MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804765270 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0197112

Clinical phenotypes and survival of pre-capillary pulmonary hypertension in systemic sclerosis

2018· article· en· W2804765270 on OpenAlexaff
David Launay, David Montani, Paul M. Hassoun, Vincent Cottin, Jérôme Le Pavec, Pierre Clerson, Olivier Sitbon, Xavier Jaïs, Laurent Savale, Jason Weatherald, Vincent Sobanski, Stephen C. Mathai, Mājid Shafiq, Jean-François Cordier, É. Hachulla, Gérald Simonneau, Marc Humbert

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersActelion PharmaceuticalsUnited Therapeutics CorporationGlaxoSmithKlineBiogenGilead SciencesSanofiJohns Hopkins UniversityPfizer
KeywordsDLCOMedicineInternal medicineHazard ratioProportional hazards modelPulmonary hypertensionPulmonary function testingCardiologySurvival analysisInterstitial lung diseaseProspective cohort studyGastroenterologyLungDiffusing capacityConfidence intervalLung function

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pre-capillary pulmonary hypertension (PH) in systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a heterogeneous condition with an overall bad prognosis. The objective of this study was to identify and characterize homogeneous phenotypes by a cluster analysis in SSc patients with PH. Patients were identified from two prospective cohorts from the US and France. Clinical, pulmonary function, high-resolution chest tomography, hemodynamic and survival data were extracted. We performed cluster analysis using the k-means method and compared survival between clusters using Cox regression analysis. Cluster analysis of 200 patients identified four homogenous phenotypes. Cluster C1 included patients with mild to moderate risk pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) with limited or no interstitial lung disease (ILD) and low DLCO with a 3-year survival of 81.5% (95% CI: 71.4-88.2). C2 had pre-capillary PH due to extensive ILD and worse 3-year survival compared to C1 (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 3.14; 95% CI 1.66-5.94; p = 0.0004). C3 had severe PAH and a trend towards worse survival (HR 2.53; 95% CI 0.99-6.49; p = 0.052). Cluster C4 and C1 were similar with no difference in survival (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.19-2.27, p = 0.507) but with a higher DLCO in C4. PH in SSc can be characterized into distinct clusters that differ in prognosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.174 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations72
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicSystemic Sclerosis and Related DiseasesFrench-language works237,207