Mycophenolate Mofetil in Refractory Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus: No Definitive Evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the Editor: We read with great interest the article by Tselios, et al on mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in nonrenal manifestations of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)1. The study suggested that this treatment is an efficacious alternative in refractory to standard-of-care of nonrenal manifestations of SLE in the long term1. However, some data are lacking to change our clinical practice. For instance, with regard to cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) lesions, an improvement was observed at 6 and 12 months in 25.9% and 40.7% of patients without renal involvement, respectively, and at 6 and 12 months in 33.3% and 53.3% of patients with renal involvement, respectively1. Such a result is very interesting in our daily practice because of conflicting data in the literature, as indicated by the authors. However, we have a few comments on this article about … Address correspondence to Dr. C. Bachmeyer, Service de Médecine Interne, Hôpital Tenon (AP-HP), 4 rue de la Chine, 75020 Paris, France. E-mail: claude.bachmeyer{at}tnn.aphp.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 | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".