Cluster Analysis of Autoantibodies in 852 Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus from a Single Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Associations between autoantibodies and clinical features have been described in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Herein, we aimed to define autoantibody clusters and their clinical correlations in a large cohort of patients with SLE. METHODS: We analyzed 852 patients with SLE who attended our clinic. Seven autoantibodies were selected for cluster analysis: anti-DNA, anti-Sm, anti-RNP, anticardiolipin (aCL) immunoglobulin (Ig)G or IgM, lupus anticoagulant (LAC), anti-Ro, and anti-La. Two-step clustering and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were used. RESULTS: Five clusters were identified. A cluster consisted of patients with only anti-dsDNA antibodies, a cluster of anti-Sm and anti-RNP, a cluster of aCL IgG/M and LAC, and a cluster of anti-Ro and anti-La antibodies. Analysis revealed 1 more cluster that consisted of patients who did not belong to any of the clusters formed by antibodies chosen for cluster analysis. Sm/RNP cluster had significantly higher incidence of pulmonary hypertension and Raynaud phenomenon. DsDNA cluster had the highest incidence of renal involvement. In the aCL/LAC cluster, there were significantly more patients with neuropsychiatric involvement, antiphospholipid syndrome, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, and thrombocytopenia. According to the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics damage index, the highest frequency of damage was in the aCL/LAC cluster. Comparison of 10 and 20 years survival showed reduced survival in the aCL/LAC cluster. CONCLUSION: This study supports the existence of autoantibody clusters with distinct clinical features in SLE and shows that forming clinical subsets according to autoantibody clusters may be useful in predicting the outcome of the disease. Autoantibody clusters in SLE may exhibit differences according to the clinical setting or population.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".