MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2900205878 · doi:10.1136/lupus-2018-lsm.47

CS-12 Outcomes of lupus nephritis in vulnerable populations

2018· article· zh· W2900205878 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christine Peschken, Rebecca Gole, Carol Hitchon, David Robinson, Ada Man, Annaliese Tisseverasinghe, Hani El‐Gabalawy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLupus nephritisInternal medicineHazard ratioProportional hazards modelEthnic groupNephritisSystemic lupus erythematosusEnd stage renal diseaseDiseaseRheumatologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Lupus nephritis is a known predictor of mortality; we examined the risks of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and death among lupus nephritis patients, and included the impact of ethnicity, low income (LowInc), lack of education (LowEduc), and living >500 km from rheumatology care (Remote). Methods Patients from a single academic center were followed from 1990–2016 using a custom database. Records of all SLE patients were abstracted. Variables included birthdate, diagnosis date, ethnicity, ACR classification criteria (ACRc), SLICC Damage Index (SDI) including ESRD, treatment and date of death. Ethnicity was categorized into North American Indigenous (IND), Asian (ASN), Caucasian (CAU), and Other. In patients who had developed nephritis, Kaplan Meier and Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare ESRD and survival between vulnerable groups. Results Nine hundred forty-four SLE patients were identified: 240 (25%) IND, 576(60%) CAU, 104(11%) ASN and 24(2.5%) Other. ‘Other’ patients were excluded from further analysis. Mean disease duration was 14 years, 89% female. Nephritis developed in 39% of CAU (n=224), 57% of IND (n=136; OR 2.1; 95% CI 1.5 to 2.8), and 75% of ASN (n=76; OR 4.7; 95% CI 2.9 to 7.6), p<0.001. Twenty percent of patients had not completed high school, 20% were LowInc, and 11% were Remote; LowInc, LowEduc, and Remote did not increase the odds of nephritis. Among nephritis patients, ESRD developed in 11% and 17% died. Risk of ESRD was increased in IND (HR 4.2; 95% CI 2.0 to 8.6) and ASN (HR 5.8; 95% CI 2.6 to 12.6) compared to CAU (figure 1a). Risk of death was increased in IND (HR 2.6; 95% CI 1.6 to 4.2), but not in ASN (HR 1.1; 95% CI 0.5 to 2.4) compared to CAU (figure 1b). In separate cox proportional hazards models, after adjustment for age, gender, SDI, ACRc, and age at diagnosis, risk of ESRD was increased in NAI (HR 2.8; 95% CI 1.0 to 8.1) and ASN (HR 4.0; 95% CI 1.6 to 10.3) compared to CAU. LowInc, LowEduc, and Remote did not increase risk of ESRD. Only LowEduc (HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.1 to 3.9) increased the adjusted risk of death; ethnicity, LowInc and Remote were not significant. Conclusions Compared to CAU, IND and ASN not only have a higher risk of nephritis, but among those with nephritis, risk of ESRD is 3–4 fold higher in IND and ASN. Lack of education, rather than ethnicity, was the major risk factor for death. Reasons for these differences may include renal pathology, care pathways, comorbid conditions and additional socioeconomic factors and need to be further explored. Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge the Lupus Society of Manitoba for ongoing funding for this work.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research→French-language works237,207→