Back

Assessment of long-term damage and cardiovascular risk in juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus compared to juvenile dermatomyositis in adulthood

Li, J.; Ali, I.; Mailoo, T.; Doddi, S.; Raj, N.; Palmer, E.; Ciurtin, C.

2026-04-04 rheumatology
10.64898/2026.03.30.26349504 medRxiv
Show abstract

Objectives: Juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus (JSLE) and juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) are systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (RMDs) with childhood-onset associated with increased risk of damage accumulation and cardiovascular disease (CVD) over the life course. Methods: Damage associated with JSLE and JDM has been assessed using validated outcome measures in a longitudinal single-centre cohort study with long-term follow-up, involving data collected both retrospectively and prospectively. Descriptive statistics, sensitivity and regression analyses have been used to evaluate predictors of damage and CVD-risk. Results: We assessed comparatively a JSLE cohort (n=76), with a mean age of 24.3 +/- 4.2 years and a JDM cohort (n=79) with a mean 20.1 +/-5.0 years (p<0.001), with matched duration of follow-up (10.0 +/- 4.2 vs. 11.0 +/- 5.1, respectively, p=0.68). Traditional CVD-risk factors, including hypertension (p=0.02), dyslipidaemia (p=0.0005), and higher total cholesterol (p=0.01) and LDL-cholesterol (p=0.02) levels at the last assessment were higher in JSLE vs. JDM. Over the disease course, 39 (51.3%) AYA with JSLE vs. 47 (59.4%) AYA with JDM accumulated damage (p=0.307), which was independently predicted by the body mass index in both cohorts (p=0.038 and p=0.026, respectively). The PDAY score was the only tool able to stratify AYA based on CVD-risk (median = 5 (4-13) points in JSLE vs. 0 (0-3) points in JDM, p=0.0001), as all the adult CVD-risk scores were very low in both cohorts. Conclusions: This is the first comparative evaluation of JSLE vs. JDM in adulthood, which highlighted increased damage burden and CVD-risk in JSLE that warrants further investigation.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.