Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 84713

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionAcknowledgementReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2024 | Month : March | Volume : 18 | Issue : 3 | Page : EC36 - EC40 Full Version

Clinicopathological Assessment of Modified Activity and Chronicity Indices in Lupus Nephritis at a Teaching Hospital in Mysore, India


Published: March 1, 2024 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2024/65158.19201
Pallavi Deka, Suchitha Satish, Manoj Chandrashekar, Manjunath Sanjeev Shetty

1. Demonstrator, Department of Pathology, Tezpur Medical College and Hospital, Tezpur, Assam, India. 2. Professor, Department of Pathology, JSS Medical College, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Mysore, Karnataka, India. 3. Assistant Professor, Department of Nephrology, JSS Medical College, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Mysore, Karnataka, India. 4. Professor, Department of Nephrology, JSS Medical College, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Mysore, Karnataka, India.

Correspondence Address :
Suchitha Satish,
892, 1st Cross, I Block, Ramakrishna Nagar, Near Nireekshe School, Mysore-570022, Karnataka, India.
E-mail: satishsuchitha@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: In 20-49% of patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), Lupus Nephritis (LN) is a major complication and, therefore, an important prognostic determinant of SLE. The Activity and Chronicity Indices (AI and CI), used as adjuncts to the histological classification of LN, assist in identifying patients who will benefit from immuno-suppressive therapy.

Aim: To investigate the correlation of AI and CI in patients with biopsy-proven LN with clinical and laboratory findings.

Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted as the Departments of Pathology and Nephrology, JSS Medical College and Hospital Mysore, India from January 2023 to March 2023, by retrieving the data of 56 patients with biopsy proven LN. AI and CI were assessed and classified. Data from multiple groups were compared using Pearson’s chi-square test, and between two groups using independent samples t-test with Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21.0. Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r-value) was calculated using Microsoft excel 2021.

Results: Renal biopsies from 56 cases with biopsy-proven LN were studied, with a mean age of 28±10.30 years and a M:F ratio of 1:10.2. Of the 56 biopsies studied, active lesions were seen in 47 (83.9%) and chronic lesions in 21 (37.5%). AI showed statistical significance with hypertension (p=0.049) and haematuria (p=0.005), with proteinuria (p=0.001, r=0.72), serum creatinine (p=0.037, r=0.62), and blood urea nitrogen (p=0.003, r=0.55) showing a statistically significant positive correlation. CI showed a statistically significant positive correlation with proteinuria (p=0.028, r=0.039) and serum creatinine (p=0.010, r=0.58). Both AI and CI showed statistical significance with the degree of renal insufficiency, with CI (p=0.008) displaying a stronger statistical significance than AI (p=0.012).

Conclusion: In conclusion, the management and prognosis of patients with suspected LN are greatly facilitated through information obtained from renal biopsy, especially AI and CI, which are useful guides to treatment. It is important to study renal biopsy for the constellation of features in LN for better patient management.

Keywords

Activity index, Renal biopsy, Systemic lupus erythematosus

The most common manifestation of SLE is LN, which is a major cause of morbidity. It occurs in about 20-49% of patients in the course of their disease (1). The clinical presentation can be diverse, varying from subclinical disease to an aggressive form that rapidly progresses to End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) within 15 years in about 10-30% of the patients (1),(2). LN can involve any renal compartment. Therefore, renal biopsies in patients with SLE provide a direct assessment of renal involvement and establish the site of injury (2),(3). It is critical in determining the class of LN, the extent of histopathological chronicity and activity, and the long-term prognosis of the disease (3),(4). The nature and severity of the clinical features of LN and the underlying histological severity do not always correlate. However, poor renal survival has been associated with certain histological and clinical parameters (2). Renal biopsy, therefore, serves as a guide for therapy (5).

