A New Era in the Treatment of Scleroderma-associated Interstitial Lung Disease?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulmonary involvement in systemic sclerosis or scleroderma (SSc) is mainly represented by SSc-associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD) and pulmonary hypertension1,2. SSc-ILD is a major challenge: It is both a very frequent and a very severe complication of SSc. According to the literature, SSc-ILD is or will be present in around one-half of patients with diffuse SSc, and one-third of patients with limited cutaneous SSc3. SSc-ILD is now one of the leading causes of death in SSc4. This explains why much effort has been expended to understand and better know the characteristics of patients with SSc-ILD as well as to manage them properly. However, despite decades of observational studies and a few randomized ones, the optimal management of patients with SSc-ILD is still a matter of debate. From an historic point of view, the cornerstone of SSc-ILD treatment has mainly been immunosuppressants. This can be explained by the fact that SSc is a connective tissue disease in which inflammation and immune abnormalities play a central role5. The immune system, especially in regards to B and T lymphocytes, is fully involved in fibroblast activation and fibrogenesis by secreting proinflammatory and profibrotic cytokines and growth factors6. The most common immunosuppressant, cyclophosphamide (CYC), has been tested in many open-label studies and a few randomized control trials (RCT), as well as being recommended in the European League Against Rheumatism Scleroderma Trials and Research group guidelines7. However, the results of those RCT are still dividing the medical community. In the FAST study, there was no significant … Address correspondence to Prof. D. Launay, Service de Médecine Interne, Hôpital Claude-Huriez, CHRU Lille, rue Michel Polonovski, F-59037 LILLE Cedex, France. E-mail: david.launay{at}univ-lille2.fr
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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".