MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4284960606 · doi:10.1186/s12891-022-05609-x

Evaluation of active inflammation, chronic structural damage, and response to treatment of sacroiliitis in axial spondyloarthritis using the Spondyloarthritis research consortium of Canada scoring system

2022· article· en· W4284960606 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yimeng Zhang, Zikang Guo, Ying Zhan, Jin Ping Qu, Xinwei Lei

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSacroiliitisAxial spondyloarthritisSports medicineRheumatologyPhysical therapyOrthopedic surgeryInternal medicineSpondylarthritisAnkylosing spondylitisPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is a chronic inflammatory rheumatic disease affecting the spine and sacroiliac joints. To investigate whether there are differences in inflammatory and chronic structural damages, as assessed by a semiquantitative MRI scoring method, between non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients with active inflammation at baseline, and to evaluate the treatment response in these patients after 3 months of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) inhibitor treatment. METHODS: Fifty-eight axSpA patients with active inflammation were included in the study. The patients were divided into nr-axSpA group and AS group. MRI examinations of the sacroiliac joints were performed before and after treatment. Inflammatory and structural damages in these patients were assessed using the established Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) inflammation and sacroiliac joint structural (SSS) scoring methods, which are two MRI-based scoring methods. The SPARCC score, SSS score, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) level were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: At baseline, SPARCC scores for patients in the nr-axSpA and AS groups did not differ significantly (P > 0.05); however, SSS scores for fat metaplasia, erosion, and backfill for patients in the AS group were significantly higher (P < 0.001). Compared with baseline, SPARCC scores were significantly decreased in both groups after treatment (P < 0.001); however, after treatment, no statistically significant difference was found regarding SPARCC scores between the AS and nr-axSpA groups. Compared with baseline, a significant increase in the SSS scores for fat metaplasia and backfill (P < 0.001) and a significant decrease in the SSS scores for erosion (P < 0.001) were observed in all axSpA patients. Changes in the SPARCC score was inversely correlated with the changes in the SSS score for fat metaplasia (r = - 0.634, P < 0.001). Changes in the SSS score for backfill were positively correlated with the changes in the SSS score for fat metaplasia (r = 0.277, P < 0.05) and inversely correlated with those for erosion (r = - 0.443, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The SPARCC and SSS scoring systems can be used to assess inflammatory and chronic structural damages as well as treatment responses in patients with axSpA. More severe structural damages were seen in AS patients. TNF-α inhibitor treatment for 3 months could effectively reduce inflammation in axSpA patients.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersSame topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207