Longterm Treatment with Endothelin Receptor Antagonist Bosentan and Iloprost Improves Fingertip Blood Perfusion in Systemic Sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the longterm effects of endothelin-1 (ET-1) antagonism on peripheral blood perfusion (PBP) in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). METHODS: Twenty-six patients with SSc already receiving cyclic intravenous iloprost (ILO) for severe Raynaud phenomenon were enrolled. Thirteen patients continued the treatment for a further 3 years (ILO group) and 13 patients, because of the appearance of digital ulcers, received in addition bosentan (BOS; 125 mg twice/day) for 3 years (ILO + BOS group). Both PBP at fingertips and nailfold microangiopathy were evaluated yearly by laser Doppler flowmetry and nailfold videocapillaroscopy, respectively. RESULTS: A progressive significant increase of PBP was observed in the ILO + BOS group during the 3 followup years (p = 0.0007, p = 0.0002, p = 0.01, respectively). In contrast, an insignificant progressive decrease of PBP was observed in the ILO group. Difference of perfusion between the PBP evaluations at basal temperature and at 36 °C (to test capillary dilation capacity), was found progressively decreased during the 3-year followup only in the ILO group (p = 0.05, p = 0.26, p = 0.09, respectively). A progressive increase of nailfold capillary number was observed only in the ILO + BOS group after 2 and 3 years of followup (p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Longterm treatment of SSc patients with ET-1 antagonism, in combination with ILO, seems to increase fingertip blood perfusion, as well as both capillary dilation capacity and number.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".