Isolated Hematuria and Sterile Pyuria May Indicate Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify patients presenting with isolated hematuria and/or pyuria in the absence of other systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) disease activity, describe their demographics, and determine whether they present with evidence of SLE flare in a period adjacent to the presentation. METHODS: We studied patients followed at the University of Toronto Lupus Clinic between 1970 and 2012. An episode of isolated hematuria (> 5 red blood cells per high power field) and/or pyuria (> 5 white blood cells per high power field) was defined as 2 consecutive visits with these findings in the absence of other concurrent SLE manifestations such as proteinuria, casts, or azotemia. We then excluded patients whose findings might be explained by urinary tract infections, menstruation, urolithiasis, and/or anticoagulation. Only patients presenting with no other SLE disease activity were included. RESULTS: Isolated hematuria and/or pyuria were identified in 49 patients, of whom 17 were excluded according to the criteria above, leaving 32. Twenty-four patients had another renal manifestation 1 year before and/or after the occurrence; 27 had a non-renal manifestation 1 year before and/or after the occurrence; 3 patients had a biopsy in the same time frame, all with evidence of active lupus nephritis. Therefore the majority of patients with an occurrence of isolated hematuria and/or pyuria had evidence of renal or other non-renal SLE disease activity at a time adjacent to this presentation. CONCLUSION: Although not proven, our results suggest that these manifestations were associated with SLE activity, either before or after the episode, and therefore may represent a phase of active disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".