Patient Outcomes in Renal-Limited Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody Vasculitis With Inactive Histology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionLittle is known about the anticipated disease course for individuals who present with renal-limited antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)−associated vasculitis but who lack inflammation on a kidney biopsy. The impact of immunosuppression on renal and overall survival is unknown.MethodsPatients were recruited from 2005 to 2016 from 8 centers worldwide (N = 16) for this descriptive study. All had positive ANCA, elevated serum creatinine with active urine sediment, histologic evidence of pauci-immune glomerulonephritis without active lesions, and had no evidence of extrarenal vasculitis. We describe the characteristics of this cohort and the differences in the clinical, histologic, and therapeutic parameters of those who developed primary outcomes of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and vasculitis relapse.ResultsThe cohort was 63% Caucasian, and 75% were men, with a median age of 62 years. At entry, the mean ± SD estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 24 ± 20 ml/min per 1.73 m2, and 5 patients required dialysis. Twelve patients received immunosuppressive therapy, 25% experienced disease relapse, and 38% developed ESRD. Patients who developed ESRD had lower baseline eGFRs (8 ± 5 ml/min per 1.73 m2 vs. 35 ± 18 ml/min per 1.73 m2; P = 0.001) and more often required dialysis at presentation (83% vs. 0%; P = 0.001). Patients who relapsed were less likely to receive immunosuppression (25% for the relapsed group vs. 92% for the nonrelapsed group; relative risk: 0.27, risk difference: 67%; P = 0.03).ConclusionAmong these patients, lower initial eGFR and dialysis dependence at presentation might increase the risk for ESRD. Immunosuppression did not affect renal outcomes in this sample of patients but was associated with a reduced risk for vasculitis relapse. More information is needed on factors that predict treatment response in this high-risk group.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".