Atlanto-axial Pannus in Patients with and without Rheumatoid Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Pannus formation in the atlanto-axial joint is a well-recognized complication of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Occasionally, atlanto-axial pannus is reported when patients without a history of RA undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the cervical spine. We sought to further characterize these patients. METHODS: The Partners HealthCare Research Patient Data Registry was free-text searched for "atlanto-axial" AND "pannus" in cervical spine MRI reports from 2001 to 2015. Cases with MRI reports describing pannus were reviewed. Clinical data were extracted by chart review in cases with confirmed atlanto-axial pannus (n = 105). RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (27.6%) had RA, all of whom except one carried this diagnosis at the time of the MRI scan. Only 1 of 77 patients without a history of RA was subsequently diagnosed with RA (1.3%, 95% CI 0.1-7.0%, median followup 3.6 yrs). Non-RA patients were significantly older (median age 79 vs 63 yrs, p < 0.0001), less frequently female (55% vs 86%, p = 0.0032), and more likely to have undergone prior cervical spine surgery (18% vs 0%, p = 0.016) compared with RA patients. Thirty-four non-RA patients (44.7%) either had a clinical diagnosis of calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate disease (CPPD) or imaging evidence for tissue calcification. There were no significant differences in age or sex between the CPPD subgroup and other non-RA patients. Twenty-eight patients (26.7%) underwent cervical spine surgery. CONCLUSION: Patients without RA diagnosis and incidental atlanto-axial pannus on cervical spine MRI are unlikely to have previously unrecognized RA. Degenerative disease and tissue calcification may contribute to pannus formation in these patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".