Survival, Causes of Death, and Prognostic Factors in Systemic Sclerosis: Analysis of 947 Brazilian Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze survival, prognostic factors, and causes of death in a large cohort of patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). METHODS: From 1991 to 2010, 947 patients with SSc were treated at 2 referral university centers in Brazil. Causes of death were considered SSc-related and non-SSc-related. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to identify prognostic factors. Survival at 5 and 10 years was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-eight patients died during the followup. Among the 110 deaths considered related to SSc, there was predominance of lung (48.1%) and heart (24.5%) involvement. Most of the 58 deaths not related to SSc were caused by infection, cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease, and cancer. Male sex, modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS) > 20, osteoarticular involvement, lung involvement, and renal crisis were the main prognostic factors associated to death. Overall survival rate was 90% for 5 years and 84% for 10 years. Patients presented worse prognosis if they had diffuse SSc (85% vs 92% at 5 yrs, respectively, and 77% vs 87% at 10 yrs, compared to limited SSc), male sex (77% vs 90% at 5 yrs and 64% vs 86% at 10 yrs, compared to female sex), and mRSS > 20 (83% vs 90% at 5 yrs and 66% vs 86% at 10 yrs, compared to mRSS < 20). CONCLUSION: Survival was worse in male patients with diffuse SSc, and lung and heart involvement represented the main causes of death in this South American series of patients with SSc.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".