MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005817375 · doi:10.1097/bor.0b013e32834ff258

Systemic lupus and malignancies

2012· review· en· W2005817375 on OpenAlexaff
Sasha Bernatsky, Mruganka Kale, Rosalind Ramsey‐Goldman, Caroline Gordon, Ann E. Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Rheumatology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSystemic lupus erythematosusLymphomaImmunosuppressionDiseaseProstate cancerPopulationEndometrial cancerImmunologyCancerLupus erythematosusOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Individuals with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have an increased susceptibility to certain types of cancer. Given concerns focused on this issue, we present a review of this important topic. RECENT FINDINGS: In non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), a several-fold increased risk is seen in SLE versus the general population. It has long been suspected that immunosuppressive drugs play a role in this risk, but there may be other important driving factors as well. Lupus disease activity may itself heighten the risk of lymphoma in diseases like SLE. Lung cancer risk also is increased in SLE; smoking appears to drive this risk. Additionally, cervical dysplasia risk is increased in SLE, particularly with immunosuppressive drug exposure. An altered clearance of cancer-related viral agents in SLE (due to the disease and/or immunosuppression) may contribute to this risk and may also drive the risk for other cancers (such as vulvovaginal and hepatic carcinomas) in SLE. On the positive side, one new and significant finding is that SLE patients seem to have a decreased risk of certain nonhematologic cancers (breast, ovarian, endometrial, and prostate). SUMMARY: Though much has been learnt so far regarding the risk in SLE, much yet remains unknown.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.147
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in RheumatologySame topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchFrench-language works237,207