Pirani CL et al., were the first to introduce the concept of active and chronic lesions, which was further modified by Morel ML et al., (6),(7). The widely used National Institute of Health (NIH)-AI and CI were based on the paper by Austin III HA and have been used to report the activity and chronicity in a semi-quantitative way (8). Recently, a modified NIH activity and chronicity scoring system has been proposed by Bajema IM et al., which does not restrict AI and CI to classes III and IV as done previously (5). Also, it has been recommended that in AI, the category of “fibrinoid necrosis/karyorrhexis” be changed to include only fibrinoid necrosis, which is the significant finding. Since “leucocyte infiltrate” refers to the presence of neutrophils only, and it has now been recommended that karyorrhexis, which represents apoptotic neutrophils, be included in this category, the name and description of this category have been changed to “neutrophil and karyorrhexis”. Further, crescents have been defined as cellular crescents (>75% cells and fibrin, and <25% fibrous matrix), fibrous crescents (>75% fibrous matrix, and <25% cells and fibrin), and fibrocellular crescents (25-75% cells and fibrin, and the remainder fibrous matrix). As previously, it wasn’t clear when fibrocellular crescents were to be included in the “cellular crescents” category of AI, it has been recommended that crescents meeting the description of fibrocellular crescents be included in the category of “cellular/fibrocellular crescents”. Also, the term endocapillary proliferation in the AI has been replaced by “endocapillary hypercellularity”.

The original description referred to only the presence of monocytes with respect to inflammatory cells in this category. Further studies are needed in this reference, and it has been recommended that neutrophils be scored as a separate entity for now (5). Activity scores predict decreased survival and the responsiveness to immuno-suppressive therapy, while chronicity scores reflect glomerular sclerosis, an indicator of diminishing renal function. The activity and chronicity scores thus assist in identifying patients who will benefit from immunosuppressive therapy or might require renal replacement therapy (9).

These scores are used as an adjunct to the International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society (ISN/RPS) classification of LN by many practicing pathologists, although the reproducibility and the predictability of these indices have been questioned by some (9). Many clinicopathological studies of classes of LN have been done in the past (9),(10). Our previous study found that classes of LN showed statistical significance with proteinuria and haematuria, and no statistical significance was seen between classes of LN and anaemia, serum creatinine, or blood urea nitrogen (10). However, very few studies have been done for AI and CI (11),(12). It is therefore appropriate to document the association of AI and CI with clinical and laboratory findings in SLE patients using the revised “2018 recommendations for the ISN/RPS classification of LN” (5). The objective of this study was to correlate AI and CI on renal biopsies with clinical and laboratory findings in patients with LN.

Material and Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted as the Departments of Pathology and Nephrology, JSS Medical College and Hospital Mysore, India from January 2023 to March 2023. Ethical clearance from the Institutional Ethical Committee was obtained vide JSSMC/IEC/0372023/19 NCT/2023-24.

Inclusion criteria: Patients with biopsy-proven LN were included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: The core biopsies having fewer than six glomeruli on light microscopic examination were excluded.

Procedure

Two cores of renal tissue were obtained from each of the fifty-six SLE patients undergoing renal biopsy, which were studied by Light Microscopy (LM) and Immunofluorescence (IF) studies. Tissues for LM were collected in 10% formalin and were studied using Haematoxylin and Eosin (H&E), Periodic Acid Schiff (PAS), Masson’s trichrome (MTS), and Jones Methanamine Silver(JMS) stains. Tissues for IF were collected in Phosphate-Buffered Saline (PBS), stained with Fluorescein Isothiocyanate (FITC) labelled anti-human antibodies of IgG, IgA, IgM, C3, C1q, kappa, and lambda light chains (DACO), and studied under an immunofluorescent microscope-Olympus BX 41.

The biopsies were divided into classes I to VI according to the “2018 recommendations for the ISN/RPS classification of LN” (5), and AI and CI were assessed according to “Revision of classification of LN” by Bajema IM et al., (Table/Fig 1),(Table/Fig 2),(Table/Fig 3) (5). For the purpose of this study, AI was divided into four groups: 1) AI of 0-5; 2) AI of 6-10; 3) AI of 11-15; and 4) AI of ≥16. Similarly, CI was divided into three groups: 1) CI of 0-3; 2) CI of 4-8; 3) CI of 9-12 (13).

Statistical Analysis

The statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS version 21.0. All continuous variables were expressed as mean±SD, and categorical variables were presented as percentages. Comparison of data from multiple groups was made by Pearson’s chi-square test and between two groups by independent samples t-test. The p-values of less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r-value) was also calculated.

