Survival Improved in Patients Aged ≤ 70 Years With Systemic Sclerosis-Associated Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension During the Period 2006 to 2017 in France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To date, nothing is known about the evolution of survival in systemic sclerosis-associated pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) over the last decade. METHODS: This study used a multivariate Cox regression model adjusted for clinically relevant baseline confounders to assess the association between the occurrence of death and date of PAH diagnosis comparing two periods of the same duration (2006-2011 vs 2012-2017). Interactions between the two diagnosis periods and baseline variables were tested. RESULTS: A total of 306 incident patients were included, 167 (54.6%) with a PAH diagnosis occurring in 2006 to 2011 and 139 (45.4%) in 2012 to 2017. No significant difference in survival was observed between patients diagnosed with PAH in 2012 to 2017 compared with those diagnosed in 2006 to 2011 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76 [0.46-1.26]; P = .29). A significant interaction was observed between PAH diagnosis periods and age (P = .05). When stratifying according to age (based on the median age of 70 years), a significant increase was observed in survival in patients aged ≤ 70 years between the 2006 to 2011 period and the 2012 to 2017 period (HR, 0.40 [0.17-0.99]; P = .046) but not in older patients (HR, 1.29 [0.67-2.51]; P = .44). A significantly higher proportion of initial (ie, within the first 4 months) endothelin receptor antagonist/phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor combination therapy was observed in younger patients diagnosed from 2012 to 2017 vs those diagnosed from 2006 to 2011 (42.9% vs 19.5%; P = .002) but not in older patients. CONCLUSIONS: Over the period 2006 to 2017, survival in systemic sclerosis-associated PAH improved over time in patients aged ≤ 70 years but not in older patients. Further investigations are needed to confirm this relation, as general improvement in medical care and management may also be a possible explanation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".