Invasive Fungal Infections in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Invasive fungal infections (IFI) are catastrophic diseases associated with a high mortality. Relatively few cases of IFI have been described in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and their related factors have not been completely explored. We evaluated factors associated with IFI in patients with SLE. METHODS: All patients with both IFI and SLE admitted to our hospital in the last 7 years were evaluated and each was compared with 5 hospitalized patients with SLE (controls). Demographic factors, duration of SLE, and treatment in the previous month were compared. RESULTS: Sixty patients with SLE were evaluated (10 with IFI and 50 controls). Median age was 29 years. High C-reactive protein levels were associated with IFI, along with other factors such as high disease activity, mechanical ventilation, treatment with antibiotics, hemodialysis, high doses of glucocorticoids (GC), and treatment with mycophenolate mofetil. Mortality was 4 times more frequent in patients with IFI than in SLE patients without the deep fungal infection. CONCLUSION: IFI is a rare infection observed in patients with rheumatic diseases. We describe factors associated with IFI in patients with SLE. IFI is associated with elevated morbidity and mortality. Early diagnosis and treatment are desirable.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".