Pulmonary hypertension in antisynthetase syndrome: prevalence, aetiology and survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antisynthetase syndrome is characterised by the association of interstitial lung disease and myositis with different anti-tRNA-synthetase antibodies. The occurrence, aetiology and prognosis of pulmonary hypertension have not yet been evaluated. Among 203 consecutive patients, transthoracic echocardiogram and right heart catheterisation results were retrospectively analysed in the light of clinico-biological, morphological and functional parameters. Definitions of pulmonary hypertension were based on the European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society 2009 guidelines, with severe pulmonary hypertension being defined by a mean pulmonary arterial pressure >35 mmHg. Pulmonary hypertension was suspected by transthoracic echocardiogram in 47 (23.2%) cases, corresponding to pulmonary hypertension "possible" (n=27, 13.3%) or "likely" (n=20, 9.9%). Right heart catheterisation was performed in 21 patients, excluding pulmonary hypertension in five and confirming pre-capillary pulmonary hypertension in 16 (7.9%). Although related to interstitial lung disease in all cases, pre-capillary pulmonary hypertension was severe in 13 (81.3%) patients (mean ± sd pulmonary arterial pressure 46 ± 9 mmHg), frequently associated with low cardiac index (mean ± sd 2.3 ± 0.8 L · min(-1) · m(-2)) and high forced vital capacity/diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide ratio (2.5 ± 0.6). Pulmonary hypertension was significantly associated with a lower survival rate (p<0.001), with a 3-year survival rate of 58%. The occurrence of pulmonary hypertension in antisynthetase syndrome is significant and dramatically worsens the prognosis. Although systematically associated with interstitial lung disease, pulmonary hypertension was usually severe, suggesting a specific pulmonary vascular 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".