Serum Levels of Soluble CD40 Ligand at Flare and at Remission in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To perform a prospective evaluation of soluble CD40 ligand (sCD40L) levels according to the activity of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: Two serum samples were taken from 53 patients with SLE: at flare and at remission. Clinical and biological measures (sCD40L levels were measured by a commercial ELISA) were evaluated in both situations. RESULTS: Patients with SLE had significantly lower median levels of sCD40L during flare than during remission [3365 (6157) vs 7125 (4122) pg/ml; p < 0.001]. The multivariate analysis to explain those patients with lower values of sCD40L during flare than during remission included 3 variables: 2 related to flare (prednisone dose received 192,000 x 10(6)/l) and one related to lower changes in SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) score. We regrouped patients with the 2 characteristics related to flare as Group 4, and the others were Group 123. All patients with low SLEDAI scores at flare had statistically significant lower sCD40L levels during flare than during remission. When flare SLEDAI scores were higher than the 50th percentile, patients of Group 123 showed the same behavior and even more diminished levels of sCD40L during flare than patients of Group 123 with low SLEDAI scores (p = 0.023); and patients of Group 4 showed no differences in the values of sCD40L between flare and remission (p = 0.241). CONCLUSION: sCD40L plays a biologically active role, with decreased levels at flare at low SLEDAI scores. At high SLEDAI scores there are mechanisms that involve platelets and that are inhibited by high doses of prednisone that lead to increased serum values of sCD40L at flare.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".