Expression of APRIL in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphomas from Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Rheumatoid Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have an increased risk of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The cytokine A PRoliferating-Inducing Ligand (APRIL) is strongly expressed in DLBCL in the general population and is detected in high concentrations in sera from subgroups of patients with RA and SLE. To investigate a possible association between APRIL and DLBCL in RA and SLE, we examined APRIL expression in lymphoma biopsies from patients with RA and SLE and from DLBCL patients without inflammatory disease. METHODS: Lymphoma tissue from 95 RA, 12 SLE, and 63 comparator DLBCL cases were stained with anti-APRIL antibodies (Aprily-2). The percentage of positively stained cells of the comparator cases were divided into quartiles (1-4, where 4 = most stained) and compared with the results for the RA and SLE lymphomas. APRIL expression was correlated to clinical variables. RESULTS: The odds ratio for high expression of APRIL (quartiles 3 and 4) was elevated in the SLE DLBCL (OR 23.6, 95% CI 2.4-231.2), but not in the RA DLBCL (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.3-2.0). RA patients in quartile 4 had higher cumulated RA disease activity than those in quartile 1 (p = 0.013). Epstein-Barr virus in the lymphoma tissue was associated with high APRIL expression (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: The high expression of APRIL in DLBCL in SLE and in an RA subset might indicate an association between APRIL and lymphoma in these subsets of rheumatic diseases, but could also reflect a dysregulation of APRIL per se in these patient groups.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".