Zahedan J Res Med Sci. 2021 July; 23(3):e86588. Published online 2021 July 24. doi: 10.5812/zjrms.86588. Research Article Interpretation of Clinical and Laboratory Findings of Patients with Lupus Nephritis According to the Results of Biopsy Parviz Soufivand 1 , Abdolrahman Rostamian 2, 3 , Mohammad Reza Abbasi 4 and Fatemeh Shahbazi 5, * 1 Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran 2 Rheumatology Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 3 Center for Research on Occupational Disease, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 4 Nephrology Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 5 Department of Biology, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran * Corresponding author: Department of Biology, Payame Noor University, P.O. Box: 19395-4697, Tehran, Iran. Email: fatemehs2011@gmail.com Received 2018 November 21; Revised 2020 June 09; Accepted 2020 June 24. Abstract Background: There are controversies regarding the diagnosis of lupus nephritis. Also, its clinical manifestations and severity are different from one patient to another. Objectives: The current study aimed to interpret clinical and laboratory features of lupus nephritis according to the results of the biopsy. Methods: Following a retrospective design, 30 patients with lupus, who were candidates for renal biopsy and undergoing kidney biopsy, were studied. Clinical findings (blood pressure and limb edema) and laboratory findings (Cr, ESR, CRP, BUN, C3, C4, CH50, Anti-ds DNA, and hematuria) were gathered. Finally, the diagnostic value of clinical and laboratory findings was interpreted accord- ing to the biopsies and the staging of samples in the pathology. Data were analyzed using SPSS. Quantitative variables are displayed using mean and quartiles. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare study groups. Also, independent samples t-test and Levene’s test were used to evaluate variances of quantitative variables. Results: Of 30 cases, 5 had a biopsy of 3 and FSGN. Also, 8 cases were on stages 3 and 4, 9 had a stage of 4 biopsy, and 8 cases were on stage 4 - 5, 5, and 5 - 6. The association between age, Limp edema, ESR, and biopsy was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusions: This study demonstrated the usefulness of clinical and laboratory findings to determine the severity of the disease in the shortest time, mainly due to its easy, non-invasive access and early preparation of the results, which will facilitate the initiation of treatment. Keywords: Lupus Nephritides, Diagnosis, Biopsy 1. Background There are controversies regarding the diagnosis of lu- pus nephritis because its clinical manifestations and sever- ity are different from one patient to another. Without accu- rate monitoring, lupus nephritis can lead to end-stage re- nal disease (ESRD). Therefore, it is necessary to find a non- invasive method for the diagnosis and monitoring of lu- pus nephritis. Serum creatinine levels, urine protein, and urine sediments level (RBC cast) can be used to evaluate the response to the treatment. In addition, the size of the autoantibodies is useful to detect lupus nephritis and disease activity monitoring (1-5). As the severity of lupus nephritis is associated with its clinical manifestations and histopathology, biopsy and histopathology can be consid- ered as the gold standard for its diagnosis. A biopsy is an in- vasive method with complications such as bleeding, intra- venous artery fistula, and infection. Although it provides useful clinical and laboratory findings, its repetition is dif- ficult and is not accessible at all healthcare centers (3-7). According to the currently available evidence, the use of clinical and laboratory findings can be considered as the gold standard for early diagnosis of lupus nephritis, which is a non-invasive, low cost, and easy to use method (5-7). Our literature review revealed that few quantitative biopsy-related criteria have been compared in terms of the degree of kidney involvement. There are also other impor- tant criteria, such as clinical and laboratory criteria, that their association with renal involvement in biopsy have not been studied. 2. Objectives In this study, in addition to a wider comparison of clin- ical and laboratory symptoms with the degree of kidney in- volvement, the diagnostic value of laboratory and clinical Copyright © 2021, Zahedan Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.