Results

A total of 56 patients with biopsy-proven LN were studied, with ages ranging from nine years to 55 years with a mean of 28.05±10.30 years. The maximum number of cases, 28 (50%) of the 56 patients, were found to be in the range of 21-30 years. Fifty-one out of 56 patients (91.1%) were females and five patients (8.9%) were males, with a male-to-female ratio of 1:10.2.

The most common clinical features were hypertension in 23 (52.3%) patients, followed by oedema in 26 (46.4%) patients. Skin lesions, malar rash, oral ulcers, joint pains suggestive of arthritis, and pregnancy-related complications in the form of a history of recurrent pregnancy loss and Anti-Phospholipid Antibody (APLA) syndrome were also seen. A neurological disorder in the form of optic neuritis was noted in one patient. Hypertension showed statistical significance with AI (p=0.049) and no statistical significance with CI (p=0.10). Haematuria showed a strong statistical significance with AI (p=0.005) but not with CI (p=0.635).

Proteinuria (p=0.001, r=0.72), serum creatinine (p=0.037, r=0.62), and Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) (p=0.003, r=0.55) showed a significant statistical correlation with AI, while haemoglobin levels (p=0.719, r=-0.07) did not show any statistically significant correlation with AI (Table/Fig 4).

Proteinuria (p=0.028, r=0.39) and serum creatinine (p=0.010, r=0.58) also showed a significant statistical correlation with CI. BUN (p=0.143, r=0.024) and haemoglobin (p=0.372, r=-0.15) did not show any statistically significant correlation with CI in this study (Table/Fig 5).

Renal function was categorised by the level of serum creatinine (mg/dL) as follows: normal to mild renal insufficiency (<1.5), moderate renal insufficiency (1.5-3.0), and advanced renal insufficiency (≥3.0). Both AI (p=0.012) and CI (p=0.008) showed statistical significance with the degree of renal insufficiency, with CI showing a stronger statistical significance than AI (Table/Fig 4),(Table/Fig 5).

The distribution of mean AI and CI according to the classes of LN is shown in (Table/Fig 6). Of the 56 biopsies studied, active lesions were seen in 47 (83.9%) of the biopsies. The mean AI in this study was 5.48±4.138. Chronic lesions were seen in 21 (37.5%) of the biopsies studied with a mean of 1.52±2.374. The distribution of the various active and chronic lesions seen in this study is listed in (Table/Fig 7). Regardless of the presence of tubular atrophy and interstitial fibrosis, Tubulo-interstitial Inflammation (TII) was seen in 36 (64.3%) of the biopsies. Statistical significance was seen between serum creatinine and the presence of tubular atrophy and interstitial fibrosis (p=0.025) as well as TII (p=0.002). Proteinuria also showed statistical significance with TII (p=0.003) but not with tubular atrophy (p=0.078) and interstitial fibrosis (p=0.078).

Discussion

Renal involvement is common in SLE and often determines the course of the disease. Most of these patients present with Class-IV of the revised ISN/RPS classification of LN. Up to 40% of the patients with diffuse proliferative glomerulonephritis die or lose their renal function within five years after diagnosis (14).

In the past, patients often presented with renal failure, massive proteinuria, and histological signs of chronicity. More has been learned in the recent years about the disease, its risk factors such as hypertension, nephrotic syndrome, and APLA syndrome, as well as its severity and characteristic clinical signs. With a better understanding and the prompt decision to investigate, there has been a reduction in the interval between the first detection of proteinuria and kidney biopsy. This has led to a significant decrease in proteinuria, renal failure, and histological signs of chronicity at the time of diagnosis. Over the past decade, advances in the diagnosis and management of LN have considerably improved prognosis and survival in patients with SLE (14),(15).

The most common clinical complication encountered in this study was hypertension, which showed a significant statistical correlation with AI and no correlation with CI. It has been seen that in proliferative LN, haemodynamic changes in the kidney, such as an increase in renal vascular resistance which leads to a decrease in renal blood flow, are aggravated by the loss of nephrons and progressive glomerular damage. Inflammatory cytokines contribute to the insult and exacerbate the increase in renal vascular resistance and reduced Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR). These changes can worsen existing hypertension or cause new-onset hypertension, further exacerbating haemodynamic changes in the kidney (16). In this study, the majority of Class-IV patients had hypertension, which is consistent with previous studies (2),(17). These findings emphasise the need to effectively treat this risk factor.

Studies have shown that proteinuria is one of the dominant signs of LN and is considered a characteristic feature in patients with LN (17),(18). In this study, there was a statistically significant correlation of proteinuria with CI (p=0.028, r=0.39), which showed a stronger statistical correlation with AI (p=0.001, r=0.72). This is explained by the deposition of immune complexes and endocapillary hypercellularity, which are part of the AI, and are implicated in causing a disruption to the filtration barrier (19).

However, in some patients with LN, proteinuria develops in the absence of immune complex depositions. It appears that extensive podocyte effacement as a result of podocyte injury causes the development of proteinuria and nephrotic syndrome in these patients (19). These findings support the hypothesis that the severity of lesions in LN does not always correlate with the degree of proteinuria (20), which was reflected in the present study as proteinuria showed a weak statistical correlation with classes of LN.

Proteinuria showed statistical significance with TII (p=0.003), which is one of the parameters of AI scoring, but proteinuria did not show any statistical significance with tubular atrophy (p=0.078) and interstitial fibrosis (p=0.078), which are parameters of CI scoring. The strong statistical significance of proteinuria with TII is consistent with previous studies (21),(22), which have suggested that TII may be largely secondary to damage caused to the tubules and the interstitium by glomerular proteinuria rather than deposition of immune complexes alone (21),(22).

Haematuria showed statistical significance with AI (p=0.005) but not with CI (p=0.635) in this study. Haematuria in LN occurs due to damage to the Glomerular Basement Membrane (GBM) and is associated with high AI. In this study, haematuria was seen predominantly in patients with Class-III and Class-IV LN, which is in accordance with previous studies that have found it to be most commonly present in patients having proliferative LN (23),(24),(25).

It has been observed that elevated serum creatinine levels at the time of renal biopsy are indicative of a poor clinical outcome and are associated with the rapid development of renal failure (9),(14). Previous studies have shown that serum creatinine has a significant positive correlation with high AI and CI (20),(26), which is supported by the present study.

As previously discussed, cytokine and chemokine production resulting from the inflammatory process in LN leads to the chemotaxis of leucocytes to the glomeruli. This causes further injury and loss of nephrons, atrophy, and reduction of GFR, thereby exacerbating hypertension and worsening renal outcomes (16),(27),(28). This explains the strong statistical significance of the degree of renal insufficiency with AI (p=0.012) and CI (p=0.008) in this study, which is consistent with previous studies (8),(13),(29),(30).

It has been noted that regardless of the presence of tubular atrophy or fibrosis, TII is associated with worsening renal function at biopsy and with renal survival, and therefore, the severity of interstitial nephritis is an independent prognostic indicator (31). In the present study, serum creatinine, which reflects the degree of renal insufficiency, showed statistical significance with tubular atrophy and interstitial fibrosis (p=0.032) as well as TII p<0.0001.

Because of the above, it has been indicated that the lack of cut-off values in the ISN/RPS classification for reporting of severity of tubulo-interstitial lesions is a drawback that needs to be addressed. In the present NIH classification, interstitial inflammation is a part of AI, and interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy are separate entities in CI. Studies are being done to determine whether interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy should be combined into a single parameter instead of being considered separately. Also, it must be determined whether distinguishing between interstitial inflammations in areas with or without interstitial fibrosis has any clinical value (5).

The mean CI of Class-IV with segmental lesions (2.00±3.464) was found to be higher than that of Class-IV with global lesions (1.18±1.786) in the present study, whereas the mean AI of Class-IV with global lesions (8.50±3.372) was higher than that of Class-IV with segmental lesions (4.67±2.082). This can be explained by the presence of somewhat more sclerotic glomeruli among the cases with segmental proliferation in this study. CI showed marginal statistical significance (p=0.048), whereas AI showed no statistical significance. This is consistent with previous studies (32).

Bajema IM et al., suggest the elimination of the S and G subdivisions of Class-IV due to the lack of reproducibility and poor corroboration of clinical significance, which is consistent with the present study (5).

LN has a highly variable course and outcome which has evoked the need for further investigation of prognostic features that would help identify those at high-risk of renal failure (8). Some studies have shown that AI and modified AI are significant predictors of outcomes, especially at the second biopsy (12),(13),(33), while others have not (34). It has been observed that AI contributes significantly to the information provided by serum creatinine (30),(35),(36), and classes of LN (5). A high AI is often associated with the presence of severely active lesions such as crescents and fibrinoid necrosis, with a tendency for such fulminant lesions to undergo sclerosis with permanent loss of functional renal tissue, which is irreversible. Therefore, patients with higher AI are at a significantly increased risk of ESRD (8), which is consistent with this study, demonstrating a statistically significant correlation (p=0.012) between AI and renal insufficiency. Less severe active lesions, associated with a lower AI, are potentially reversible and are weaker predictors of long-term renal outcomes (8).

In this study, CI (p=0.008) showed a stronger statistical significance with renal insufficiency than AI, which supports many studies that have found CI to be a better indicator of prognosis than AI, especially on repeat biopsies (8),(29),(30). The CI is an indicator of chronic renal damage that is thought to be irreversible and therapeutically unresponsive. Hence, in distinguishing between chronic parenchymal damage and glomerular “activity”, the CI has focused attention on untreatable abnormalities, which explains the reason for poorer prognosis in patients with higher CI (29).

Limitation(s)

The study was a cross-sectional study and is thus limited by the unavailability of follow-up data.

Conclusion

A high AI and/or CI on renal biopsy, the presence of tubulo-interstitial lesions, and vascular lesions have been linked to poor outcomes. Hence, the modified NIH activity and chronicity scoring system adds valuable information to the 2018 changes in the ISN/RPS classification of LN, especially in directing treatment and prognosis. The presence of active lesions, reflected by the AI, would suggest that the disease is more likely to respond to immuno-suppressive therapy, whereas a high CI indicates that the nephritis is less likely to respond to immuno-suppression and is an indicator for renal replacement in the form of dialysis or transplant. Several large studies have been reported from all around the world, although studies involving the Indian population are sparse. Further large cohort long-term studies with a focus on therapeutic outcome and prognosis will be a step forward in providing valuable prognostic data through consistent histopathological lesions and their association with clinical and therapeutic parameters.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to acknowledge the technical staff of the Department of Pathology for their technical assistance in processing the renal biopsies.

References

1.
Cimbaluk D. Pathology, classification and pathogenesis of lupus glomerulonephritis. Diagn Histopathol. 2013;19(5):151-57. Doi: 10.1016/j.mpdhp.2013.02.001. [crossref]
2.
Singh S, Saxena R, Zhou XJ, Ahn C. A retrospective analysis of clinical presentation of lupus nephritis. Am J Med Sci. 2011;342(6):467-73. Doi: 10.1097/maj.0b013e3182199214. [crossref][PubMed]
3.
Cimbaluk D, Naumann A. Renal involvement in systemic lupus erythematosus: Glomerular pathology, classification, and future directions. Diagn Histopathol. 2017;23(3):109-16. Doi: 10.1016/j.mpdhp.2017.03.007.[crossref]
4.
Saxena R, Mahajan T, Mohan C. Lupus nephritis: Current update. Arthritis Res Ther. 2011;13(5):240. Doi: 10.1186/ar3378, [crossref][PubMed]
5.
Bajema IM, Wilhelmus S, Alpers CE, Bruijn JA, Colvin RB, Cook HT, et al. Revision of the International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society classification for lupus nephritis: Clarification of definitions, and modified National Institutes of Health activity and chronicity indices. Kidney Int. 2018;93(4):789-96. Doi: 10.1016/j.kint.2017.11.023. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
Pirani CL, Pollak VE, Schwartz FD. The reproducibility of semiquantitative analyses of renal histology. Nephron. 1964;1(4):230-37. Doi: 10.1159/000179336. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Morel-ML, Mery JP, Droz D, Godin M, Verroust P, Kourilsky O, et al. The course of lupus nephritis: Contribution of serial renal biopsies. Adv Nephrol Necker Hosp. 1976;6:79-118. PMID: 139084.
8.
Austin III HA, Muenz LR, Joyce KM, Antonovych TT, Balow JE. Diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis: Identification of specific pathologic features affecting renal outcome. Kidney Int. 1984;25(4):689-95. Doi: 10.1038/ki.1984.75. [crossref][PubMed]
9.
Halland AM, Bates WD, Tribe RD, Cooper R, Chalton D, Klemp P. Lupus nephritis. Part ll. A clinicopathological correlation and study of outcome. S Afr Med J. 1991;79(3):260-64. PMID: 2011805.
10.
Satish S, Deka P, Shetty MS. A clinico-pathological study of lupus nephritis based on the International Society of Nephrology-Renal Pathology Society 2003 classification system. J Lab Physicians. 2017;9(03):149-55. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Choi SE, Fogo AB, Lim BJ. Histologic evaluation of activity and chronicity of lupus nephritis and its clinical significance. Kidney Res Clin Pract. 2023;42(2):166-73. Doi: 10.23876/j.krcp.22.083. Epub 2023 Mar 15. PMID: 37037479; PMCID: PMC10085727. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Prasanwong T, Laoharojvongsa N, Pongpanich K, Satirapoj B, Charoenpitakchai M. Pathological assessment of activity and chronicity indices in lupus nephritis patients. Asian Arch Path. 2020;2(3):03-13.
13.
Schwartz MM, Bernstein J, Hill GS, Holley K, Phillips EA. Predictive value of renal pathology in diffuse proliferative lupus glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int. 1989;36(5):891-96. Doi: 10.1038/ki.1989.276. [crossref][PubMed]
14.
Nezhad ST, Sepaskhah R. Correlation of clinical and pathological findings in patients with lupus nephritis: A five-year experience in Iran. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2008;19(1):32. PMID: 18087120.
15.
Fiehn C, Hajjar Y, Mueller K, Waldherr R, Ho AD, Andrassy K. Improved clinical outcome of lupus nephritis during the past decade: Importance of early diagnosis and treatment. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62(5):435-39. Doi: 10.1136/ard.62.5.435. [crossref][PubMed]
16.
Ryan MJ. The pathophysiology of hypertension in systemic lupus erythematosus. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physio. 2009;296:R1258-67. Doi: 10.1152/ ajpregu.90864.2008. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Faurschou M, Dreyer L, Kamper AL, Starklint H, Jacobsen S. Long-term mortality and renal outcome in a cohort of 100 patients with lupus nephritis. Arthritis Care Res. 2010;62(6):873-80. Doi: 10.1002/acr.20116. [crossref][PubMed]
18.
Brugos B, Kiss E, Szodoray P, Szegedi G, Zeher M. Retrospective analysis of patients with lupus nephritis: Data from a large clinical immunological center in Hungary. Scand J Immunol. 2006;64(4):433-37. Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3083.2006.01833.x. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
Trivedi S, Zeier M, Reiser J. Role of podocytes in lupus nephritis. Nephrol Dial. Transplant. 2009;24(12):3607-12. Doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfp427. [crossref][PubMed]
20.
Lydia A, Saraswati MH, Dharmeizar D, Saraswati M, Setiati S. Diagnostic determinants of proliferative lupus nephritis based on clinical and laboratory parameters: A diagnostic study. Acta Med Indones. 2018;50(2):110-18. PMID: 29950529.
21.
Hill GS, Delahousse M, Nochy D, Mandet C, Bariéty J. Proteinuria and tubulointerstitial lesions in lupus nephritis. Kidney Int. 2001;60(5):1893-903. Doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.00017.x. [crossref][PubMed]
22.
O’Dell JR, Hays RC, Guggenheim SJ, Steigerwald JC. Tubulointerstitial renal disease in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arch Intern Med. 1985;145(11):1996- 99. Doi: 10.1001/archinte.1985.00360110066018. [crossref][PubMed]
23.
Nived O, Hallengren CS, Alm P, Jönsen A, Sturfelt G, Bengtsson AA. An observational study of outcome in SLE patients with biopsy-verified glomerulonephritis between 1986 and 2004 in a defined area of Southern Sweden: The clinical utility of the ACR renal response criteria and predictors for renal outcome. Scand J Rheumatol. 2013;42(5):383-89. Doi: 10.3109/03009742.2013.799224. [crossref][PubMed]
24.
Shariati-Sarabi Z, Ranjbar A, Monzavi SM, Esmaily H, Farzadnia M, Zeraati AA. Analysis of clinicopathologic correlations in Iranian patients with lupus nephritis. Int J Rheum Dis. 2013;16(6):731-38. Doi: 10.1111/1756-185x.12059. [crossref][PubMed]
25.
Satirapoj B, Tasanavipas P, Supasyndh O. Clinicopathological correlation in asian patients with biopsy-proven lupus nephritis. Int J Nephrol. 2015;2015:857316. Doi: 10.1155/2015/857316. [crossref][PubMed]
26.
Nasri H, Ahmadi A, Baradaran A, Momeni A, Nasri P, Mardani S, et al. Clinicopathological correlations in lupus nephritis; A single center experience. J Nephropathol. 2014;3(3):115-20. Doi: 10.12860/jnp.2014.22.
27.
Allam R, Anders HJ. The role of innate immunity in autoimmune tissue injury. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2008;20(5):538-44. Doi: 10.1097/bor.0b013e3283025ed4. [crossref][PubMed]
28.
Kurts C, Panzer U, Anders HJ, Rees AJ. The immune system and kidney disease: Basic concepts and clinical implications. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2013;13(10):738- 53. Doi:10.1038/nri3523. [crossref][PubMed]
29.
Brunner HI, Bennett MR, Abulaban K, Klein-Gitelman MS, O’Neil KM, Tucker L, et al. Development of a novel renal activity index of lupus nephritis in children and young adults. Arthritis Care Res. 2016;68(7):1003-11. Doi: 10.1002/acr.22762. [crossref][PubMed]
30.
Magil AB, Puterman ML, Ballon HS, Chan V, Lirenman DS, Rae A, et al. Prognostic factors in diffuse proliferative lupus glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int. 1988;34(4):511-17. Doi: 10.1038/ki.1988.211. [crossref][PubMed]
31.
Hsieh C, Chang A, Brandt D, Guttikonda R, Utset TO, Clark MR. Predicting outcomes of lupus nephritis with tubulointerstitial inflammation and scarring. Arthritis Care Res. 2011;63(6):865-74. Doi: 10.1002/acr.20441. [crossref][PubMed]
32.
Hill GS, Delahousse M, Nochy D, Bariaty J. Class IV-S versus Class-IV-G lupus nephritis: Clinical and morphologic differences suggesting different pathogenesis. Kidney Int. 2005;68(5):2288-97. Doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.00688.x. [crossref][PubMed]
33.
Alsuwaida A, Husain S, Alghonaim M, AlOudah N, Alwakeel J, Ullah A, et al. Strategy for second kidney biopsy in patients with lupus nephritis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012;27(4):1472-78. Doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfr517. [crossref][PubMed]
34.
Rush PJ, Baumal R, Shore A, Balfe JW, Schreiber M. Correlation of renal histology with outcome in children with lupus nephritis. Kidney Int. 1986;29(5):1066-71. Doi: 10.1038/ki.1986.108. [crossref][PubMed]
35.
Austin III HA, Muenz LR, Joyce KM, Antonovych TA, Kullick ME, Klippel JH, et al. Prognostic factors in lupus nephritis: Contribution of renal histologic data. Am J Med. 1983;75(3):382-91. Doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(83)90338-8. [crossref][PubMed]
36.
Hachiya A, Karasawa M, Imaizumi T, Kato N, Katsuno T, Ishimoto T, et al. The ISN/RPS 2016 classification predicts renal prognosis in patients with first-onset Class-III/IV lupus nephritis. Scientific Reports. 2021;11(1):01-02. Doi: 10.1038/ s41598-020-78972-1.[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2024/65158.19201

Date of Submission: May 06, 2023
Date of Peer Review: Aug 08, 2023
Date of Acceptance: Dec 30, 2023
Date of Publishing: Mar 01, 2024

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? No
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. No

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: May 10, 2023
• Manual Googling: Sep 19, 2023
• iThenticate Software: Dec 28, 2023 (12%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

EMENDATIONS: 8

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com