Anti-dsDNA and Antichromatin Antibody Isotypes in Serologically Active Clinically Quiescent Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Serologically active clinically quiescent (SACQ) patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are clinically quiescent despite serologic activity. Since studies suggest that antichromatin antibodies are more sensitive than anti-dsDNA antibodies in detecting active SLE, and that immunoglobulin (Ig) G, in particular complement-fixing subclasses, may be more pathogenic than IgM, we investigated the levels of anti-dsDNA and antichromatin isotypes in SACQ patients as compared to non-SACQ patients with SLE. METHODS: Levels of IgM, IgA, IgG, and IgG1-4 antichromatin and anti-dsDNA were measured by ELISA. SACQ was defined as ≥ 2 years with the SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) at 2 or 4 from serologic activity, during which patients could be taking antimalarials, but not corticosteroids or immunosuppressives. Unselected non-SACQ patients with SLE were used as comparators. SACQ patient serum samples were further stratified based on subsequent development of flare, defined as clinical SLEDAI-2K ≥ 1 and/or treatment initiation. Nonparametric statistics were used, and generalized estimating equations were applied to account for multiple samples in the same patient. RESULTS: SACQ patients' complement-fixing antichromatin and anti-dsDNA IgG subclasses were significantly higher than those of non-SACQ patients. When the sample drawn latest in a SACQ period was analyzed, there was no difference between antichromatin or anti-dsDNA isotype or IgG subclass levels between patients who flared and those who remained SACQ, nor were consistent trends seen when samples were examined during SACQ and flare in the same patient. CONCLUSION: The SACQ phenotype does not arise from a lack of pathogenic anti-dsDNA and/or antichromatin autoantibodies. Neither increases in antichromatin nor anti-dsDNA isotype or IgG subclass levels were predictive of or coincident with flare in SACQ patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".