Timing of onset affects arthritis presentation pattern in antisyntethase syndrome.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate if the timing of appearance with respect to disease onset may influence the arthritis presentation pattern in antisynthetase syndrome (ASSD). METHODS: The patients were selected from a retrospective large international cohort of ASSD patients regularly followed-up in centres referring to AENEAS collaborative group. Patients were eligible if they had an antisynthetase antibody testing positive in at least two determinations along with arthritis occurring either at ASSD onset (Group 1) or during the course of the disease (Group 2). RESULTS: 445 (70%; 334 females, 110 males, 1 transsexual) out of the 636 ASSD we collected had arthritis, in the majority of cases (367, 83%) from disease onset (Group 1). Patients belonging to Group 1 with respect to Group 2 had an arthritis more commonly polyarticular and symmetrical (p=0.015), IgM-Rheumatoid factor positive (p=0.035), erosions at hands and feet plain x-rays (p=0.036) and more commonly satisfying the 1987 revised classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (p=0.004). Features such as Raynaud's phenomenon, mechanic's hands and fever (e.g. accompanying findings) were more frequently reported in Group 2 (p=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: In ASSD, the timing of appearance with respect to disease onset influences arthritis characteristics. In particular, RA features are more common when arthritis occurs from ASSD onset, suggesting an overlap between RA and ASSD in these patients. When arthritis appears during the follow-up, it is very close to a connective tissue disease-related arthritis. Also, the different prevalence of accompanying features between these two groups is in line with this possibility.
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) | 0.000 | 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".