Longterm Prognosis of 121 Patients with Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis in Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the risk factors for relapse or prognosis of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) in Japanese patients presenting to our hospital. METHODS: From June 1999 through March 2015, we retrospectively recruited 121 patients with EGPA according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria. Frequent relapse was defined as disease occurrence at least once every 2 years after a period of initial remission. The study endpoint was the last examination performed. We used multiple logistic regression to analyze risk factors for relapse or survival in EGPA. RESULTS: Gastrointestinal (GI) involvement with both abnormalities on endoscopy and biopsy (p < 0.01) and symptoms; myocardial involvement with both abnormalities on 1 or more cardiac investigations and symptoms (p < 0.01); and treatment at initial or maintenance with immunosuppressants (p < 0.01) or administration of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG; p < 0.01) were associated significantly more often with frequent relapse than with infrequent. Overall 5-, 10-, and 20-year survival rates were 91.1%, 83.7%, and 68.6%, respectively. Survival in EGPA was associated with age of onset < 65 years. Age at onset of EGPA was the only significant predictor of survival (p < 0.01). Myocardial or GI tract involvement did not affect mortality risk. CONCLUSION: Patients with myocardial or GI tract involvement had frequent relapses, but these conditions were not reflected in increased mortality. Treatment with immunosuppressants or IVIG in addition to corticosteroids might have improved the prognosis in Japanese patients with EGPA.
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".