Retrospective Medical Record Review to Describe Use of Repository Corticotropin Injection Among Patients with Uveitis in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Repository corticotropin injection (RCI) has immune-modulatory and anti-inflammatory effects and is approved for multiple indications, including severe and acute chronic allergic and inflammatory processes involving the eye and adnexa. This study describes patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and physicians' assessments of patients with uveitis treated with RCI. METHODS: This was a retrospective medical record review of US patients. Eligible patients had a diagnosis of uveitis, received RCI in the past 12 months, and had completed or were receiving RCI treatment at the time of data collection. Baseline characteristics and after-treatment clinical data are descriptively reported. RESULTS: The study included 91 patients (mean age 41 years, 62% female, and mean time since diagnosis 3.98 years). Most patients had moderate (n = 48, 53%) to severe (n = 21, 23%) visual impairment, and none was blind before RCI therapy. Patients used an average of 2.5 medications before RCI. Initial RCI dosing regimens, dose adjustments, and treatment durations were different for each patient. Concomitant medication use and dosages were reduced during RCI; 76 patients (84%) improved, 15 patients (16%) stayed the same, and none worsened; 86% of patients had improvements in vision. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians individualized RCI therapy among patients who suffered uveitis for several years and when previous therapies were inadequate. Most patients improved after initiating RCI, most commonly in vision. The findings support use of RCI for uveitis and provide a better understanding of patient characteristics and practice patterns to guide appropriate use.
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) | 0.000 | 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".