The Impact of Belimumab and Rituximab on Health‐Related Quality of Life in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Accumulating evidence supports an impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). We investigated the effects of 2 biologic treatments on HRQoL of patients with SLE. METHODS: Patients with SLE from the Karolinska University Hospital treated with belimumab (n = 34) or rituximab (n = 35) were included; normative values derived from Swedish population-based controls matched for age and sex were used for the purpose of comparisons. Data were collected prospectively at treatment initiation and at months 3, 6, 12, and 24, using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) health questionnaire, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) scale, the EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D) instrument, and the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index (HAQ DI). RESULTS: Substantial decrements from Swedish norms were observed across all SF-36 domains at baseline. Patients treated with belimumab reported gradual improvements in the SF-36 physical component summary (significant from month 12; P = 0.023) and FACIT-Fatigue (significant by month 24; P = 0.001), no changes in EQ-5D scores, and improvements in HAQ DI by month 6 (P = 0.014). Patients treated with rituximab showed rapid improvements in the SF-36 mental component summary and FACIT-Fatigue by month 3 (P = 0.031 and P = 0.007, respectively), as well as improvements in EQ-5D at month 6 (P = 0.016) and HAQ DI at month 3 (P = 0.033). Based on baseline evaluations, patients receiving antimalarial agents (n = 33) performed better in the SF-36 social functioning (P = 0.022) and mental health (P = 0.023) domains compared to patients who did not receive antimalarial agents (n = 36). CONCLUSION: Our results corroborated previous findings of considerable HRQoL impairments in patients with SLE. Patients' perceptions of HRQoL showed discrepant patterns over time in the 2 treatment groups and could provide additional information along with the clinical evaluation of biologic therapy in SLE. Further survey on the effects of antimalarial agents on the HRQoL of patients with SLE in larger cohorts is merited.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".