Consensus Treatment Plans for Severe Pediatric Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody–Associated Vasculitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is no standardized approach to the treatment of pediatric antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV). Because of the rarity of pediatric AAV, randomized trials have not been feasible. The present study of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) was undertaken to establish consensus treatment plans (CTPs) for severe pediatric AAV to enable the future study of comparative effectiveness and safety. METHODS: A workgroup of CARRA members (rheumatologists and nephrologists) formed the AAV Workgroup. This group performed a literature review on existing evidence-based treatments and guidelines for the management of AAV. They determined that the target population for CTP development was patients <18 years of age with new-onset granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), microscopic polyangiitis, or renal-limited AAV (eosinophilic GPA was excluded), with presentation confined to those with severe disease (i.e., organ- or life-threatening). Face-to-face consensus conferences employed nominal group techniques to identify treatment strategies for remission induction and remission maintenance, data elements to be systematically collected, and outcomes to be measured over time. RESULTS: The pediatric AAV Workgroup developed 2 CTPs for each of the remission induction and remission maintenance of severe AAV. A glucocorticoid-weaning regimen for induction and maintenance, a core data set, and outcome measures were also defined. A random sample of CARRA membership voted acceptance of the CTPs for remission induction and remission maintenance, with a 94% (75 of 80) and 98% (78 of 80) approval rate, respectively. CONCLUSION: Consensus methodology established standardized CTPs for treating severe pediatric AAV. These CTPs were in principle accepted by CARRA-wide membership for the evaluation of pragmatic comparative effectiveness in a long-term registry.
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 | 0.030 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".