Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Sep;49(9):1665-9.
doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keq026. Epub 2010 Feb 24.

Numerical scoring for the BILAG-2004 index

Chee-Seng Yee  1 , Lynne Cresswell, Vernon Farewell, Anisur Rahman, Lee-Suan Teh, Bridget Griffiths, Ian N Bruce, Yasmeen Ahmad, Athiveeraramapandian Prabu, Mohammed Akil, Neil McHugh, David D'Cruz, Munther A Khamashta, David A Isenberg, Caroline Gordon
Affiliations

Numerical scoring for the BILAG-2004 index

Chee-Seng Yee et al. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010 Sep.

Abstract

Objective: To develop an additive numerical scoring scheme for the BILAG-2004 index.

Methods: SLE patients were recruited into this multi-centre cross-sectional study. At every assessment, data were collected on disease activity and therapy. Logistic regression was used to model an increase in therapy, as an indicator of active disease, by the BILAG-2004 index score in the nine systems. As both indicate inactivity, scores of D and E were set to 0 and used as the baseline in the fitted model. The models were used to determine the numerical values for Grades A-C. Different scoring schemes were compared.

Results: There were 1510 assessments from 369 SLE patients. The coding schemes suggested for the Classic BILAG index (A = 12, B = 5, C = 1, D/E = 0 and A = 9, B = 3, C = 1, D/E = 0) did not fit the data well. A coding scheme (A = 12, B = 8, C = 1 and D/E = 0) was recommended, based on analysis results and consistency with the numerical coding scheme of the Classic BILAG index.

Conclusion: A reasonable additive numerical scoring scheme based on treatment decision for the BILAG-2004 index is A = 12, B = 8, C = 1, D = 0 and E = 0.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

F<sc>ig</sc>. 1
Fig. 1
Histograms showing the distribution of the estimated ratio for (A) a Grade A to a Grade B, (B) a Grade A to a Grade C for the BILAG-2004 index.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Isenberg DA, Rahman A, Allen E, et al. BILAG 2004. Development and initial validation of an updated version of the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group’s disease activity index for patients with systemic lupuserythematosus. Rheumatology. 2005;44:902–6. - PubMed
    1. Yee CS, Farewell V, Isenberg DA, et al. Revised British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 index: a reliable tool for assessment of systemic lupus erythematosus activity. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54:3300–5. - PubMed
    1. Yee CS, Farewell V, Isenberg DA, et al. British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 index is valid for assessment of disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;56:4113–9. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yee CS, Farewell V, Isenberg DA, et al. The BILAG-2004 index is sensitive to change for assessment of SLE disease activity. Rheumatology. 2009;48:691–5. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cresswell L, Yee CS, Farewell V, et al. Numerical scoring for the Classic BILAG index. Rheumatology. 2009;48:1548–52. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Substances