Psoriatic spondylitis or ankylosing spondylitis with psoriasis: same or different?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Of the four musculoskeletal domains of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), the axial domain is the least studied. With the advent of targeted therapy that is efficacious in some but not all manifestations of spondyloarthritis (SpA), there is interest in understanding the similarities and differences between axial PsA (axPsA) and ankylosing spondylitis. Moreover, there is also interest in evaluating the axial domain in PsA clinical trials, domain that has traditionally been ignored in such studies. This review aims to summarize the current understanding of the differences between ankylosing spondylitis and axPsA. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent observational studies have shown that axPsA forms part of the SpA spectrum, flanked by peripheral PsA on one side and ankylosing spondylitis on the other. Thus, axial disease is more severe in ankylosing spondylitis, whereas peripheral disease is more severe in axPsA. However, the overall disease burden and impact is similar. The expression of axPsA is influenced by age, disease duration, sex and HLA-B27 status. SUMMARY: axPsA has not been properly defined hampering research into pathogenesis, disease impact and treatment. Research to define prevalence, clinical features, impact, similarities and differences with other axial SpA, and treatment is an unmet need.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".