The SAPHO Syndrome: A Single-center Study of 41 Adult Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The SAPHO syndrome (synovitis, acne, pustulosis, hyperostosis, osteitis) is a rare disease and only a few series have been published about it. We describe the experience of a rheumatology department with a focus on the therapeutic aspects. METHODS: All cases of SAPHO fulfilling the Benhamou criteria and seen between 1992 and 2013 in our unit were retrospectively included. RESULTS: Forty-one patients (11 men and 30 women) were included. The average age was 45 years (20-80 yrs) at the time of diagnosis. Nineteen patients had palmoplantar pustulosis, 3 had psoriasis vulgaris, 3 had severe acne, and 15 had no dermatological involvement. Bone symptoms involved mainly the anterior chest wall (n = 28, 68%), followed by the spine (n = 16, 39%) and sacroiliac joints (n = 12, 29%). Four patients had peripheral osteitis and 2 had mandibular osteitis. Ten patients had peripheral arthritis affecting mainly the knees and wrists. None of the 36 patients tested was HLA-B27-positive. At least a partial response was achieved with colchicine, methotrexate, or sulfasalazine in 0/6, 2/4, and 1/6 of patients, respectively. Antibiotic therapy (azithromycin, n = 7; doxycycline, n = 2) was effective in 2/9 patients. Pamidronate was prescribed in 26 patients with bone involvement and 18/22 patients evaluable at 6 months responded to this therapy. Two patients were treated with tumor necrosis factor blockers: 1 with infliximab and 1 with adalimumab, followed by etanercept. CONCLUSION: Based on our experience, SAPHO can be diagnosed in the elderly. It was not associated with HLA-B27. Soft tissue involvement was common and the bisphosphonates were generally effective on bone involvement.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".