Plasma exchange in antineutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article reviews the use of plasma exchange for the treatment of antineutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV) with a focus on current controversies and knowledge gaps. RECENT FINDINGS: Experimental evidence suggesting that antineutrophil cytoplasm antibodies are pathogenic continues to evolve and support the theory that rapid removal of antineutrophil cytoplasm antibody with plasma exchange may be beneficial. Although early, small trials of plasma exchange in rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis and vasculitis suggested that plasma exchange may improve a patient's potential for renal recovery, more recent analyses have called the net benefit of plasma exchange into question. Furthermore, there is uncertainty as to whether plasma exchange is beneficial to patients with particular organ manifestations of their AAV (e.g., lung hemorrhage). SUMMARY: Whether plasma exchange should be used routinely in antineutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis, in patients with certain manifestations or severity of disease only, or not at all, remains unclear. Given that plasma exchange is expensive and invasive, further research to resolve these uncertainties is required.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".