Prospective evaluation of phosphorus-32 radiation synovectomy in patients with severe and chronic rheumatoid arthritis unresponsive to conventional medical treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of Phosphorus-32 radiation synovectomy in the treatment of patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) unresponsive to systematic or local medical therapy. METHODS: Twenty-three knees in 16 patients with severe chronic RA were prospectively treated by intra-articular installation of Phosphorus-32 and evaluated at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis index (WOMAC), visual analog scale (VAS), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), pain scale, and grade of joint effusion and tenderness were assessed. At the 12-month time interval, the treated knees were classified into four categories: excellent response (no symptoms), good response (significant reduction of symptoms), moderate response (slight decrease), and poor response (no change or worsening). RESULTS: Excellent response or good response was observed in 13/23 (56.5%) of the treated knees, moderate response in 2/23 (8.7%) of the treated knees, and poor response in 8/23 (34.8%) of the treated knees. The grades of effusion and tenderness were significantly decreased one-month posttreatment (P< 0.05); however, these changes did not persist at other time intervals (P > 0.05). There was a significant improvement in the HAQ, WOMAC, VAS, and pain scores at all time points compared with baseline, including at the 12-month time interval (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Phosphorus-32 radiosynovectomy is an effective therapeutic treatment for patients with RA of the knee unresponsive to conventional pharmacotherapy.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".