Ocular manifestations of ANCA-associated vasculitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) is a group of multisystem diseases that can have several ocular manifestations. There are published data on ocular manifestations of granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), but few for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) or microscopic polyangiitis (MPA). There is little information concerning chronicity, complications, and association with other cranial manifestations of AAV. METHODS: This study retrospectively analysed longitudinal multicentre cohorts of individuals with AAV followed between 2006 and 2022. Data included diagnosis, demographics, cranial manifestations of disease, presence of manifestations at onset of disease and/or follow-up, and ocular complications of disease. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis assessed associations across disease manifestations. RESULTS: Data from 1441 patients were analysed, including 395 with EGPA, 876 with GPA, and 170 with MPA. Ocular manifestations were seen within 23.1% of patients: 39 (9.9%) with EGPA, 287 (32.7%) with GPA, and 12 (7.1%) with MPA at any time in the disease course. There were more ocular manifestations at onset (n = 224) than during follow-up (n = 120). The most common disease-related manifestations were conjunctivitis/episcleritis and scleritis. In multivariable analysis, dacryocystitis, lacrimal duct obstruction, and retro-orbital disease were associated with sinonasal manifestations of GPA; ocular manifestations were associated with hearing loss in MPA. The most common ocular complications and/or damage seen were cataracts (n = 168) and visual impairment (n = 195). CONCLUSION: Ocular manifestations occur in all forms of AAV, especially in GPA. Clinicians should be mindful of the wide spectrum of ocular disease in AAV, caused by active vasculitis, disease-associated damage, and toxicities of therapy.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".