The association of HLA-DRB1 alleles with rheumatoid arthritis in the Chinese Shantou population: a follow-up studyThis paper is one of a selection of papers in this Special Issue, entitled International Symposium on Recent Advances in Molecular, Clinical, and Social Medicine, and has undergone the Journal's usual peer-review process.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the distribution of HLA-DRB1 alleles in a sample of the Chinese Shantou population, and explored the relationship between HLA-DRB1 alleles and the susceptibility and clinical features of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We studied 117 consecutive patients with RA and control groups, including 38 cases of systemic lupus erythematosus and 100 healthy individuals. HLA-DRB1 genotyping was performed using PCR with sequence-specific primers. HLA-DRB1*04 subtypes were detected using spot hybridization of PCR products with sequence-specific oligonucleotide probes. We compared the frequency of HLA-DRB1 alleles in healthy control patients with that in patients with RA. Patients with RA were evaluated for sex, age at disease onset, disease duration, extra-articular involvement, presence of autoantibodies, global functional status, and radiographic damage. The frequency of HLA-DRB1*04 was found to be significantly higher in RA patients than in healthy individuals (49.6% vs 18.0%, odds ratio = 4.478, P < 0.001). HLA-DRB1*0405 was the most prominently associated subtype in RA patients (62.1% vs 27.8%, odds ratio = 4.255, P = 0.011). Compared with the HLA-DRB1*04-negative RA group, the mean duration of RA in the HLA-DRB1*04-positive RA group was longer, and the mean age at disease onset was lower. A 2-9 year follow-up study was performed, and the risk factors associated with the radiographic progression of RA were determined. Logistic regression analysis revealed that only HLA-DRB1*04 alleles were significantly associated with the radiographic progression of RA (B = 2.652, P = 0.018, Exp(B) = 14.182). Our observations indicated that the HLA-DRB1*04 alleles, especially the subtype HLA-DRB1*0405, were significantly associated with RA susceptibility in the Chinese Shantou population. The HLA-DRB1*04 alleles may be associated with the severity of RA.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".