The Natural Course of Radiographic Progression in Ankylosing Spondylitis — Evidence for Major Individual Variations in a Large Proportion of Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the natural course of radiographic progression and to differentiate rates of progression in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: Overall, 146 patients with AS who had never received anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy were analyzed in this retrospective cohort study. The main inclusion criterion was the availability of complete sets of cervical and lumbar radiographs from at least 2 timepoints within 6 years. Using the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score (mSASSS), we quantified the structural changes and assessed different rates of radiographic progression based on development of new syndesmophytes/year. RESULTS: The mean followup time was 3.8 +/- 1.7 years (range 1-6) and the mean number of consecutive radiographs was 2.7 (range 2-6) per patient. The mean mSASSS change/year was 1.3 +/- 2.5 units. Radiographic progression showed much variability, since 43% of patients showed a 4-fold greater rate of progression than the mean, and 23% had no progression. The data-based definition for "fast progression" was calculated as a change > 5 mSASSS units or > 2 new syndesmophytes; for "moderate progression" as change of 2.0-5.0 mSASSS units or < 2 new syndesmophytes; and for "slow progression" as change of < 2 mSASSS units or no more than 1 new syndesmophyte within 2 years. The only factor to predict future radiographic progression was the number of syndesmophytes at baseline. CONCLUSION: Radiographic progression in AS is rather variable and many patients show high rates of progression. On the basis of this retrospective dataset we propose to differentiate patients on an individual level according to their progression rates: patients with fast, moderate, and slow radiographic progression, assessed by counting new syndesmophytes. Predicting radiographic progression remains difficult; only the prevalence of syndesmophytes at baseline is predictive of future damage.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".