Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Response to: ‘Comment on: ‘Lupus Low Disease Activity State(LLDAS) attainment discriminates responders in a systemic lupus erythematosus trial: post-hocanalysis of the Phase IIb MUSE trial of anifrolumab’ by Eric Morand et al’ by Isenberg
Free
  1. Eric F Morand1,
  2. Teodora Trasieva2,
  3. Anna Berglind2,
  4. Gabor Illei3,
  5. Raj Tummala2
  1. 1 School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
  2. 2 AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden
  3. 3 Clinical Development, Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmunity, MedImmune, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA
  1. Correspondence to Professor Eric F Morand, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton Victoria 3168, Australia; eric.morand{at}monash.edu

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

The authors thank Professor Isenberg1 for pointing out a drafting error on the manuscript reporting the use of the Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS) in the anifrolumab phase II trial data set.2 The British Isles Lupus Assessment Group(BILAG) instrument does indeed document gastrointestinal disease activity, while Systemic Lupus Erythematosis (SLE) Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) does not. This error does not impact on the findings of the published paper, or the intended meaning of the sentence in which this error occurred, which was a discussion of the need for evidence that the physician global assessment adequately captures gastrointestinal activity in SLE.

References

Footnotes

  • Handling editor Josef S Smolen

  • Contributors EFM wrote the text, with approval from the authors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles