National real-world study examines the impact of immunosuppressive therapy on serositis relapse in lupus.
Background Management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is largely guided by organ involvement. Serositis affects up to 46% of patients, yet its treatment is mainly empirical and extrapolated from other manifestations, and long-term outcome data remain limited. We aimed to evaluate short-term response to anti-inflammatory therapy and to examine associations between immunosuppressive treatments and serositis relapse. Methods We conducted a multicentre retrospective real-world study in patients with SLE with pericarditis and/or pleuritis, identified through a nationwide call for case reporting. Initial response was defined as symptom and sign resolution at early reassessment. Relapse was defined as recurrence requiring treatment intensification ≥3 months after the index flare. Relapse-free survival was described by Kaplan–Meier methods and analysed as recurrent events using a Prentice-Williams-Peterson gap-time Cox model adjusted for prespecified confounders. Results One hundred patients contributed 180 serositis episodes (161 pericarditis, 51 pleuritis, associated in 32 cases) over a mean follow-up of 91 months; 46% experienced ≥1 relapse. Overall, 108/124 (87.1%) of evaluable episodes responded to initial anti-inflammatory therapy, with no significant difference between corticosteroid-based and aspirin/colchicine regimens. Corticosteroid use was not associated with increased relapse risk (46.0% vs 46.2%, p=0.98). Conventional immunosuppressants (methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil) were not associated with reduced relapse risk, whereas belimumab was associated with lower relapse risk (HR=0.34, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.84; p=0.019). Conclusion Lupus-related serositis is frequent and highly relapsing. In this national cohort, belimumab—but not conventional immunosuppressants—was associated with reduced serositis recurrence, supporting its further evaluation in lupus serositis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fels et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: