Next Article in Journal
Simulated Microgravity-Induced Changes in SUMOylation and Protein Expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Previous Article in Journal
Genome-Wide Characterization of the HOX Gene Family: Evolution and Expression Patterns in Donkey
Previous Article in Special Issue
Impact of Smoking, Steroid Use and Immunosuppression on Anti-dsDNA Antibodies in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 27
Issue 1
10.3390/ijms27010037
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Lessons Learnt from the Belimumab Trials in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

by
Leonardo Palazzo
1,
Alexander Tsoi
1,
Dionysis Nikolopoulos
1,* and
Ioannis Parodis
1,2,*
1
Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, Center for Molecular Medicine (CMM), SE-171 76 Stockholm, Sweden
2
Department of Rheumatology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, SE-701 82 Örebro, Sweden
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27(1), 37; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27010037
Submission received: 25 November 2025 / Revised: 14 December 2025 / Accepted: 15 December 2025 / Published: 19 December 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Drug Therapy of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus)
Versions Notes

Abstract

Belimumab, a human monoclonal antibody that works against B-cell activating factor (BAFF), has significantly advanced the management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Beyond the initial Phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that demonstrated efficacy for belimumab as an add-on to non-biological standard therapy (ST) along with a favourable safety profile, more than 50 post hoc analyses of RCT data have provided additional insights into its clinical utility. These analyses have shown uniformly that belimumab increases the likelihood of achieving meaningful reductions in disease activity, sustained low disease activity, and improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes, with more pronounced benefits in serologically active SLE. Studies focusing on organ-specific manifestations revealed that belimumab confers benefits across multiple SLE facets, with prominent effects on musculoskeletal and mucocutaneous symptoms. Along the same lines, post hoc analyses of the BLISS-LN trial demonstrated benefit from belimumab regarding multiple renal outcomes, including reduced renal flare rates, improved glomerular filtration rate, and improved histological findings in repeat kidney biopsies. Long-term extension studies and real-world evidence confirm its durable efficacy and safety, with continued reductions in overall disease activity, glucocorticoid use, and healthcare resource utilisation over several years. By exploring different efficacy endpoints, person-centred outcomes, disease trajectories, and characteristics across organ manifestations, this body of post-marketing evidence has not only enhanced our understanding of belimumab use in SLE but also constitutes a comprehensive framework for future clinical trial design and development of novel therapeutic strategies. The present review summarises key findings of post hoc analyses of RCTs and observational studies of belimumab.

1. Introduction

Belimumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets the B-lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS), a key factor in B cell survival and a contributor to the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) [1]. It was first approved in 2011 for the treatment of moderately to highly active SLE based on the positive outcomes of two pivotal Phase III clinical trials: BLISS-52 [2] and BLISS-76 [3]. These studies demonstrated the efficacy and favourable safety of intravenous (i.v.) belimumab as an add-on therapy to non-biological standard therapy (ST) in patients with active, autoantibody-positive SLE. Following these initial trials, three additional studies (BLISS-NEA [4], EMBRACE [5], and BLISS-SC [6]) were conducted to further evaluate its effectiveness across more diverse patient populations and to assess the efficacy and convenience of the subcutaneous (s.c.) administration. Collectively, these trials enrolled over 3500 patients, making this clinical programme one of the largest and most comprehensive datasets in SLE research. This extensive dataset has not only facilitated post hoc studies to substantiate the clinical efficacy of belimumab but has also provided a valuable resource for broader research efforts in the field beyond belimumab. In 2020, the BLISS-LN study led to an expanded indication for belimumab, with approval of its use as an add-on therapy for active lupus nephritis, signifying a substantial advancement in the management of this severe manifestation of SLE [7].
Beyond the primary efficacy and safety outcomes, over 50 post hoc analyses have been conducted using data from the clinical trials of belimumab. These studies have enhanced our understanding of clinical outcomes in SLE as well as the role of belimumab in the management of the disease, e.g., by exploring ways to optimise the use of outcome measures used in clinical trials [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17], the importance of patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as a part of the disease management [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34], the trajectory and characteristics of specific SLE manifestations [35,36,37,38,39,40,41], indicators of disease flares [42,43,44,45,46,47], and predictors of long-term outcomes [48,49,50]. Herein, we discuss and summarise key findings from post hoc analyses of the main clinical trials of belimumab that have been published to date aiming to offer a clinically oriented synthesis that extends the information available from previous reviews and meta-analyses [51,52,53,54] to support decision-making in routine SLE care.

2. The Belimumab Trials

A summary of the main clinical trials conducted to assess safety and efficacy of belimumab is provided in Table 1.

2.1. First Phase II Trial

The first Phase II randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated belimumab (1, 4, or 10 mg/kg every 4th week) versus placebo in 449 SLE patients over 52 weeks [55]. While the trial did not meet its two co-primary efficacy endpoints (Reduction of the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus: National Assessment version of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SELENA-SLEDAI) [58] at week 24, and time to first flare), it provided insights into the biological activity of belimumab and its therapeutic potential. The drug induced greater reductions in CD20+ B cells and anti-double stranded DNA antibody (anti-dsDNA) levels compared to placebo. Post hoc analyses revealed that serologically active patients (defined as anti-nuclear antibody titre > 1:80 and/or anti-dsDNA level > 30 IU/mL; 71.5% of the study population) showed significantly better responses across multiple measures, including SELENA-SLEDAI, physician’s global assessment (PGA), and 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component summary (PCS) scores [59]. The safety profile of belimumab was comparable to that of the placebo. This study informed the design of subsequent Phase III trials by identifying serologically active patients as the optimal target population [2,3,4,5,6]. Moreover, it informed the generation of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Responder Index (SRI), which is currently one of the most commonly used composite endpoints in Phase III clinical trials [60].

2.2. BLISS-52 and BLISS-76

Following the Phase II trial, two pivotal Phase III trials were conducted. BLISS-52, conducted primarily in Asia, South America, and Eastern Europe, enrolled 867 patients with SLE, and was the first to demonstrate significant efficacy of belimumab in reducing disease activity when added to ST [2]. Participants received belimumab 1 mg/kg (n = 289), 10 mg/kg (n = 290) or placebo (n = 288) plus ST for 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was the SRI-4 [54] at week 52, and a dose-dependent response was noted with 58% of participants receiving belimumab 10 mg/kg achieving SRI-4 response [odds ratio (OR) 1.83; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.30–2.59], compared with 51% of participants receiving belimumab 1 mg/kg (OR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.10–2.19) and 44% of those receiving placebo.
Corroborating the findings of BLISS-52, BLISS-76 [3] was a Phase III, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that randomised 819 patients with active SLE, mainly in North America and Europe. Participants received belimumab 1 mg/kg (n = 271), 10 mg/kg (n = 273) or placebo (n = 275) plus ST over 76 weeks. At week 52, the SRI-4 response frequencies were 43% with belimumab 10 mg/kg and 41% with belimumab 1 mg/kg, compared to 34% with placebo (p = 0.013 for the 10 mg/kg dose and p = 0.089 for the 1 mg/kg dose). While response frequencies remained numerically higher at week 76 with both belimumab doses versus placebo, the differences were not statistically significant [3]. Since the 10 mg/kg dose of belimumab consistently yielded improvements based on SRI-4 rates that were significantly greater than those yielded by placebo across both BLISS-52 and BLISS-76, along with an absence of meaningful differences in overall rates of adverse events between the two doses, the 10 mg/kg dose was approved as the standard treating dose.

2.3. BLISS-NEA

Building on the success of BLISS-52 and BLISS-76, another Phase III trial was conducted to specifically evaluate belimumab in North East Asian patients with SLE (BLISS-NEA) [4]. This randomised, double-blind trial enrolled 677 patients from China, Japan, and South Korea who received i.v. belimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo plus ST. The results reinforced previous findings, with significantly more patients achieving an SRI-4 response at week 52 in the belimumab group versus placebo (54% versus 40%; OR: 1.99; 95% CI: 1.40–2.82). The study also demonstrated a significant reduction in severe flares and corticosteroid-sparing effects with belimumab. The safety profile remained consistent with earlier trials, with no new concerns identified in this population.

2.4. EMBRACE

Building on the need to understand the efficacy of belimumab across diverse populations, the EMBRACE trial, which introduced a modified version of the SRI incorporating the SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 scoring system (SRI-SLEDAI-2K), examined patients of Black African ancestry with SLE [5]. This Phase III/IV randomised, placebo-controlled trial enrolled 448 participants, and while the primary endpoint using this adapted measure at week 52 was not achieved, numerically higher response frequencies were observed in the belimumab 10 mg/kg group compared to placebo (49% versus 42%; OR: 1.40; 95% CI: 0.93–2.11). Notably, patients with high disease activity or renal involvement showed greater benefit. The safety profile remained consistent with previous belimumab trials, with no new concerns identified in this population.

2.5. BLISS-SC

Although earlier trials had established the efficacy of i.v. belimumab at 10 mg/kg, the BLISS-SC trial explored a s.c. route of administration in 839 randomised patients with moderate-to-severe SLE [6]. This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessed weekly s.c. belimumab 200 mg versus placebo over 52 weeks. The trial met its primary endpoint, with 61% of belimumab-treated patients achieving an SRI-4 response at week 52 compared to 48% in the placebo group (OR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.25–2.25). In line with BLISS-NEA [4], this trial showed belimumab benefit in reducing severe flare rates and facilitating steroid tapering. BLISS-SC established s.c. belimumab as an alternative to i.v. administration.

2.6. BLISS-LN

The two-year, randomised, controlled trial of belimumab in lupus nephritis (BLISS-LN) represented a pivotal advance in lupus nephritis (LN) treatment [7]. This Phase III, multinational study randomised 448 patients with active LN to either receive belimumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo alongside ST. At week 104, the primary efficacy renal response was achieved in 43% of patients receiving belimumab compared to 32% of patients receiving placebo. The trial demonstrated significant benefits in reducing renal-related events or death [hazard ratio (HR) 0.51; 95% CI: 0.34–0.77] and established the efficacy of belimumab in active LN, leading to its approval for this indication.

2.7. PLUTO

Following adult efficacy data, belimumab was studied in paediatric SLE. The PLUTO trial investigated i.v. belimumab in children with SLE aged 5–17 years [56]. This Phase II randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study enrolled 93 participants. The primary endpoint using SRI-4 demonstrated a 53% response frequency with belimumab versus 44% with placebo at week 52, although the difference was not significant (OR: 1.49; 95% CI: 0.64–3.46). Safety analysis revealed fewer serious adverse events with belimumab (17% versus 35%), leading to regulatory approval.

2.8. BLISS-BELIEVE

The BLISS-BELIEVE trial [57] explored whether combining the established efficacy of belimumab with rituximab, which alone had failed primary endpoints in clinical trials [61,62], could enhance outcomes in SLE. This Phase III, double-blind study randomised 292 patients to either receive belimumab with rituximab, belimumab with placebo, or belimumab with ST. The primary endpoint of disease control (SLEDAI-2K ≤ 2 without immunosuppressants and glucocorticoids at a dose ≤ 5 mg/day of a prednisone equivalent) at week 52 was achieved in 19% of patients who received the combination of belimumab and rituximab versus 17% receiving belimumab and placebo. Although the combination did not show statistically significant superiority, it demonstrated deeper reductions in B cell counts and improvements in serological markers.

2.9. OBSErve

As belimumab has become increasingly used in clinical practice, several important real-world observational studies have helped corroborate its effectiveness. The OBSErve programme examined outcomes up to 24 months across six countries, with the US study being the largest (n = 501) [63], followed by the studies in Germany (n = 102) [64], Argentina (n = 81) [65], Spain (n = 64) [66], Switzerland (n = 53) [67], and Canada (n = 52) [68]. At the 6-month mark, over 70% of patients achieved ≥20% improvement in physician-assessed disease activity, mean SELENA-SLEDAI scores decreased significantly, and substantial steroid-sparing effects were observed, with mean prednisone doses typically halving [63,64,65,66,67,68]. Importantly, healthcare resource utilisation generally decreased across the OBSErve studies. Additional data from other real-life experiences in Greece [69,70], Sweden [71,72], Italy [73,74,75], Spain [76], and Brazil [77] reported concordant efficacy results on multiple efficacy outcomes, including SLEDAI-2K scores, PGA, flare rates, attainment of low disease activity (LDA) and remission, and patient-reported outcomes. Moreover, these studies helped to identify predictors of treatment response, including shorter disease duration and low or no baseline damage as predictors of better belimumab efficacy [71,75].

3. Results from Post Hoc Analyses of the BLISS Trials

3.1. Efficacy Endpoints and Outcome Measures

3.1.1. SRI-4

The SRI-4 [78] is defined as ≥ 4-point reduction from baseline in the SELENA-SLEDAI score [58], or in the SLEDAI-2K score [79] in later adaptations [5], no worsening in PGA defined as an increase of ≥0.3 points on the SELENA-SLEDAI PGA 0–3 scale [80,81], and no new British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) [82] A organ domain score or 2 new BILAG B organ domain scores compared with baseline at the time of assessment. The SRI-4 was the primary endpoint of the Phase III trials of belimumab in SLE, and was met in all trials, with the exception of EMBRACE [5]. In BLISS-52 [2], BLISS-76 [3], BLISS-NEA [4], and BLISS-SC [6], analysis of the individual components of the SRI-4 demonstrated significant improvements in favour of belimumab for all three parameters, i.e., ≥4-point reduction in SELENA-SLEDAI score, no worsening in PGA, and no new BILAG A or two new BILAG B organ domain scores. These results were confirmed when analysing pooled data from the five Phase III BLISS trials, where belimumab yielded an OR of 1.67 (95% CI: 1.36–2.03) for SRI-4 response at week 52 compared with placebo [13] (Table 2). Another analysis comparing data from the paediatric PLUTO trial [56] and the adult Phase III trials of i.v. belimumab [2,3,4,5] found similar SRI-4 response rates across the two populations, demonstrating consistent efficacy and safety of belimumab in paediatric and adult patients with SLE [11]. SRI-4 response in the BLISS trials has been linked to improvements in different outcomes, including glucocorticoid need, flare rates, and patient-reported fatigue, strengthening its value as a clinically meaningful primary endpoint in SLE [23,25].

3.1.2. BICLA

The BILAG-based Combined Lupus Assessment (BICLA) is another outcome measure, which has been used as a primary and secondary endpoint in several SLE trials, including the anifrolumab trials [83,84,85]. The BICLA definition requires BILAG 2004 improvement in all affected domains at baseline (A domain scores to B, C, or D; and B domain scores to C or D) and no worsening of disease activity in other organ systems (defined as ≥1 new A domain score(s) or ≥2 new B domain scores); no increase in the SLEDAI-2K score from baseline; no numeric increase in the PGA score ≥ 0.3 points from baseline (scale range: 0–3); and no treatment failure [86]. In a recent post hoc analysis of the BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-NEA, BLISS-SC, and EMBRACE SLE populations, significant greater proportions of BICLA responders were seen among belimumab-treated patients compared with placebo recipients, with differences starting from week 8 and being maintained through the 52-week observation period, and with an OR of 1.47 (95% CI: 1.25–1.72) in favour of belimumab over placebo at week 52 [17] (Table 2). BICLA has distinct strengths and limitations. Its criteria require documented improvement in all baseline-affected domains according to the BILAG index [82], ensuring clinically meaningful progress across multiple systems. Unlike SRI-4, BICLA does not require complete resolution of a manifestation; substantial partial improvement based on BILAG scoring is sufficient [78,87]. In comparison, SRI-4 primarily focuses on the SLEDAI score [78] and mandates complete resolution of at least one manifestation in a SLEDAI organ domain, corresponding to an improvement of ≥4 points [78]. These differences in approach have led to divergent response evaluations in clinical trials [88], highlighting their complementary nature as outcome measures.

3.1.3. LLDAS and DORIS Remission

Attainment of LDA and, if possible, remission, is the recommended target of SLE treatment [89,90]. Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS) [91,92] and Definition Of Remission In SLE (DORIS) remission [93,94] are two widely adopted sets of criteria for these targets. LLDAS is defined as a SLEDAI-2K score ≤ 4 with no major organ activity or fever and no new activity in any descriptor since the previous assessment, a PGA score ≤ 1 (scale: 0–3), and concomitant prednisone (or equivalent) dose ≤7.5 mg/day, whereas DORIS remission is more stringent, requiring a clinical SLEDAI-2K score of 0 (SLEDAI-2K score after elimination of the serological descriptors), PGA < 0.5 (scale: 0–3), and prednisone (or equivalent) ≤ 5 mg/day. LLDAS and DORIS remission were not included as efficacy endpoints in the belimumab trials, which were conducted before the introduction of disease control targets. Nevertheless, the relationship between LLDAS and DORIS remission attainment and belimumab treatment was subsequently investigated in a series of post hoc analyses of the BLISS trials [8,9,10,12,13,14] (Table 2). A recent meta-analysis of pooled data from five Phase III trials (BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-NEA, BLISS-SC, EMBRACE) showed significant differences in attainment of DORIS remission (as early as week 28) and LLDAS (as early as week 8) in favour of belimumab, with significantly higher proportions of belimumab-treated compared with placebo-recipients attaining DORIS remission [risk ratio (RR): 1.51; 95% CI 1.15–1.99] and LLDAS (RR: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.44–2.12) at week 52 [14] (Table 2). The same study showed that patients treated with belimumab were significantly more likely to reach sustained (i.e., at ≥2 consecutive visits) and maintained (i.e., through week 52) DORIS remission and LLDAS compared with placebo recipients [14]. Real-world experiences have demonstrated consistent findings, yet higher attainment rates [69,75,95].

3.1.4. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

Patients with SLE experience significant impairments in HRQoL compared with the general population and with patients with other chronic conditions [96]. Post hoc analyses of the BLISS trials have highlighted an association between LDA/remission and greater patient-reported health states [12,31], and between decreased disease activity and HRQoL [26,27]. However, a proportion of patients reports poor HRQoL even in the setting of an adequate response to therapy assessed with physician-centred activity measures [18,20]. The effect of belimumab on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) was assessed in an early post hoc analysis of the BLISS-52 and BLISS-76 trials [24], using the SF-36 [59], Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue [97], and EQ-5D questionnaires [98]. In that study, greater improvements in SF-36 PCS and mental component summary (MCS) were observed at week 52 in patients receiving belimumab compared with placebo [24]. Similarly, improvement in FACIT-Fatigue scores at week 52 were greater in the belimumab arms compared with the placebo arm [24] (Table 2). Consistently, other studies highlighted a lower probability of experiencing poor HRQoL outcomes using the SF-36 and FACIT-Fatigue scales in patients on belimumab plus ST versus patients receiving ST alone [20,21] (Table 2). Another post hoc analysis of the same trials focused on the proportion of patients experiencing EQ-5D full health state (FHS), defined as a response of no problem across all five EQ-5D dimensions (i.e., EQ-5D index score corresponding to the maximum value of 1.000) [19] (Table 2). That study showed higher EQ-5D FHS frequencies among patients receiving the licenced belimumab dose versus patients receiving placebo [19]. A subsequent study found similar results using less stringent EQ-5D values, i.e., EQ-5D index scores above 0.800 [30]. More recently, a machine learning-powered analysis applied to the same dataset identified older age, female sex, non-Asian ancestry, high disease activity, and low urinary protein to creatinine ratio (UPCR) to be associated with a lack of EQ-5D FHS experience at baseline and after the 52-week trial intervention. Importantly, high baseline EQ-5D-3L index scores constituted the strongest predictor of EQ-5D FHS reports at week 52 [33]. Overall, these findings provide support for the integration of PROMs into the global evaluation of patients with SLE, complementing traditional clinical assessments and ensuring that treatment outcomes better reflect the patient’s lived experience and overall well-being. Results of post hoc analyses addressing the effect of belimumab on PROMs are summarised in Table 2.

3.2. Belimumab Efficacy Across Organ Manifestations

3.2.1. Lupus Nephritis

The BLISS-LN trial demonstrated a beneficial effect of belimumab as an add-on therapy in patients with active LN [7]. An early post hoc analysis of the BLISS-LN by Rovin et al. showed that add-on belimumab was most effective in yielding primary efficacy renal response [PERR; UPCR ≤ 0.7 g/g, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) no worse than 20% below the pre-flare value or ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2, and no rescue therapy for treatment failure] and complete renal response (CRR; UPCR < 0.5 g/g, eGFR no worse than 10% below the pre-flare value or ≥90 mL/min/1.73 m2, and no rescue therapy) in patients with proliferative LN and a baseline UPCR under 3 g/g, compared with patients with UPCR equal or above 3 g/g or membranous LN [38]. Moreover, belimumab significantly improved the long-term outcomes including chronic kidney disease, risk of renal flare, and risk of kidney-related events or death (defined as occurrence of one of the following: end-stage kidney disease, doubling of serum creatinine, increased proteinuria and/or impaired kidney function, kidney disease-related treatment failure, or all-cause death) [38]. Another post hoc analysis of the BLISS-LN and BLISS-LN open label extension by Malvar et al., conducted on a subgroup of patients who underwent per-protocol repeat kidney biopsy after a median follow-up of 43.6 months after the end of the study, showed that add-on belimumab on top of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) was associated with complete histological response, i.e., a National Institutes of Health (NIH) Activity Index (AI) score of 0 [39]. To this end, another study found that benefits of belimumab on kidney outcomes were similar for newly diagnosed LN and relapsed LN patients, irrespective of the glucocorticoid dose in the initial phase of LN treatment [37].
Although patients with severe active LN were excluded from the initial belimumab Phase III studies, post hoc analyses of these studies demonstrated benefits from belimumab on kidney outcomes in SLE patients with evidence of active kidney disease based on BILAG (summarised in Table 3) [43,44,45,99]. Interestingly, a protection against de novo renal SLE conferred from 1 mg/kg i.v. (HR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.20–0.73) and 200 mg s.c. (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.54–0.88) but not 10 mg/kg i.v. belimumab was demonstrated in patients with SLE and no prior nephritis history [43], which along with real-world observations of nephritis occurrence in SLE patients under treatment [100,101] and documentation of rapid reductions in IL-10 levels upon belimumab treatment commencement [102] has resulted in speculations about effects of belimumab on B cells with regulatory properties [43,46]. Collectively, further investigation of the effects of lower belimumab doses of belimumab appears warranted, especially for the treatment of SLE patients with low or absent renal activity.
In conclusion, belimumab on top of ST adds benefit in attaining renal response and helps improve long-term kidney outcomes by enhancing renal protection and reducing the risk of flares in patients with active lupus nephritis, especially if initiated early.
Results of post hoc analyses of the BLISS trials with focus on LN are reported in Table 3.

3.2.2. Neuropsychiatric SLE

Patients with active severe central nervous system disease were excluded from belimumab trials, thus limiting analyses on neuropsychiatric SLE (NPSLE). A post hoc analysis of data from BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-NEA, BLISS-SC, and EMBRACE identified predictors of NPSLE flares in patients with active disease yet no severe nervous system involvement, assessed with BILAG. Predictors included male sex, prior neuropsychiatric involvement (neuropsychiatric BILAG B–D scores), and higher baseline SDI score. Organ damage in the SDI neuropsychiatric category, particularly cognitive impairment and transverse myelitis, emerged as the strongest determinant of flares [42]. Importantly, belimumab neither reduced nor increased the risk of NPSLE flares. Complementary findings by Nikolopoulos et al. revealed that NPSLE patients reported significantly lower HRQoL and higher fatigue levels than those without neuropsychiatric involvement, regardless of current organ manifestations [29], underscoring the debilitating impact of NPSLE on patients’ well-being. Further analysis demonstrated that neuropsychiatric involvement is associated not only with damage in the nervous system but also damage in other organ systems [41].

3.2.3. Skin and Musculoskeletal Involvement

Several studies have explored the efficacy of belimumab across musculoskeletal and cutaneous SLE manifestations. A post hoc analysis of the BLISS-52 and BLISS-76 trials highlighted that belimumab-treated patients had significant improvements in the cutaneous as well as musculoskeletal domains, assessed with either BILAG or SELENA-SLEDAI [40]. In addition, treatment response in musculoskeletal and mucocutaneous organ system domains has been linked with improvements in SF-36 scores in a recent post hoc analysis [27]. In a meta-analysis of six belimumab trials, Kneeland et al. investigated the effect of belimumab on cutaneous manifestations after 52 weeks of treatment, defined as a decrease in the cutaneous domain from a baseline BILAG A to a BILAG score of B through E, and from a baseline BILAG B to a BILAG C through E score in patients with cutaneous manifestations at baseline. In this study, belimumab use yielded an OR of 1.44 (95% CI: 1.20–1.74) for attainment of cutaneous clinical response at week 52, with significant differences observed as early as week 20 from baseline (OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.01–1.81) [47]. In addition, the same study showed a protective effect of belimumab against cutaneous flares [47]. In another recent post hoc analysis of five Phase III trials of belimumab, belimumab was superior to placebo in inducing mucocutaneous improvement at week 52, measured by BILAG (OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.07–1.57) and by SLEDAI-2K (OR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.16–1.62), as well as in inducing sustained (≥2 consecutive visits, maintained through week 52) mucocutaneous improvement by BILAG (HR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.07–1.41) and by SLEDAI-2K (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.17–1.31) [36]. Collectively, these findings indicate that belimumab significantly improves cutaneous and musculoskeletal manifestations and reduces the risk of flares, supporting its use in patients with mucocutaneous or musculoskeletal disease to achieve sustained organ-specific response.

3.2.4. Organ Damage

Organ damage is a major determinant of morbidity and mortality in SLE patients [104,105], and thus prevention of damage accrual represents the overarching goal of treatment [89]. In the original Phase III belimumab trials, no difference emerged between belimumab and placebo in Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Damage Index (SDI) scores after 52 weeks, which may be expected given the short time of observation [2,3,4,5,6]. However, the impact of belimumab on organ damage accrual was assessed in the long-term open label study extensions of the Phase III belimumab trials [50,106,107,108,109]. In these studies, patients assigned to the belimumab arm continued to receive belimumab, and patients previously receiving placebo were switched to receive belimumab. Belimumab proved effective and safe over up to 8 years of follow-up [107], yielding minimal organ damage accrual assessed using the SDI, with lack of SDI increase documented in up to 88% of patients [107]. In an analysis of pooled data from BLISS-52 and BLISS-76 open label studies, 343 out of 403 (85%) patients had no change in SDI score from baseline after a 6-year follow-up. Damage accrual appeared to be irrespective of baseline organ damage [50]. In another open label study, including 142 South Korean and Japanese patients from both BLISS-NEA and BLISS-SC, only 4 out of 117 patients from BLISS-NEA and 2 out of 25 patients from BLISS-SC experienced SDI worsening compared to baseline over a 7-year follow-up [108]. Two other studies comparing patients receiving belimumab from open label extension studies and propensity matched patients from the Toronto Lupus Clinic Cohort treated with ST found that patients treated with belimumab had 60–61% lower risk of SDI progression compared with patients receiving real-world ST over a 5-year follow-up (HR: 0.39–0.40) [48,49].
With specific regard to kidney damage, a post hoc analysis of the BLISS-LN trial showed that patients receiving belimumab were less likely to experience a sustained decline in eGFR compared to placebo, yielding an OR of 0.29 (95% CI: 0.13–0.68) for 30% decline and an OR of 0.25 (95% CI: 0.08–0.78) for 40% decline [38].
In conclusion, long-term treatment with belimumab is associated with reduced accrual of organ damage, highlighting its role in modifying disease course and supporting prolonged therapy, especially in patients at risk of accumulating organ damage over time.

3.2.5. Serologically Active Disease

Subgroup analyses of the early Phase II and subsequent Phase III belimumab trials provided evidence of the efficacy of belimumab in mitigating serological activity. In the BLISS-76 trial [2], belimumab treatment resulted in sustained reductions in anti-dsDNA antibody levels and increases in C3/C4 levels from week 8 through week 76, and similar beneficial effects were described in EMBRACE [5]. Belimumab efficacy was shown to be greater in serologically active patients compared with counter subgroups, i.e., patients with positive anti-dsDNA levels and/or low C3/C4 levels; this was documented across several post hoc analyses of the BLISS trials, using different efficacy outcome measures, including SRI-4 [110,111,112], BICLA [17], LLDAS [14,16], DORIS remission [14,16], and PROMs [19,111]. Two post hoc analyses [111,112] showed enhanced therapeutic benefit of belimumab compared with ST alone in patients with higher disease activity, anti-dsDNA positivity, and low complement levels at baseline, holding true for both the i.v. [111] and the s.c. [112] administration. Also, patients with either low complement or positive anti-dsDNA, rather than both, attained SRI-4 response to a greater extent with belimumab than with placebo at week 52 [110]. In a meta-analysis of five Phase III trials of belimumab, in patients with positive anti-dsDNA antibody levels and patients with positive anti-dsDNA antibody levels and/or low complement C3 and/or C4 levels, belimumab conferred significantly greater BICLA response rates compared with placebo after 52 weeks of follow-up. Another meta-analysis of the same trials found that belimumab conferred greater efficacy in inducing LLDAS or DORIS remission among patients with serologically active SLE at baseline compared with counter subgroups [14].
Longitudinal changes in anti-dsDNA antibody and C3/C4 levels have also been associated with response to belimumab, as a greater decline in anti-dsDNA and a greater increase in C3 and C4 levels was seen in SRI-4 responders compared with non-responders from baseline through week 52 [113]. Conversely, increase or lack of decrease in anti- dsDNA levels heralded subsequent severe disease flares [46]. Along similar lines, another post hoc analysis of five RCTs of belimumab showed that negative anti-dsDNA or normal/high C3/C4 levels were associated with enhanced protection against severe SLE flares or renal flares [114].
Among other serological markers, anti-Smith (Sm) antibody positivity has been shown to be associated with enhanced clinical response to belimumab [102]. In a post hoc analysis of the BLISS-52 and BLISS-76 trials, higher proportions of EQ-5D FHS at week 52 were seen in anti-Sm positive versus negative patients who received belimumab the approved dose of belimumab, while no such difference was observed among placebo recipients [19].
Overall, these findings support the use of serological activity to guide belimumab initiation and identify patients likely to derive optimal benefit.

3.2.6. Trajectories of Disease Evolution

Trajectory modelling has recently gained traction as a valuable tool in studying chronic diseases like SLE by helping predict disease progression and identify subgroups with distinct patterns, thereby disentangling disease heterogeneity and supporting personalised therapeutic decisions [115]. In a post hoc analysis of three clinical trials of belimumab, we modelled clinical, laboratory, and patient-reported data in combined analysis and identified four latent classes with differential evolution of disease activity and patient-reported fatigue, with those features having been selected in an unsupervised fashion. These findings highlight the diverse nature of SLE and underscore the importance of incorporating patient-reported health experience in disease assessment and monitoring [35].

3.3. Drug-Related Aspects

3.3.1. Synergy with Antimalarial Agents

Accumulating evidence supports the use of antimalarial agents (AMA) in combination with belimumab for increased likelihood of favourable responses to this biological therapy. In a recent meta-analysis of five belimumab RCTs, BICLA response rates were greater in belimumab-treated when combined with AMA [17]. Accordingly, other post hoc analyses have demonstrated higher frequencies of EQ-5D FHS reports with the combined regimen [19] and greater protection against development of renal flares [44]. In another post hoc analysis of BLISS-52 and BLISS-76 data, it was shown that IV belimumab 10 mg/kg induced significant decreases in IgG and IgA anticardiolipin (aCL) antibody levels only in the subgroup of patients who were concomitantly treated with AMA [116]. A similar observation was made in a post hoc analysis of the BLISS-SC trial, which reported significantly greater decreases in IgM aCL and IgA anti-β2-glycoprotein I (anti-β2-GPI) levels with belimumab compared with placebo only in the subgroup of patients who were concomitantly receiving AMA [117]. These findings may be partly explained by the observed association between AMA use and lower B-cell activating factor (BAFF) levels [118], thereby enhancing the pharmacodynamic effects of belimumab, which directly targets soluble BAFF. While a consolidated mechanistic explanation has not been provided yet, these studies suggest a synergy between belimumab and AMA, with AMA potentiating the effect of belimumab.

3.3.2. Safety and Side Effects

Belimumab is generally safe and well-tolerated, with an overall positive risk-benefit profile. In a meta-analysis of data from one Phase II and five Phase III belimumab trials in adult patients with SLE, the incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), severe AEs, AEs of special interest (AESI), and mortality over a 52-week study period were similar between belimumab and placebo [119]. Reassuring results were obtained across other populations, including paediatric patients [56], older adults [120], and patients with LN [7].
Among the most frequently observed side effects is the occurrence of infections and infestations, especially of the respiratory and urinary tract, which have been reported in multiple post hoc analyses of RCTs [119,121], yet with comparable rates between belimumab and placebo. In addition, in the Phase IV BASE trial investigating the incidence of all-cause mortality and AESI with belimumab versus placebo, a higher incidence of serious depression (placebo: 0.1% [n = 1/2001]; belimumab: 0.4% [n = 7/2002]) and serious suicidal ideation or self-injury (placebo: 0.25% [n = 5/2001]; belimumab: 0.75% [n = 15/2002]) was found in patients receiving belimumab compared with placebo [122]. A higher incidence of depression was also found in another meta-analysis of data from six belimumab trials, raising concerns on the use of this drug in patients with a previous history of psychiatric disorder [119]. However, in long-term follow-up studies, depression, suicidal ideation, and/or self-injury rates decreased with belimumab. These findings highlight the importance of close monitoring, especially during the early stages of treatment.

4. Conclusions

In summary, over the past decade, more than 50 post hoc analyses of clinical trials of belimumab have been conducted and have advanced our understanding of the use of the drug, along with deepening our overall understanding of SLE. By exploring a broad spectrum of trial endpoints, these studies have provided valuable insights that may guide the design of future clinical trials and support the development of new therapeutic strategies. In addition to data from randomised settings, emerging real-world evidence has further confirmed the clinical benefits of belimumab in routine practice, often showing higher attainment rates of LLDAS and remission. Notably, several studies suggest that earlier initiation of belimumab, particularly in serologically active patients, may enhance long-term outcomes by promoting faster disease control and reducing cumulative exposure to glucocorticoids [69,71,75,123]. On the other hand, evidence on treatment discontinuation remains limited, with only a small real-world retrospective study suggesting that discontinuing belimumab treatment after achieving disease stability may be associated with a subsequent increase in disease activity and higher glucocorticoid dosages [124]. Therefore, tapering or discontinuation of belimumab should be undertaken with caution, careful patient selection and individualised risk assessment. The findings reinforce the efficacy of belimumab in treating specific disease manifestations, preventing disease flares, including renal flares, and reducing long-term exposure to glucocorticoids and organ damage accrual. Additionally, observed improvements in patient-reported outcomes have underscored the broader impact of belimumab on disease burden and highlighted the importance of incorporating patient-reported HRQoL in SLE surveillance, promoting more patient-centred and holistic management approaches [125,126]. Collectively, these studies offer advanced and clinically relevant insights into both the natural history and the therapeutic landscape of SLE.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation: D.N. and I.P.; methodology: all authors; data curation: L.P. and A.T.; writing—original draft preparation: all authors; writing—review and editing: all authors; supervision: D.N. and I.P.; project administration: D.N. and I.P.; funding acquisition: D.N. and I.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

IP has received grants from the Swedish Rheumatism Association (R-995882), King Gustaf V’s 80-year Foundation (FAI-2023-1055), Swedish Society of Medicine (SLS-974449), Nyckelfonden (OLL-1000881), Professor Nanna Svartz Foundation (2021-00436), Ulla and Roland Gustafsson Foundation (2024-43), Region Stockholm (FoUI-1004114), and Karolinska Institutet. DN has received grants from the Swedish Rheumatism Association (R-995557), King Gustaf V’s 80-year Foundation (FAI-2023-1006), Ulla and Roland Gustafsson Foundation (2024-49), Ulla and Gustaf af Uggla Foundation (2023-025029), Åke Wiberg foundation, Alex och Eva Wallströms foundation, and Karolinska Institutet.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analysed in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia, BMS, Elli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Otsuka, and Roche. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study, in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Möckel, T.; Basta, F.; Weinmann-Menke, J.; Schwarting, A. B cell activating factor (BAFF): Structure, functions, autoimmunity and clinical implications in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE). Autoimmun. Rev. 2021, 20, 102736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Navarra, S.V.; Guzmán, R.M.; Gallacher, A.E.; Hall, S.; Levy, R.A.; Jimenez, R.E.; Li, E.K.-M.; Thomas, M.; Kim, H.-Y.; León, M.G.; et al. Efficacy and safety of belimumab in patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus: A randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2011, 377, 721–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Furie, R.; Petri, M.; Zamani, O.; Cervera, R.; Wallace, D.J.; Tegzová, D.; Sanchez-Guerrero, J.; Schwarting, A.; Merrill, J.T.; Chatham, W.W.; et al. A phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled study of belimumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits B lymphocyte stimulator, in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. 2011, 63, 3918–3930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhang, F.; Bae, S.-C.; Bass, D.; Chu, M.; Egginton, S.; Gordon, D.; Roth, D.A.; Zheng, J.; Tanaka, Y. A pivotal phase III, randomised, placebo-controlled study of belimumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus located in China, Japan and South Korea. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2018, 77, 355–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ginzler, E.; Guedes Barbosa, L.S.; D’Cruz, D.; Furie, R.; Maksimowicz-McKinnon, K.; Oates, J.; Santiago, M.B.; Saxena, A.; Sheikh, S.; Bass, D.L.; et al. Phase III/IV, Randomized, Fifty-Two-Week Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Belimumab in Patients of Black African Ancestry With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2022, 74, 112–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Stohl, W.; Schwarting, A.; Okada, M.; Scheinberg, M.; Doria, A.; Hammer, A.E.; Kleoudis, C.; Groark, J.; Bass, D.; Fox, N.L.; et al. Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Belimumab in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Fifty-Two-Week Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017, 69, 1016–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Furie, R.; Rovin, B.H.; Houssiau, F.; Malvar, A.; Teng, Y.O.; Contreras, G.; Amoura, Z.; Yu, X.; Mok, C.-C.; Santiago, M.B.; et al. Two-Year, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Belimumab in Lupus Nephritis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 383, 1117–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Oon, S.; Huq, M.; Golder, V.; Ong, P.X.; Morand, E.F.; Nikpour, M. Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS) discriminates responders in the BLISS-52 and BLISS-76 phase III trials of belimumab in systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2019, 78, 629–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Parodis, I.; Emamikia, S.; Gomez, A.; Gentline, C.; Arkema, E.V.; Chatzidionysiou, K.; van Vollenhoven, R.F. Definitions of remission in systemic lupus erythematosus: A post-hoc analysis of two randomised clinical trials. Lancet Rheumatol. 2019, 1, e163–e173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Parodis, I.; Emamikia, S.; Gomez, A.; Gunnarsson, I.; van Vollenhoven, R.F.; Chatzidionysiou, K. Clinical SLEDAI-2K zero may be a pragmatic outcome measure in SLE studies. Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 2019, 19, 157–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Brunner, H.I.; Abud-Mendoza, C.; Mori, M.; Pilkington, C.A.; Syed, R.; Takei, S.; Viola, D.O.; Furie, R.A.; Navarra, S.; Zhang, F.; et al. Efficacy and safety of belimumab in paediatric and adult patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: An across-study comparison. RMD Open 2021, 7, e001747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Emamikia, S.; Oon, S.; Gomez, A.; Lindblom, J.; Borg, A.; Enman, Y.; Morand, E.; Grannas, D.; van Vollenhoven, R.F.; Nikpour, M.; et al. Impact of remission and low disease activity on health-related quality of life in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheumatology 2022, 61, 4752–4762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Neupane, B.; Shukla, P.; Slim, M.; Martin, A.; Petri, M.; Bertsias, G.K.; Kim, A.H.J.; Fanouriakis, A.; Levy, R.A.; Chauhan, D.; et al. Belimumab versus anifrolumab in adults with systemic lupus erythematosus: An indirect comparison of clinical response at 52 weeks. Lupus Sci. Med. 2023, 10, e000907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Parodis, I.; Lindblom, J.; Levy, R.A.; Zen, M.; Cetrez, N.; Gomez, A.; Oon, S.; Henning, C.; Khamashta, M.; Quasny, H.A.; et al. Attainment of remission and low disease activity after treatment with belimumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: A post-hoc analysis of pooled data from five randomised clinical trials. Lancet Rheumatol. 2024, 6, e751–e761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Depascale, R.; Da Mutten, R.; Lindblom, J.; Cetrez, N.; Palazzo, L.; Iaccarino, L.; Doria, A.; Nikolopoulos, D.; Gatto, M.; Parodis, I. Unsupervised machine learning identifies distinct systemic lupus erythematosus patient endotypes with differential response to belimumab. Rheumatology 2025, 64, 4650–4658, Correction in Rheumatology 2025, keaf579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Parodis, I.; Johansson, P.; Gomez, A.; Soukka, S.; Emamikia, S.; Chatzidionysiou, K. Predictors of low disease activity and clinical remission following belimumab treatment in systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheumatology 2019, 58, 2170–2176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Parodis, I.; Lindblom, J.; Palazzo, L.; Cetrez, N.; Oon, S.; Ala, H.; van Vollenhoven, R.F.; Morand, E.; Levitsky, A.; Nikpour, M. Outcomes of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus treated with belimumab: A post hoc efficacy analysis of five phase III clinical trials by British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Combined Lupus Assessment criteria. RMD Open 2025, 11, e005444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Parodis, I.; Lindblom, J.; Palazzo, L.; Tsoi, A.; Cetrez, N.; Ala, H.; Nikpour, M.; Levitsky, A.; Strand, V. Poor health-related quality of life despite Lupus Low Disease Activity State or Definitions of Remission in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) remission in patients with SLE: Results from a clinical trial setting. RMD Open 2025, 11, e006061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lindblom, J.; Gomez, A.; Borg, A.; Emamikia, S.; Ladakis, D.; Matilla, J.; Pehr, M.; Cobar, F.; Enman, Y.; Heintz, E.; et al. EQ-5D-3L full health state discriminates between drug and placebo in clinical trials of systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheumatology 2021, 60, 4703–4716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Gomez, A.; Qiu, V.; Cederlund, A.; Borg, A.; Lindblom, J.; Emamikia, S.; Enman, Y.; Lampa, J.; Parodis, I. Adverse Health-Related Quality of Life Outcome Despite Adequate Clinical Response to Treatment in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Front. Med. 2021, 8, 651249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Borg, A.; Gomez, A.; Cederlund, A.; Cobar, F.; Qiu, V.; Lindblom, J.; Emamikia, S.; Enman, Y.; Pettersson, S.; Parodis, I. Contribution of abnormal BMI to adverse health-related quality of life outcomes after a 52-week therapy in patients with SLE. Rheumatology 2021, 60, 4205–4217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Gomez, A.; Butrus, F.H.; Johansson, P.; Åkerström, E.; Soukka, S.; Emamikia, S.; Enman, Y.; Pettersson, S.; Parodis, I. Impact of overweight and obesity on patient-reported health-related quality of life in systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheumatology 2020, 60, 1260–1272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Furie, R.; Petri, M.A.; Strand, V.; Gladman, D.D.; Zhong, Z.J.; Freimuth, W.W. Clinical, laboratory and health-related quality of life correlates of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Responder Index response: A post hoc analysis of the phase 3 belimumab trials. Lupus Sci. Med. 2014, 1, e000031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Strand, V.; Levy, R.A.; Cervera, R.; Petri, M.A.; Birch, H.; Freimuth, W.W.; Zhong, Z.J.; Clarke, A.E. Improvements in health-related quality of life with belimumab, a B-lymphocyte stimulator-specific inhibitor, in patients with autoantibody-positive systemic lupus erythematosus from the randomised controlled BLISS trials. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2014, 73, 838–844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. van Vollenhoven, R.F.; Stohl, W.; Furie, R.A.; Fox, N.L.; Groark, J.G.; Bass, D.; Kurtinecz, M.; Pobiner, B.F.; Eastman, W.J.; Gonzalez-Rivera, T.; et al. Clinical response beyond the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Responder Index: Post-hoc analysis of the BLISS-SC study. Lupus Sci. Med. 2018, 5, e000288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Rendas-Baum, R.; Baranwal, N.; Joshi, A.V.; Park, J.; Kosinski, M. Psychometric properties of FACIT-Fatigue in systemic lupus erythematosus: A pooled analysis of three phase 3 randomised, double-blind, parallel-group controlled studies (BLISS-SC, BLISS-52, BLISS-76). J. Patient-Rep. Outcomes 2021, 5, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Rendas-Baum, R.; Chen, W.-H.; Gairy, K.; Anderson, S.; Henning, C.; Hammer, A.; Kosinski, M. SF-36v2 and FACIT-Fatigue quality of life improvements with organ-specific SELENA-SLEDAI response and belimumab treatment in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus Sci. Med. 2024, 11, e001118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Gomez, A.; Parodis, I.; Sjöwall, C. Obesity and tobacco smoking are independently associated with poor patient-reported outcomes in SLE: A cross-sectional study. Rheumatol. Int. 2024, 44, 851–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Nikolopoulos, D.; Cetrez, N.; Lindblom, J.; Palazzo, L.; Enman, Y.; Parodis, I. Patients with NPSLE experience poorer HRQoL and more fatigue than SLE patients with no neuropsychiatric involvement, irrespective of neuropsychiatric activity. Rheumatology 2024, 63, 2494–2502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Hua, N.; Gomez, A.; Lindblom, J.; Emamikia, S.; Enman, Y.; Grannas, D.; Heintz, E.; Regardt, M.; Parodis, I. Sensitivity analysis of EQ-5D-3L index scores in terms of discriminative and known-groups validity in SLE: Introducing Adequate Health State. Rheumatology 2023, 62, 3916–3923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Jesus, D.; Henriques, C.; Matos, A.; Doria, A.; Inês, L.S. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Score Remission and Low Disease Activity States Discriminate Drug From Placebo and Better Health-Related Quality of Life. Arthritis Care Res. 2024, 76, 788–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Borg, A.; Lindblom, J.; Gomez, A.; Soltani, A.; Enman, Y.; Heintz, E.; Regardt, M.; Grannas, D.; Emamikia, S.; Parodis, I. Obesity is associated with pain and impaired mobility despite therapy in systemic lupus erythematosus. Front. Med. 2023, 10, 1247354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Botto, J.; Cetrez, N.; Nikolopoulos, D.; Regardt, M.; Heintz, E.; Lindblom, J.; Parodis, I. Predicting EQ-5D full health state in systemic lupus erythematosus using machine learning algorithms. Rheumatol. Adv. Pract. 2025, 9, rkaf032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Lindblom, J.; Zetterberg, S.; Emamikia, S.; Borg, A.; von Perner, G.; Enman, Y.; Heintz, E.; Regardt, M.; Grannas, D.; Gomez, A.; et al. EQ-5D full health state after therapy heralds reduced hazard to accrue subsequent organ damage in systemic lupus erythematosus. Front. Med. 2022, 9, 1092325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Parodis, I.; Lindblom, J.; Tsoi, A.; Palazzo, L.; Sporre, K.B.; Enman, Y.; Nikolopoulos, D.; Beretta, L. Trajectories of disease evolution upon treatment initiation in systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from four clinical trials of belimumab. Rheumatology 2024, 64, 2697–2705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Grosso, G.; Giannopoulou, N.; Tsoi, A.; Cetrez, N.; Nikolopoulos, D.; Lindblom, J.; Parodis, I. Belimumab efficacy in mucocutaneous lupus erythematosus: A large post-hoc analysis from five phase III clinical trials. Rheumatology 2025, 64, 4257–4266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Anders, H.-J.; Furie, R.; Malvar, A.; Zhao, M.-H.; Hiromura, K.; Weinmann-Menke, J.; Green, Y.; Jones-Leone, A.; Negrini, D.; Levy, R.A.; et al. Effect of belimumab on kidney-related outcomes in patients with lupus nephritis: Post hoc subgroup analyses of the phase 3 BLISS-LN trial. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2023, 38, 2733–2742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Rovin, B.H.; Furie, R.; Teng, Y.O.; Contreras, G.; Malvar, A.; Yu, X.; Ji, B.; Green, Y.; Gonzalez-Rivera, T.; Bass, D.; et al. A secondary analysis of the Belimumab International Study in Lupus Nephritis trial examined effects of belimumab on kidney outcomes and preservation of kidney function in patients with lupus nephritis. Kidney Int. 2022, 101, 403–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Malvar, A.; Alberton, V.; Recalde, C.; Heguilen, R. Repeat kidney biopsy findings of lupus nephritis patients in clinical remission treated with Mycophenolate associated with Belimumab or Mycophenolate plus standard of care therapy. A “post-hoc” analysis of participants in the BLISS-LN and open label extension study belonging to a single center. Lupus 2023, 32, 1394–1401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Manzi, S.; Sánchez-Guerrero, J.; Merrill, J.T.; Furie, R.; Gladman, D.; Navarra, S.V.; Ginzler, E.M.; D’Cruz, D.P.; Doria, A.; Cooper, S.; et al. Effects of belimumab, a B lymphocyte stimulator-specific inhibitor, on disease activity across multiple organ domains in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: Combined results from two phase III trials. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2012, 71, 1833–1838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Nikolopoulos, D.; Cetrez, N.; Lindblom, J.; Parodis, I. Neuropsychiatric involvement in systemic lupus erythematosus contributes to organ damage beyond the nervous system: A post-hoc analysis of 5 phase III randomized clinical trials. Rheumatol. Int. 2024, 44, 1679–1689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Palazzo, L.; Lindblom, J.; Cetrez, N.; Ala, H.; Parodis, I. Determinants of neuropsychiatric flares in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from five phase III trials of belimumab. Rheumatology 2024, 63, 798–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Parodis, I.; Lindblom, J.; Cetrez, N.; Palazzo, L.; Ala, H.; Houssiau, F.A.; Sjöwall, C.; Rovin, B.H. Effect of Belimumab on Preventing de novo Renal Lupus Flares. Kidney Int. Rep. 2023, 8, 1822–1830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Gomez, A.; Jägerback, S.; Sjöwall, C.; Parodis, I. Belimumab and antimalarials combined against renal flares in patients treated for extra-renal systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from 4 phase III clinical trials. Rheumatology 2024, 63, 338–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Jägerback, S.; Gomez, A.; Parodis, I. Predictors of renal flares in systemic lupus erythematosus: A post-hoc analysis of four phase III clinical trials of belimumab. Rheumatology 2024, 64, 623–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Parodis, I.; Gomez, A.; Chow, J.W.; Borg, A.; Lindblom, J.; Gatto, M. Early B Cell and Plasma Cell Kinetics Upon Treatment Initiation Portend Flares in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Post-Hoc Analysis of Three Phase III Clinical Trials of Belimumab. Front. Immunol. 2022, 13, 796508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kneeland, R.; Montes, D.; Endo, J.; Shields, B.; Bartels, C.M.; Garg, S. Improvement in Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus After Twenty Weeks of Belimumab Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Arthritis Care Res. 2023, 75, 1838–1848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Urowitz, M.B.; Ohsfeldt, R.L.; Wielage, R.C.; Kelton, K.A.; Asukai, Y.; Ramachandran, S. Organ damage in patients treated with belimumab versus standard of care: A propensity score-matched comparative analysis. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2019, 78, 372–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Urowitz, M.B.; Ohsfeldt, R.L.; Wielage, R.C.; Dever, J.J.; Zakerifar, M.; Asukai, Y.; Ramachandran, S.; Joshi, A.V. Comparative analysis of long-term organ damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus using belimumab versus standard therapy: A post hoc longitudinal study. Lupus Sci. Med. 2020, 7, e000412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Bruce, I.N.; Urowitz, M.; van Vollenhoven, R.; Aranow, C.; Fettiplace, J.; Oldham, M.; Wilson, B.; Molta, C.; Roth, D.; Gordon, D. Long-term organ damage accrual and safety in patients with SLE treated with belimumab plus standard of care. Lupus 2016, 25, 699–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Joy, A.; Muralidharan, A.; Alfaraj, M.; Shantharam, D.; Cherukuri, A.S.S.; Muthukumar, A. The Role of Belimumab in Systemic Lupus Erythematosis: A Systematic Review. Cureus 2022, 14, e25887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Chiang, H.-Y.; Guo, Z.-A.; Wu, T.-W.; Peng, T.-R. Efficacy and safety of belimumab therapy in systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lupus 2022, 31, 666–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Zhang, H.; Chen, J.; Zhang, Y.; Zhao, N.; Xu, D. Efficacy and safety of belimumab therapy in lupus nephritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ren. Fail. 2023, 45, 2207671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Yoshijima, C.; Suzuki, Y.; Oda, A.; Tanaka, R.; Ono, H.; Itoh, H.; Ohno, K. Usefulness of Belimumab in Adult Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Evaluated Using Single Indexes: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review. Curr. Ther. Res. 2024, 100, 100738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wallace, D.J.; Stohl, W.; Furie, R.A.; Lisse, J.R.; McKay, J.D.; Merrill, J.T.; Petri, M.A.; Ginzler, E.M.; Chatham, W.W.; McCune, W.J.; et al. A phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study of belimumab in patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Care Res. 2009, 61, 1168–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Brunner, H.I.; Abud-Mendoza, C.; Viola, D.O.; Penades, I.C.; Levy, D.; Anton, J.; Calderon, J.E.; Chasnyk, V.G.; Ferrandiz, M.A.; Keltsev, V.; et al. Safety and efficacy of intravenous belimumab in children with systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from a randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2020, 79, 1340–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Aranow, C.; Allaart, C.F.; Amoura, Z.; Bruce, I.N.; Cagnoli, P.C.; Chatham, W.W.; Clark, K.L.; Furie, R.; Groark, J.; Urowitz, M.B.; et al. Efficacy and safety of sequential therapy with subcutaneous belimumab and one cycle of rituximab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: The phase 3, randomised, placebo-controlled BLISS-BELIEVE study. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2024, 83, 1502–1512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Petri, M.; Kim, M.Y.; Kalunian, K.C.; Grossman, J.; Hahn, B.H.; Sammaritano, L.R.; Lockshin, M.; Merrill, J.T.; Belmont, H.M.; Askanase, A.D.; et al. Combined Oral Contraceptives in Women with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. N. Engl. J. Med. 2005, 353, 2550–2558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ware, J.E., Jr.; Sherbourne, C.D. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med. Care 1992, 30, 473–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Yang, B.; Chen, Y.; Jiang, J.; Chang, C.; Wu, H.; Gershwin, M.E.; Lu, Q. The importance of developing reproducible primary endpoints for clinical trials in systemic lupus erythematosus. Clin. Rheumatol. 2025, 44, 183–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Merrill, J.T.; Neuwelt, C.M.; Wallace, D.J.; Shanahan, J.C.; Latinis, K.M.; Oates, J.C.; Utset, T.O.; Gordon, C.; Isenberg, D.A.; Hsieh, H.; et al. Efficacy and safety of rituximab in moderately-to-severely active systemic lupus erythematosus: The randomized, double-blind, phase ii/iii systemic lupus erythematosus evaluation of rituximab trial. Arthritis Rheum. 2010, 62, 222–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Rovin, B.H.; Furie, R.; Latinis, K.; Looney, R.J.; Fervenza, F.C.; Sanchez-Guerrero, J.; Maciuca, R.; Zhang, D.; Garg, J.P.; Brunetta, P.; et al. Efficacy and safety of rituximab in patients with active proliferative lupus nephritis: The lupus nephritis assessment with rituximab study. Arthritis Rheum. 2012, 64, 1215–1226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Collins, C.E.; Dall’ERa, M.; Kan, H.; Macahilig, C.; Molta, C.; Koscielny, V.; Chang, D.J. Response to belimumab among patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in clinical practice settings: 24-month results from the OBSErve study in the USA. Lupus Sci. Med. 2016, 3, e000118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Schwarting, A.; Schroeder, J.O.; Alexander, T.; Schmalzing, M.; Fiehn, C.; Specker, C.; Perna, A.; Cholmakow-Bodechtel, C.; Koscielny, V.B.; Carnarius, H. First Real-World Insights into Belimumab Use and Outcomes in Routine Clinical Care of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in Germany: Results from the OBSErve Germany Study. Rheumatol. Ther. 2016, 3, 271–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Babini, A.; Cappuccio, A.M.; Caprarulo, C.; Casado, G.; Eimon, A.; Figueredo, H.; García, M.A.; Magri, S.; Mannucci, P.; Rodriguez, S.P.; et al. Evaluation of belimumab treatment in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in a clinical practice setting: Results from a 24-month OBSErve study in Argentina. Lupus 2020, 29, 1385–1396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Cortés, J.; Andreu, J.; Calvo, J.; García-Aparicio, A.; Coronell, C.; Díaz-Cerezo, S. Evaluation of Use of Belimumab In Clinical Practice Settings (Observe Study) In Spain: Health Resource Utilization and Labour Absenteeism. Value Health 2014, 17, A534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. von Kempis, J.; Duetsch, S.; Reuschling, N.; Villiger, R.; Villiger, P.M.; Vallelian, F.; Schaer, D.J.; Mueller, R.B. Clinical outcomes in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus treated with belimumab in clinical practice settings: A retrospective analysis of results from the OBSErve study in Switzerland. Swiss Med. Wkly. 2019, 149, w20022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Touma, Z.; Sayani, A.; Pineau, C.A.; Fortin, I.; Matsos, M.; Ecker, G.A.; Chow, A.; Iczkovitz, S. Belimumab use, clinical outcomes and glucocorticoid reduction in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus receiving belimumab in clinical practice settings: Results from the OBSErve Canada Study. Rheumatol. Int. 2017, 37, 865–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Nikoloudaki, M.; Nikolopoulos, D.; Koutsoviti, S.; Flouri, I.; Kapsala, N.; Repa, A.; Katsimbri, P.; Theotikos, E.; Pitsigavdaki, S.; Pateromichelaki, K.; et al. Clinical response trajectories and drug persistence in systemic lupus erythematosus patients on belimumab treatment: A real-life, multicentre observational study. Front. Immunol. 2022, 13, 1074044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Fanouriakis, A.; Adamichou, C.; Koutsoviti, S.; Panopoulos, S.; Staveri, C.; Klagou, A.; Tsalapaki, C.; Pantazi, L.; Konsta, S.; Mavragani, C.P.; et al. Low disease activity—Irrespective of serologic status at baseline—Associated with reduction of corticosteroid dose and number of flares in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus treated with belimumab: A real-life observational study. Semin. Arthritis Rheum. 2018, 48, 467–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Parodis, I.; Sjöwall, C.; Jönsen, A.; Ramsköld, D.; Zickert, A.; Frodlund, M.; Sohrabian, A.; Arnaud, L.; Rönnelid, J.; Malmström, V.; et al. Smoking and pre-existing organ damage reduce the efficacy of belimumab in systemic lupus erythematosus. Autoimmun. Rev. 2017, 16, 343–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Parodis, I.; Benavides, A.H.L.; Zickert, A.; Pettersson, S.; Möller, S.; Henriksson, E.W.; Voss, A.; Gunnarsson, I. The Impact of Belimumab and Rituximab on Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Arthritis Care Res. 2019, 71, 811–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Iaccarino, L.; Bettio, S.; Reggia, R.; Zen, M.; Frassi, M.; Andreoli, L.; Gatto, M.; Piantoni, S.; Nalotto, L.; Franceschini, F.; et al. Effects of Belimumab on Flare Rate and Expected Damage Progression in Patients With Active Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Arthritis Care Res. 2017, 69, 115–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Iaccarino, L.; Andreoli, L.; Bocci, E.B.; Bortoluzzi, A.; Ceccarelli, F.; Conti, F.; De Angelis, R.; De Marchi, G.; De Vita, S.; Di Matteo, A.; et al. Clinical predictors of response and discontinuation of belimumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in real life setting. Results of a large, multicentric, nationwide study. J. Autoimmun. 2018, 86, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Gatto, M.; Saccon, F.; Zen, M.; Regola, F.; Fredi, M.; Andreoli, L.; Tincani, A.; Urban, M.L.; Emmi, G.; Ceccarelli, F.; et al. Early Disease and Low Baseline Damage as Predictors of Response to Belimumab in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in a Real-Life Setting. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020, 72, 1314–1324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Altabás-González, I.; Pego-Reigosa, J.M.; Mouriño, C.; Jiménez, N.; Hernández-Martín, A.; Casafont-Solé, I.; Urguelles, J.F.; Román-Ivorra, J.A.; Navarro, M.d.l.R.; Galindo-Izquierdo, M.; et al. Thorough assessment of the effectiveness of belimumab in a large Spanish multicenter cohort of systemic lupus erythematosus patients. Rheumatology 2024, 64, 276–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Scheinberg, M.A.; Golmia, A.P.; Golmia, R.P.; Molotievschi, R.N.d.S.; Cortada, A.P.d.S. Lupus low disease activity (SLE) in patients treated with belimumab: A single-center real-life experience (2016–2019). Clin. Rheumatol. 2021, 40, 923–927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Furie, R.A.; Petri, M.A.; Wallace, D.J.; Ginzler, E.M.; Merrill, J.T.; Stohl, W.; Chatham, W.W.; Strand, V.; Weinstein, A.; Chevrier, M.R.; et al. Novel evidence-based systemic lupus erythematosus responder index. Arthritis Care Res. 2009, 61, 1143–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Gladman, D.D.; Ibañez, D.; Urowitz, M.B. Systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index 2000. J. Rheumatol. 2002, 29, 288–291. [Google Scholar]
  80. Chessa, E.; Piga, M.; Floris, A.; Devilliers, H.; Cauli, A.; Arnaud, L. Use of Physician Global Assessment in systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review of its psychometric properties. Rheumatology 2020, 59, 3622–3632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Piga, M.; Chessa, E.; Morand, E.F.; Ugarte-Gil, M.F.; Tektonidou, M.; van Vollenhoven, R.; Petri, M.; Arnaud, L.; Appenzeller, S.; Aranow, C.; et al. Physician Global Assessment International Standardisation COnsensus in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: The PISCOS study. Lancet Rheumatol. 2022, 4, e441–e449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Hay, E.; Bacon, P.; Gordon, C.; Isenberg, D.; Maddison, P.; Snaith, M.; Symmons, D.; Viner, N.; Zoma, A. The BILAG index: A reliable and valid instrument for measuring clinical disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus. Qjm Int. J. Med. 1993, 86, 447–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Furie, R.; Khamashta, M.; Merrill, J.T.; Werth, V.P.; Kalunian, K.; Brohawn, P.; Illei, G.G.; Drappa, J.; Wang, L.; Yoo, S.; et al. Anifrolumab, an Anti-Interferon-α Receptor Monoclonal Antibody, in Moderate-to-Severe Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017, 69, 376–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Furie, R.A.; Morand, E.F.; Bruce, I.N.; Manzi, S.; Kalunian, K.C.; Vital, E.M.; Ford, T.L.; Gupta, R.; Hiepe, F.; Santiago, M.; et al. Type I interferon inhibitor anifrolumab in active systemic lupus erythematosus (TULIP-1): A randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Rheumatol. 2019, 1, e208–e219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Morand, E.F.; Furie, R.; Tanaka, Y.; Bruce, I.N.; Askanase, A.D.; Richez, C.; Bae, S.-C.; Brohawn, P.Z.; Pineda, L.; Berglind, A.; et al. Trial of Anifrolumab in Active Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 211–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Wallace, D.J.; Kalunian, K.; Petri, M.A.; Strand, V.; Houssiau, F.A.; Pike, M.; Kilgallen, B.; Bongardt, S.; Barry, A.; Kelley, L.; et al. Efficacy and safety of epratuzumab in patients with moderate/severe active systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from EMBLEM, a phase IIb, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2014, 73, 183–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Connelly, K.; Golder, V.; Kandane-Rathnayake, R.; Morand, E.F. Clinician-reported outcome measures in lupus trials: A problem worth solving. Lancet Rheumatol. 2021, 3, e595–e603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Bruce, I.N.; Furie, R.A.; Morand, E.F.; Manzi, S.; Tanaka, Y.; Kalunian, K.C.; Merrill, J.T.; Puzio, P.; Maho, E.; Kleoudis, C.; et al. Concordance and discordance in SLE clinical trial outcome measures: Analysis of three anifrolumab phase 2/3 trials. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2022, 81, 962–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Fanouriakis, A.; Kostopoulou, M.; Andersen, J.; Aringer, M.; Arnaud, L.; Bae, S.-C.; Boletis, J.; Bruce, I.N.; Cervera, R.; Doria, A.; et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of systemic lupus erythematosus: 2023 update. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2024, 83, 15–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Nikolopoulos, D.; Lourenço, M.H.; Depascale, R.; Triantafyllias, K.; Parodis, I. Evolving Concepts in Treat-to-Target Strategies for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Mediterr. J. Rheumatol. 2024, 35, 328–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Franklyn, K.; Lau, C.S.; Navarra, S.V.; Louthrenoo, W.; Lateef, A.; Hamijoyo, L.; Wahono, C.S.; Le Chen, S.; Jin, O.; Morton, S.; et al. Definition and initial validation of a Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS). Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2016, 75, 1615–1621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Golder, V.; Kandane-Rathnayake, R.; Huq, M.; Nim, H.T.; Louthrenoo, W.; Luo, S.F.; Wu, Y.-J.J.; Lateef, A.; Sockalingam, S.; Navarra, S.V.; et al. Lupus low disease activity state as a treatment endpoint for systemic lupus erythematosus: A prospective validation study. Lancet Rheumatol. 2019, 1, e95–e102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. van Vollenhoven, R.; Voskuyl, A.; Bertsias, G.; Aranow, C.; Aringer, M.; Arnaud, L.; Askanase, A.; Balážová, P.; Bonfa, E.; Bootsma, H.; et al. A framework for remission in SLE: Consensus findings from a large international task force on definitions of remission in SLE (DORIS). Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2017, 76, 554–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. van Vollenhoven, R.F.; Bertsias, G.; Doria, A.; Isenberg, D.; Morand, E.; Petri, M.A.; Pons-Estel, B.A.; Rahman, A.; Ugarte-Gil, M.F.; Voskuyl, A.; et al. 2021 DORIS definition of remission in SLE: Final recommendations from an international task force. Lupus Sci. Med. 2021, 8, e000538, Correction in Lupus Sci. Med. 2022, 9, e000538corr1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Fan, C.; Yang, T.; Zheng, S.; Liao, X.; Xie, R.; Chen, S.; Li, J. Frequency and predictors for early-achieved lupus low disease activity state in systemic lupus erythematosus patients treated with telitacicept or belimumab: A real-life, single-center observational study. Front. Immunol. 2024, 15, 1423035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Jolly, M. How does quality of life of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus compare with that of other common chronic illnesses? J. Rheumatol. 2005, 32, 1706–1708. [Google Scholar]
  97. Webster, K.; Cella, D.; Yost, K. The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System: Properties, applications, and interpretation. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 2003, 1, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Rabin, R.; de Charro, F. EQ-5D: A measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann. Med. 2001, 33, 337–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Dooley, M.; Houssiau, F.; Aranow, C.; D’cruz, D.; Askanase, A.; Roth, D.; Zhong, Z.; Cooper, S.; Freimuth, W.; Ginzler, E. Effect of belimumab treatment on renal outcomes: Results from the phase 3 belimumab clinical trials in patients with SLE. Lupus 2013, 22, 63–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Parodis, I.; Vital, E.M.; Hassan, S.-U.; Jönsen, A.; Bengtsson, A.A.; Eriksson, P.; Leonard, D.; Gunnarsson, I.; Rönnblom, L.; Sjöwall, C. De novo lupus nephritis during treatment with belimumab. Rheumatology 2021, 60, 4348–4354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Delfino, J.; dos Santos, T.A.F.G.; Skare, T.L. Comparison of lupus patients with early and late onset nephritis: A study in 71 patients from a single referral center. Hortic. Bras. 2020, 60, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Parodis, I.; Åkerström, E.; Sjöwall, C.; Sohrabian, A.; Jönsen, A.; Gomez, A.; Frodlund, M.; Zickert, A.; Bengtsson, A.A.; Rönnelid, J.; et al. Autoantibody and Cytokine Profiles during Treatment with Belimumab in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 3463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Yu, X.; Chen, N.; Xue, J.; Mok, C.C.; Bae, S.-C.; Peng, X.; Chen, W.; Ren, H.; Li, X.; Noppakun, K.; et al. Efficacy and Safety of Belimumab in Patients With Lupus Nephritis: Subgroup Analyses of a Phase 3 Randomized Trial in the East Asian Population. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2023, 81, 294–306.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Murimi-Worstell, I.B.; Lin, D.H.; Nab, H.; Kan, H.J.; Onasanya, O.; Tierce, J.C.; Wang, X.; Desta, B.; Alexander, G.C.; Hammond, E.R. Association between organ damage and mortality in systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2020, 10, e031850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Kapsala, N.; Nikolopoulos, D.; Fanouriakis, A. The Multiple Faces of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Pearls and Pitfalls for Diagnosis. Mediterr. J. Rheumatol. 2024, 35, 319–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Furie, R.A.; Wallace, D.J.; Aranow, C.; Fettiplace, J.; Wilson, B.; Mistry, P.; Roth, D.A.; Gordon, D. Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Belimumab in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Continuation of a Seventy-Six-Week Phase III Parent Study in the United States. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018, 70, 868–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. van Vollenhoven, R.F.; Navarra, S.V.; Levy, R.A.; Thomas, M.; Heath, A.; Lustine, T.; Adamkovic, A.; Fettiplace, J.; Wang, M.L.; Ji, B.; et al. Long-term safety and limited organ damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus treated with belimumab: A Phase III study extension. Rheumatology 2020, 59, 281–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Tanaka, Y.; Bae, S.-C.; Bass, D.; Curtis, P.; Chu, M.; DeRose, K.; Ji, B.; Kurrasch, R.; Lowe, J.; Meizlik, P.; et al. Long-term open-label continuation study of the safety and efficacy of belimumab for up to 7 years in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus from Japan and South Korea. RMD Open 2021, 7, e001629, Correction in RMD Open 2024, 10, e001629corr1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Zhang, F.; Zheng, J.; Li, Y.; Wang, G.; Wang, M.; Su, Y.; Gu, J.; Li, X.; Bass, D.; Chu, M.; et al. Phase 3, long-term, open-label extension period of safety and efficacy of belimumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in China, for up to 6 years. RMD Open 2022, 8, e001669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Maslen, T.; Bruce, I.N.; D’CRuz, D.; Ianosev, M.; Bass, D.L.; Wilkinson, C.; Roth, D.A. Efficacy of belimumab in two serologically distinct high disease activity subgroups of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: Post-hoc analysis of data from the phase III programme. Lupus Sci. Med. 2021, 8, e000459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. van Vollenhoven, R.F.; Petri, M.A.; Cervera, R.; Roth, D.A.; Ji, B.N.; Kleoudis, C.S.; Zhong, Z.J.; Freimuth, W. Belimumab in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus: High disease activity predictors of response. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2012, 71, 1343–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Doria, A.; Stohl, W.; Schwarting, A.; Okada, M.; Scheinberg, M.; van Vollenhoven, R.; Hammer, A.E.; Groark, J.; Bass, D.; Fox, N.L.; et al. Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Belimumab in Anti–Double-Stranded DNA–Positive, Hypocomplementemic Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018, 70, 1256–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Parodis, I.; Gomez, A.; Lindblom, J.; Chow, J.W.; Doria, A.; Gatto, M. Early Changes in B and Plasma Cell Subsets and Traditional Serological Markers as Predictors of SRI-4 Response to Therapy in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Front. Med. 2022, 9, 852162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Gomez, A.; Lindblom, J.; Parodis, I.; Bertsias, G. Treat-to-target in SLE: Is serology important? Results from an integrated analysis of five randomized clinical trials of belimumab. Rheumatology 2025, 64, 3598–3605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Herle, M.; Micali, N.; Abdulkadir, M.; Loos, R.; Bryant-Waugh, R.; Hübel, C.; Bulik, C.M.; De Stavola, B.L. Identifying typical trajectories in longitudinal data: Modelling strategies and interpretations. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2020, 35, 205–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Chatzidionysiou, K.; Samoli, E.; Sfikakis, P.P.; Tektonidou, M.G. Effect of belimumab treatment on antiphospholipid antibody levels: Post-hoc analysis based on two randomised placebo-controlled trials in systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2020, 79, 304–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Bettiol, A.; Pregnolato, F.; Sciascia, S.; Emmi, G.; Prisco, D.; Meroni, P.L. Association of subcutaneous belimumab and long-term antimalarial treatment reduces antiphospholipid antibodies levels in systemic lupus erythematosus: Post-hoc analysis of a randomised placebo-controlled trial—Comment on: ‘Effect of belimumab treatment on antiphospholipid antibody levels: Post-hoc analysis based on two randomised placebo-controlled trials in systemic lupus erythematosus’ by Chatzidionysiou et al. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2022, 81, e140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Hernández-Breijo, B.; Gomez, A.; Soukka, S.; Johansson, P.; Parodis, I. Antimalarial agents diminish while methotrexate, azathioprine and mycophenolic acid increase BAFF levels in systemic lupus erythematosus. Autoimmun. Rev. 2019, 18, 102372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Wallace, D.J.; Atsumi, T.; Daniels, M.; Hammer, A.; Meizlik, P.; Quasny, H.; Schwarting, A.; Zhang, F.; Roth, D.A. Safety of belimumab in adult patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: Results of a large integrated analysis of controlled clinical trial data. Lupus 2022, 31, 1649–1659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. D’CRuz, D.; Eriksson, G.; Green, Y.; Hammer, A.; Ji, B.; Meizlik, P.; Roth, D.A. Safety and efficacy of belimumab in older adults with SLE: Results of an integrated analysis of clinical trial data. Lupus Sci. Med. 2023, 10, e000830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Wallace, D.; Navarra, S.; Petri, M.; Gallacher, A.; Thomas, M.; Furie, R.; Levy, R.; van Vollenhoven, R.; Cooper, S.; Zhong, Z.; et al. Safety profile of belimumab: Pooled data from placebo-controlled phase 2 and 3 studies in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus 2013, 22, 144–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Sheikh, S.Z.; Scheinberg, M.A.; Wei, J.C.-C.; Tegzova, D.; Stohl, W.; de Toledo, R.A.; Mucenic, T.; Banfi, M.R.A.; Maksimowicz-McKinnon, K.; Abud-Mendoza, C.; et al. Mortality and adverse events of special interest with intravenous belimumab for adults with active, autoantibody-positive systemic lupus erythematosus (BASE): A multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 4 trial. Lancet Rheumatol. 2021, 3, e122–e130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Martin-Iglesias, D.; Paredes-Ruiz, D.; Ruiz-Irastorza, G. Use of Glucocorticoids in SLE: A Clinical Approach. Mediterr. J. Rheumatol. 2024, 35, 342–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Ren, Y.; Yan, T.; Wang, C. Discontinuation of belimumab in systemic lupus erythematosus patients who achieved disease stability: A retrospective cohort study. Clin. Rheumatol. 2025, 44, 3539–3547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Parodis, I.; Wincup, C.; Touma, Z.; Andersen, J.; Strand, V.; Sjöwall, C. Holistic approaches in systemic lupus erythematosus: Do physicians avoid addressing difficult-to-treat but highly relevant symptoms? RMD Open 2025, 11, e005400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Parodis, I.; Studenic, P. Patient-Reported Outcomes in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Can Lupus Patients Take the Driver’s Seat in Their Disease Monitoring? J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1. Summary of belimumab trials.
Table 1. Summary of belimumab trials.
StudySettingPopulationStudy GroupsPrimary EndpointPrimary Endpoint Achieved?
Wallace et al. 2009 [55]Phase II RCTAdults with active SLE (N = 449) belimumab 1, 4 and 10 mg/kg i.v.; placeboPercent change in
SELENA-SLEDAI at
week 24		No
Navarra et al. 2011 [2]Phase III RCTAdults with active SLE (N = 867)belimumab 1 and 10 mg/kg i.v.; placeboSRI-4 at week 52Yes
Furie et al. 2011 [3]Phase III RCTAdults with active SLE (N = 819)belimumab 1 and 10 mg/kg i.v.; placeboSRI-4 at week 52Yes
Stohl et al. 2017 [6]Phase III RCTAdults with active SLE (N = 836)belimumab 200 mg s.c.; placeboSRI-4 at week 52Yes
Zhang et al. 2018 [4]Phase III RCTAdults with active SLE (N = 677) belimumab 10 mg/kg i.v.; placeboSRI-4 at week 52Yes
Furie et al. 2020 [7]Phase III RCTAdults with active LN (N = 448)belimumab 10 mg/kg i.v.; placeboPERR at week 104Yes
Brunner et al. 2020 [56]Phase II RCTChildren with active SLE (N = 93)belimumab 10 mg/kg i.v.; placeboSRI-4 at week 52No
Ginzler et al. 2022 [5]Phase III/IV RCTAdults with active SLE (N = 448)belimumab 10 mg/kg i.v.; placeboSRI-SLEDAI-2K at week 52No
Aranow et al. 2024 [57]Phase III RCTAdults with active SLE (N = 263)rituximab 1000 mg i.v. or placebo on top of belimumab 200 mg s.c.SLEDAI-2K ≤ 2 without immunosuppressants and glucocorticoids at a dose ≤ 5 mg/day of a prednisone equivalent) at week 52No
i.v.: intravenous; LN: lupus nephritis; PERR: primary efficacy renal response; RCT: randomised controlled trial; s.c.: subcutaneous; SELENA-SLEDAI: Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus: National Assessment version of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index; SLE: systemic lupus erythematosus; SLEDAI-2K: SLE Disease Activity Index 2000; SRI-4: SLE Responder Index 4.
Table 2. Efficacy of belimumab according to outcome measures in post hoc analyses of clinical trials of belimumab.
Table 2. Efficacy of belimumab according to outcome measures in post hoc analyses of clinical trials of belimumab.
Author, YearTrial (s)Population *ComparatorMain Findings
SRI-4
Brunner et al., 2021 [11]PLUTO, BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-NEA, EMBRACE93 paediatric; 2250 adults (N = 2343)Adult versus paediatricComparable SRI-4 response rates in children (52.8%) and adults (43.2–57.6%) treated with belimumab
Neupane et al. 2023 [13]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-NEA, BLISS-SC, EMBRACEN = 3080 Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab yielded greater SRI-4 response rates (OR: 1.7)
BICLA
Parodis et al. 2025 [18]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-NEA, BLISS-SC, EMBRACEN = 2800Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab yielded greater BICLA response rates (OR: 1.5)
LLDAS
Oon et al. 2019 [8]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab yielded greater LLDAS attainment rates (OR: 2.3)
Parodis et al. 2019 [9]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 563NASDI > 0 had a negative impact on LLDAS attainment among patients receiving belimumab (OR: 0.4)
Parodis et al. 2024 [14]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-NEA, BLISS-SC, EMBRACEN = 3086Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab yielded greater LLDAS attainment rates (RR: 1.7)
Depascale et al. 2025 [15]BLISS-SCN = 796NAThree distinct endotypes based on B cell subset and serological profiles displayed distinct belimumab benefit for sustained LLDAS
DORIS remission
Parodis et al. 2019 [9]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab yielded greater sustained DORIS remission attainment rates (OR: 2.1)
Parodis et al. 2024 [14]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-NEA, BLISS-SC, EMBRACEN = 3086Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab yielded greater DORIS remission attainment rates (RR: 1.5)
Depascale et al. 2025 [15]BLISS-SCN = 796NAThree distinct endotypes based on B cell subset and serological profiles displayed distinct belimumab benefit for sustained DORIS remission
PROMs
Strand et al. 2014 [24]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab yielded greater improvements in PCS, SF-36 vitality domain, and FACIT-F scores
Furie et al. 2014 [23]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684SRI-4 responders versus non-respondersResponders had greater SF-36 PCS (4.9 vs. 2.6), MCS (4.4 vs. 1.7) and FACIT-F (5.2 vs. 3.0) score change
van Vollenhoven et al. 2018 [25]BLISS-SCN = 833SRI-4 responders versus non-respondersResponders had greater mean change in FACIT-F scores (35.6 vs. 18.7%)
Borg et al. 2021 [21]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab protected against adverse SF-36 general health (OR: 0.8) and FACIT-F < 30 (OR: 0.8)
Gomez et al. 2021 [20]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 760Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab protected against adverse SF-36 physical functioning (OR: 0.6) and FACIT-F (OR: 0.5)
Gomez et al. 2020 [22]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684NAOverweight and obesity were associated with PCS, FACIT-F and EQ-5D scores
Lindblom et al. 2021 [19]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab yielded higher EQ-5D FHS frequencies (26.1 vs. 19.4%; OR: 1.6)
Rendas-Baum et al. 2021 [26]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SCN = 2520Responders versus non-respondersImprovement in PGA and BILAG scores was associated in higher improvement in FACIT-F scores (−4.4 vs. −2.2)
Emamikia et al. 2022 [12]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684NARemission and LLDAS contributed to clinically important HRQoL benefit in a time-dependent manner
Lindblom et al. 2022 [34]BLISS-52 and BLISS-76 open label studiesN = 973NAEQ-5D FHS was associated with reduced hazard to accrue organ damage (HR: 0.6)
Borg et al. 2023 [32]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684NAObesity was associated with impaired mobility (OR: 2.1), affecting HRQoL outcomes
Jesus et al. 2024 [31]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684LDA/remission attainers versus non attainers Patients achieving SLE-DAS remission and LDA had greater improvements in SF-36 and FACIT-F scores
Parodis et al. 2024 [35]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, EMBRACEN = 2868NAFour classes with distinct disease trajectories upon treatment initiation were identified, based on physician-and patient-reported (FACIT-F) outcome measures
Rendas-Baum et al. 2024 [27]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, EMBRACEN = 1066Responders versus non-respondersResponders had greater improvement in SF-36 and FACIT-F scores across several SLEDAI organ domains
Botto et al. 2025 [33]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1642NAOlder age, female sex, non-Asian ancestry, high disease activity and low UPCR were associated with a lack of EQ-5D FHS experience at baseline and week 52
Parodis et al. 2025 [18]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, EMBRACEN = 2406NADespite LLDAS or DORIS remission, substantial proportions of SLE patients experienced poor HRQoL
BLISS: Study of Belimumab in Subjects with SLE; BICLA: British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)-based Combined Lupus Assessment; DORIS: Definitions of Remission in SLE; EMBRACE: Efficacy and Safety of Belimumab in Black Race Patients with SLE; EQ-5D: EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire; FACIT-F: Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue questionnaire; FHS: full health state; HRQoL: health-related quality of life; LLDAS: Lupus Low Disease Activity Status; MCS: mental component summary; NA: not applicable; OR: odds ratio; PCS: physical component summary; PLUTO: Paediatric Lupus Trial of Belimumab Plus Background Standard Therapy; PROMs: Patient-reported outcome measures; RR: risk ratio; SF-36: Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form; SRI-4: SLE Responder Index 4; ST: standard therapy; UPCR: urine protein to creatinine ratio. * In case of multiple analyses, N refers to the analysis comprising the highest number of patients.
Table 3. Summary of post hoc analyses of the BLISS trials analysing organ-specific manifestations of SLE.
Table 3. Summary of post hoc analyses of the BLISS trials analysing organ-specific manifestations of SLE.
Author, YearTrial (s)PopulationComparatorMain Findings
Lupus nephritis
Dooley et al. 2013 [99]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684Belimumab versus ST aloneRates of renal flare, renal remission, and improvement in the BILAG and SLEDAI domains; proteinuria reduction favoured belimumab, although the between-group differences were not significant
Rovin et al. 2022 [38]BLISS-LNN = 448Belimumab versus ST aloneBenefits of belimumab in terms of renal response rates were more prominent in patients with PLN compared with MLN; reduced risk of renal flares in belimumab compared with placebo (HR: 0.5); slower eGFR decline in belimumab versus placebo
Anders et al. 2023 [37]BLISS-LNN = 448Belimumab versus ST aloneBenefits of belimumab on kidney outcomes were consistent for newly diagnosed and relapsed patients, irrespective of GC pulses at induction
Malvar et al. 2023 [39]BLISS-LNN = 20Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab use increase the possibility of achieving complete histological response in patients undergoing repeat kidney biopsy
Parodis et al. 2023 [43]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, BLISS-NEA, EMBRACEN = 1844Belimumab versus ST alone1 mg/kg i.v. and 200 mg s.c., but not 10 mg/kg i.v., belimumab protected against de novo renal flares
Yu et al. 2023 [103]BLISS-LNN = 142Belimumab versus ST aloneSafety and efficacy of belimumab in the East Asian population were consistent with data in the overall population
Gomez et al. 2024 [44]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, BLISS-NEAN = 3225Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab conferred enhanced protection against renal flares when co-administered with AMA
Jägerback et al. 2024 [45]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, BLISS-NEAN = 3225NACurrent/former renal involvement, hypalbuminaemia, proteinuria and low C3 were associated with impending renal flare
Neuropsychiatric lupus
Palazzo et al. 2024 [42]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, BLISS-NEA, EMBRACEN = 3638Belimumab versus STBelimumab use yielded no clear protection against NPSLE flare development
Nikolopoulos et al. 2024 [29]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, EMBRACEN = 2968NPSLE versus non NPSLENPSLE patients reported lower EQ-5D FHS frequencies, PCS, MCS scores, and severe fatigue
Nikolopoulos et al. 2024 [41]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, BLISS-NEA, EMBRACEN = 3545NPSLE versus non NPSLENPSLE patients were more likely to develop damage (OR: 2.9) across several organ domains beyond NP
Skin and joint
Manzi et al. 2012 [40]BLISS-52, BLISS-76N = 1684Belimumab versus ST aloneGreater improvement in BILAG and SLEDAI mucocutaneous and musculoskeletal domains in belimumab-treated patients compared with placebo
Kneeland et al., 2022 [47] PLUTO, BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, BLISS-NEA, EMBRACEN = 1910Belimumab versus ST aloneOR of 1.4 of cutaneous response attainment at week 52 and OR of 0.5 of cutaneous flare in belimumab-treated patients versus placebo
Grosso et al. 2025 [36]BLISS-52, BLISS-76, BLISS-SC, BLISS-NEA, EMBRACEN = 3086Belimumab versus ST aloneBelimumab was superior to placebo in inducing mucocutaneous improvement at week 52, measured by BILAG (OR: 1.3) and SLEDAI-2K (OR: 1.4)
Organ damage (SDI)
Bruce et al. 2016 [50]BLISS-52, BLISS-76 open label extensionsN = 998NALow incidence of organ damage in patients treated with long-term belimumab
Urowitz et al. 2019 [48]BLISS-52, BLISS-76 open label extensionsN = 99Belimumab versus ST aloneSmaller SDI increase (mean difference: −0.4) and reduced likelihood of SDI progression (HR: 0.4) in belimumab-treated patients versus ST alone
Urowitz et al. 2020 [49]BLISS-52, BLISS-76 open label extensionsN = 181Belimumab versus ST aloneSmaller SDI increase (mean difference: −0.5) and reduced likelihood of SDI progression (HR: 0.4) in belimumab-treated patients versus ST alone
AMA: antimalarial agents; BILAG: British Isles Lupus Assessment Group; BLISS: Study of Belimumab in Subjects with SLE; eGFR: estimated glomerular filtration rate; EMBRACE: Efficacy and Safety of Belimumab in Black Race Patients with SLE; GC: glucocorticoid; HR: hazard ratio; MLN: membranous lupus nephritis; NPSLE: neuropsychiatric SLE; OR: odds ratio; PLN: proliferative lupus nephritis; PLUTO: Paediatric Lupus Trial of Belimumab Plus Background Standard Therapy; SDI: Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Damage Index; SLEDAI: SLE Disease Activity Index; ST: standard therapy.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Palazzo, L.; Tsoi, A.; Nikolopoulos, D.; Parodis, I. Lessons Learnt from the Belimumab Trials in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27, 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27010037

AMA Style

Palazzo L, Tsoi A, Nikolopoulos D, Parodis I. Lessons Learnt from the Belimumab Trials in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2026; 27(1):37. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27010037

Chicago/Turabian Style

Palazzo, Leonardo, Alexander Tsoi, Dionysis Nikolopoulos, and Ioannis Parodis. 2026. "Lessons Learnt from the Belimumab Trials in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 27, no. 1: 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27010037

APA Style

Palazzo, L., Tsoi, A., Nikolopoulos, D., & Parodis, I. (2026). Lessons Learnt from the Belimumab Trials in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 27(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27010037

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop