Clinical, Functional, and Radiographic Differences Among Juvenile-onset, Adult-onset, and Late-onset Ankylosing Spondylitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to compare the clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes at different ages of onset in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: A total of 546 patients were enrolled consecutively and classified into 3 groups based on their age at symptom onset: (1) juvenile-onset AS (age ≤ 16 years; JoAS); (2) adult-onset AS (> 16 but < 40 years; AoAS); and (3) late-onset AS (≥ 40 years; LoAS). We compared the differences among the 3 groups. OR for disease outcomes were calculated and adjusted for sex, HLA-B27, and disease duration. RESULTS: There were 67 patients (12.3%) with JoAS, 460 (84.2%) with AoAS, and 19 (3.5%) with LoAS. Male sex and HLA-B27 were associated with a younger age at onset (p < 0.001). Compared to patients with AoAS, patients with JoAS were more likely to present with peripheral arthritis, while patients with JoAS and LoAS were less likely to have back pain at the onset of AS (p < 0.05). After controlling for multiple covariates, JoAS was found to be associated with a worse functional outcome and global assessment, and a high serum immunoglobulin A level (p < 0.05). Patients with JoAS had less lumbar spinal radiographic severity (p < 0.05). There were no statistical differences in clinical or functional outcome between the LoAS and AoAS groups. None of the LoAS patients had radiographic hip involvement. CONCLUSION: Sex and HLA-B27 are significantly associated with age at onset of AS. Both JoAS and LoAS have their distinctive symptoms/signs at onset and different disease outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".