SAT0350 Does a systemic sclerosis patient's clinical phenotype demonstrate his autoantibody status?. (15th June 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Boonstra, M; Bakker, JA; Ninaber, MK; Marsan, N Ajmone; Huizinga, TW; de, JK Vries-Bouwstra
• Is Part Of: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. Volume 76(2017)Supplement 2
• Page Start: 903
• Page End: 904
• Publication Date: 2017-06-15
• Subjects: Rheumatism -- Periodicals; 616.723005
• DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-eular.6004
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0003-4967

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Although antibody status has shown to improve clinical subsetting in Systemic sclerosis (SSc), it is far from perfect. For optimal clinical subsetting as well as for evaluating the possible pathogenic role of SSc specific antibodies, it is relevant to know to what extent clinical SSc phenotypes are determined by presence of these antibodies. Objectives: To evaluate 1. if clinical relevant subsets of SSc patients are distinguishable using only clinical data, 2. how SSc specific autoantibodies are distributed among these subsets, and 3. whether adding antibody status to cluster analyses improves recognition of SSc subsets. Methods: Using data from SSc patients of the Combined Care In Systemic Sclerosis (CCIS) cohort, Leiden University Medical Center, hierarchical clustering based on Ward Method was performed on the first obtained factor of principal component analysis of 7 organ systems (skin;lung;heart;kidney;muscle;vascular;gastro-intestinal) and time since non-Raynaud phenomenon. Clinical characteristics and prevalence of auto-antibodies within clusters was evaluated. We assessed whether adding autoantibody status as additional factor improved clinical subsetting. Results: Of 407 SSc patients included, 371 patients (91%) fulfilled ACR/EULAR 2013 criteria. Prevalence of anti-centromere (ACA) was 37%, anti-topoisomerase (ATA) 24%, anti-RNAPIII 5%, anti-fibrillarin 4%, anti-Pm/Scl 5%. Cluster analysis identified clinically recognisable clusters of SSc patients based on absence of skin involvement (cluster 1), peripheral vascular involvement (cluster 2), fibrotic complications (cluster 4), and severe vascular complications (pulmonary arterial hypertension [PH], renal crises; cluster 5). Except for cluster 4, where ATA was dominant, in all clusters ACA was the most prevalent auto-antibody. No cluster associated with any of the more rare SSc specific auto-antibodies. Adding of auto-antibodies resulted in increased clinical overlap, with a frequency of PH between 6 – 8% and a frequency of digital ulcers between 24 – 39% in clusters 2, 4 and 5. Conclusions: Based on clinical data alone, relevant subgroups in SSc can be distinguished. Adding antibody status to cluster analyses increases overlap of clinical features between subgroups. These findings show that solely presence of SSc specific antibodies is of limited clinical relevance. For optimal risk stratification more complex serological findings as antibody titers might be additive. Disclosure of Interest: None declared