Abstract 254 Table 1

Comparison of disease activity, damage score and mortality between damage clusters

VariablesCluster 1 (n=824)Cluster 2 (n=195)Cluster 3 (n=111) P value
Age at SLE diagnosis 27.87±10.60 27.21±11.31 25.56±10.36 0.399
Female sex 774 (93.9)a 169 (86.7)c 102 (91.9) 0.002
Disease duration at last follow up, years 12.07±5.42ab 14.96±6.05c 14.06±5.84c <0.001
Weighted GRS 1.56±1.09 1.78±1.00 1.43±1.12 0.036$
Adjusted Mean SLEDAI 3.96±2.21 5.40±2.94 4.20±2.94 <0.001
Mortality 20 (2.4) 11 (5.6) 16 (14.4) <0.001
Damage involvement (at last follow-up)
Ocular 0 113 (58.0) 16 (14.4) <0.001
Neuropsychiatric 0 4 (2.1) 111 (100.0) <0.001
Renal 0 108 (55.4) 11 (9.9) <0.001
Pulmonary 60 (7.3) 20 (10.3) 19 (17.1) 0.002
Cardiovascular 26 (3.2) 13 (6.7) 3 (2.7) 0.055
Peripheral vascular 27 (3.3) 8 (4.1) 5 (4.5) 0.722
Gastrointestinal 8 (1.0) 3 (1.5) 3 (2.7) 0.024
Musculoskeletal 132 (16.0) 57 (29.2) 39 (35.1) <0.001
Skin 31 (3.8) 10 (5.1) 7 (6.3) 0.367
Premature gonadal failure 0 5 (2.6) 4 (3.6) <0.001
Diabetes Mellitus 22 (2.7) 16 (8.2) 6 (5.4) 0.001
Malignancy 47 (5.7) 7 (3.6) 3 (2.7) 0.237
  • aSignificantly different from cluster 2.

  • bSignificantly different from cluster 3.

  • cSignificantly different from cluster 1.

  • *Continuous variables were compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and nominal variable (mortality) was compares using chi-square test.

  • $Tukey’s test showed there was no statistically significant difference between clusters.