Treatment Algorithms in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish agreement on systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) treatment. METHODS: SLE experts (n = 69) were e-mailed scenarios and indicated preferred treatments. Algorithms were constructed and agreement determined (≥50% respondents indicating ≥70% agreement). RESULTS: Initially, 54% (n = 37) responded suggesting treatment for scenarios; 13 experts rated agreement with scenarios. Fourteen of 16 scenarios had agreement as follows: discoid lupus: first-line therapy was topical agents and hydroxychloroquine and/or glucocorticoids then azathioprine and subsequently mycophenolate (mofetil); uncomplicated cutaneous vasculitis: initial treatment was glucocorticoids ± hydroxychloroquine ± methotrexate, followed by azathioprine or mycophenolate and then cyclophosphamide; arthritis: initial therapy was hydroxychloroquine and/or glucocorticoids, then methotrexate and subsequently rituximab; pericarditis: first-line therapy was nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, then glucocorticoids with/without hydroxychloroquine, then azathioprine, mycophenolate, or methotrexate and finally belimumab or rituximab, and/or a pericardial window; interstitial lung disease/alveolitis: induction was glucocorticoids and mycophenolate or cyclophosphamide, then rituximab or intravenous gamma globulin (IVIG), and maintenance followed with azathioprine or mycophenolate; pulmonary hypertension: glucocorticoids and mycophenolate or cyclophosphamide and an endothelin receptor antagonist were initial therapies, subsequent treatments were phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors and then prostanoids and rituximab; antiphospholipid antibody syndrome: standard anticoagulation with/without hydroxychloroquine, then a thrombin inhibitor for venous thrombosis, versus adding aspirin or platelet inhibition drugs for arterial events; mononeuritis multiplex and central nervous system vasculitis: first-line therapy was glucocorticoids and cyclophosphamide followed by maintenance with azathioprine or mycophenolate, and then rituximab, IVIG, or plasmapheresis; and serious lupus nephritis: first-line therapy was glucocorticoids and mycophenolate, then cyclophosphamide then rituximab. CONCLUSION: We established variable agreement on treatment approaches. For some treatment decisions there was good agreement between experts even if no randomized controlled trial data were available.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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".