Investigating the treatment phenotypes of cardiac sarcoidosis: A prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Data indicates there are 4 main pulmonary sarcoidosis duration/treatment phenotypes: asymptomatic, acute (disease duration <1-2 years), chronic and advanced. There are no data about disease duration/treatment phenotypes of cardiac sarcoidosis patients. Our study had 2 main aims (i) to assess the response to corticosteroids and (ii) to assess the incidence of relapse after a one-year course of corticosteroids (thereby classifying patients as acute or chronic treatment phenotype). Methods: Consecutive, treatment naive patients with CS were prospectively recruited and treated with 0.5 mg/kg prednisone, to a maximum dose of 40 mg/day. Patients had a follow-up PET after 3-6 months of therapy (PET 2). In the responders (PET definition of response) the prednisone was then weaned and stopped after 12 months. Three months after stopping, the PET was repeated to look for disease relapse (PET 3). Results: Twenty-one consecutive patients were included, and all patients showed a reduction in cardiac FDG uptake after 3-6 months and 19/21 (90.5 %) met the PET definition of response. Of these, 12/19 (63.1 %) relapsed after prednisone was stopped. There were no serious adverse effects during the trial of therapy cessation and there were no later relapses in the 7 non-relapsers during over 4 years of subsequent follow-up. Conclusion: The initial response rate to prednisone was high with all patients showing a reduction in FDG uptake and 19/21 meeting a PET definition of >25 % response. Secondly, a trial of therapy discontinuation was able to classify 7/19 patients as acute treatment phenotype and 12/19 as chronic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".