Use of EuroLupus Cyclophosphamide Dosing for the Treatment of Lupus Nephritis in Childhood-onset Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. Childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) has higher rates of lupus nephritis (LN) than adult-onset SLE, often requiring intensive immunosuppression. This study examined North American practices and preferences for the low-dose EuroLupus cyclophosphamide (CYC) protocol, as compared to the high-dose National Institutes of Health (NIH) CYC protocol, to treat LN in cSLE. Methods. A 35-item Web-based survey was distributed to Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) and Pediatric Nephrology Research Consortium (PNRC) providers. The survey assessed participant demographics, CYC prescribing practices, perceptions of EuroLupus protocol, and LN vignette treatment decisions; 1 vignette was taken from a 2009 CARRA survey and responses were compared. Multivariable logistic regression analyzed provider factors associated with use of low- vs high-dose CYC. Results. Responses were provided by 185/421 (44%) pediatric rheumatologists (CARRA) and 40/354 (11%) pediatric nephrologists (PNRC). Among respondents who prescribed CYC for pediatric LN over the past year (n = 135), half reported using EuroLupus. When presented with the same vignette about an adolescent with class IV LN, 32% of pediatric rheumatologists chose EuroLupus dosing in 2020, vs 6% in 2009. Provider factors associated with choosing the low-dose regimen were familiarity with the protocol (OR 4.2,P= 0.006) and greater perceived benefit (OR 1.6,P< 0.0001). Pediatric nephrologists had similar responses to the pediatric rheumatology providers. Overall, 78% of respondents perceived EuroLupus protocol efficacy to be equivalent to the high-dose protocol in cSLE LN. Conclusion. Pediatric specialists are currently more likely to use low-dose CYC to treat cSLE LN than they were a decade ago. Nevertheless, familiarity with EuroLupus dosing remains low.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".