<i>In Vitro</i>Fertilization in 37 Women with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus or Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Series of 97 Procedures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: fertilization (IVF) of women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and/or antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). To date, such data are sparse. METHODS: This retrospective study described women with SLE and/or APS who have had at least 1 IVF cycle. RESULTS: Thirty-seven women with SLE (n = 23, including 8 with antiphospholipid antibodies), SLE with APS (n = 4), or primary APS (n = 10) underwent 97 IVF procedures. For 43% of cases, the infertility was female in origin, for 19% male, 14% mixed, and 24% unexplained. No women had premature ovarian insufficiency because of cyclophosphamide. Median age at IVF was 34 years (range 26-46). The median number of IVF cycles was 2.6 (1-8). Patients were treated with hydroxychloroquine (72%), steroids (70%), azathioprine (3%), aspirin (92%), and/or low molecular weight heparin (62%). There were 27 (28%) pregnancies, 23 live births among 26 neonates (3 twin pregnancies), 2 miscarriages, and 2 terminations for trisomy 13 and 21. Six spontaneous pregnancies occurred during the followup. Finally, 26 women (70%) delivered at least 1 healthy child. Complications occurred in or after 8 IVF cycles (8%): SLE flares in 4 (polyarthritis in 3 and lupus enteritis in 1) and thromboembolic events in 4 others. One SLE flare was the first sign of previously undiagnosed SLE. Poor treatment adherence was obvious in 2 other flares and 2 thromboses. No ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome was reported. CONCLUSION: These preliminary results confirm that IVF can be safely and successfully performed in women with SLE and/or APS.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".