842 (87.7)/118 (12.3)
Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Alive/dead (%) 792 (82.5)/168 (17.5)
Ontario, Canada. Race: Caucasian/Black/other (%) 778 (81.5)/71 (7.48)/106 (11.0)
D.D. Gladman, MD, FRCPC, Professor of Medicine, University of Age at diagnosis, yrs 32.9 (13.68) [8–83]*
Toronto, Deputy Director; D. Ibañez, MSc, Biostatistician; M.B. Urowitz, Age at first visit, yrs 36.3 (13.60) [10–84]*
MD, FRCPC, Professor of Medicine, University of Toronto, Director, Assessments (n) 18,636
Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases. Mean assessments per patient 19.2 (19.8) [1–106]*
Address reprint requests to Dr. D.D. Gladman, Toronto Western Hospital, Duration of followup, yrs 8.2 (7.4) [0-30.5]*
399 Bathurst Street, MP 1-318, Toronto, Ontario M5T 2S8, Canada.
Submitted May 28, 2001; revision accepted August 30, 2001. *Mean (SD) [range].
Personal non-commercial use only. The Journal of Rheumatology Copyright © 2002. All rights reserved.
288 The Journal of Rheumatology 2002; 29:2
As of December 2000 there were 960 patients registered in the cohort, of and who had 5 consecutive regular visits between 1991 and 1993. A clinician
whom 168 have died. All deaths are recorded according to a standardized who did not know the patients and was blind to their SLEDAI score evaluat-
form in the database, and we have only a 10% lost to followup rate and can ed each patient record and assigned a clinical activity score for each assess-
account for the vast majority of deaths9. We have previously shown that ment according to the following scale: 0 = no activity; 1 = mild activity with
SLEDAI at presentation predicts mortality. The survival analysis was repeat- no therapeutic intervention; 2 = activity, but improvement from previous visit;
ed using the original SLEDAI and SLEDAI-2K in the entire cohort. 3 = persistent activity/refractory to treatment; 4 = flare, defined as one of the
To test the validity of the modified index in describing changes in global following: the introduction of new treatment in the presence of worsening of
disease activity in our clinic, we used patients who attended the clinic in 1992 an already active system or in response to the activation of a new system; an
Personal non-commercial use only. The Journal of Rheumatology Copyright © 2002. All rights reserved.
Gladman, et al: SLEDAI 2000 289
Personal non-commercial use only. The Journal of Rheumatology Copyright © 2002. All rights reserved.
290 The Journal of Rheumatology 2002; 29:2
0–No activity 465 (43.9) 1.95 (2.29) [2] 2.23 (2.34) [2] 0.066
1–Mild activity 231 (21.8) 3.80 (2.85) [4] 4.42 (2.93) [4] 0.023
2–Activity, but
improvement 87 (8.2) 6.74 (3.93) [6] 7.45 (3.93) [8] 0.233
3–Persistent activity 165 (15.6) 7.78 (4.05) [8] 8.80 (4.05) [8] 0.023
4–Flare 112 (10.6) 9.37 (6.13) [9] 9.76 (6.15) [9] 0.632
Personal non-commercial use only. The Journal of Rheumatology Copyright © 2002. All rights reserved.
Gladman, et al: SLEDAI 2000 291