More Consistent Antimalarial Intake in First 5 Years of Disease Is Associated with Better Prognosis in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether more consistent use of antimalarial agents (AM) leads to better results in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: From a longitudinal cohort study, we identified inception patients with a minimum of 5 years of followup. They were divided into 3 groups: patients who took AM > 60% of the time (group A), those who took AM < 60% of the time (group B), and those who did not receive AM (group C) during the first 5 years of followup. Outcomes included increase in Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index (SDI), flare, achieving low disease activity (LDA), adjusted mean Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000, cumulative doses of steroids (CMS), and AM-related retinal toxicity. Regression analysis models were constructed to identify predictors of the outcomes. RESULTS: There were 459 patients identified: 236 (51.4%) in group A, 88 (19.2%) in group B, and 135 (29.4%) in group C. The changes in SDI, flare event, and CMS were significantly lower in group A, which more often achieved LDA. Multivariable analysis revealed that the patients in group A had a lower risk of increasing SDI and were more likely to achieve LDA at Year 5 compared to the patients in group C. Patients taking AM had lower CMS over the 5 years of followup. There was only 1 patient with AM-related retinal toxicity in each group. CONCLUSION: More consistent use of an AM over the first 5 years of SLE is associated with better outcomes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".