Rheumatoid Arthritis Initiating as Palindromic Rheumatism: A Distinct Clinical Phenotype?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the prevalence of preexisting palindromic rheumatism (PR) in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to evaluate whether these patients have a distinctive clinical and serological phenotype. METHODS: Cross-sectional study in patients with established RA. Preexisting PR was determined using a structured protocol and confirmed by retrospective review of medical records. Demographic, clinical, radiological, immunological, and therapeutic features were compared in patients with and without PR. RESULTS: Included were 158 patients with established RA (78% female) with a mean disease duration since RA onset of 5.1 ± 2.7 years. Preexisting PR was recorded in 29 patients (18%). The median time from the onset of PR to progression to RA was 1.2 years. No between-group differences in demographic features, current disease activity, radiographic erosive disease, or disability were observed. Patients with PR had a higher prevalence of smoking (72% vs 40%). Positive rheumatoid factor, anticitrullinated peptide antibodies, and anticarbamylated protein antibodies were numerically higher in patients with PR. No differences in treatment were observed except for greater hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) use in patients with PR (38% vs 6%). Palindromic flares persisted in a significant proportion of patients during the RA course, including patients in clinical remission or receiving biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. CONCLUSION: Eighteen percent of patients with RA had a history compatible with PR previous to RA onset. No specific clinical or serological phenotype was identified in these patients, although higher HCQ use and smoking prevalence were identified. Palindromic flares may persist during the RA disease course despite treatment.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".