MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

205 Longitudinal immune changes during and after recent flares in lupus

2022· article· en· W4313532760 on OpenAlexaff
Zoha Faheem, Kieran Manion, Carolina Munoz-Grajales, Michael Kim, Dafna D. Gladman, Murray B. Urowitz, Zahi Touma, David J. Brooks, Joan Wither

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmune systemImmunologyFlow cytometrySystemic lupus erythematosusInnate immune systemPrednisoneMedicineInternal medicineBiologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Previous studies suggest substantial immunologic heterogeneity in lupus. However, the majority of these studies were cross-sectional in nature. Here we followed flaring and quiescent patients longitudinally to determine how their immunologic profile changes over time. Methods Forty-seven SLE patients with a recent flare (change in clinical SLEDAI ≥ 2 in the past month that prompted a change in therapy), 25 quiescent SLE patients (clinical SLEDAI = 0 for ≥ 1 year with no increase in immunosuppressive treatment , ≤ 10 mg prednisone, matched for disease duration) and 16 healthy controls (HC) were recruited. The peripheral blood immunologic profile at baseline and follow-up (every 6 months for 1 year, COVID permitting) was examined by multi-parameter flow cytometry. Expression of interferon (IFN)-induced proteins that correlated with gene expression was examined in immune populations of interest using CyTOF. Results Using unsupervised clustering, incorporating all subjects and visits, four distinct immunologic profiles were seen: Cluster 1, with increased levels of activated B cells and age- associated B cells (ABCs); Cluster 2, with Tfh and Tph expansion; Cluster 3, with reduced levels of innate, naïve B, and Tfh cells; and Cluster 4 with expansion of Th1 and innate immune cells relative to other clusters. Although patients with new-onset flares were found in all clusters, Cluster 1 had the highest number of these patients, whereas Cluster 4 has the highest number of patients who were inactive at baseline, as well as HC. Patients moved between clusters over time and/or in response to treatment. A substantial proportion of flaring patients in Cluster 3 transitioned to Cluster 1 on follow-up, suggesting that B cell changes accumulate post-flare. Similar findings were seen for myeloid populations in a smaller subset of patients that transitioned from Cluster 3 to 4. In general, patients in Cluster 1, 2, or 4 at baseline tended to remain in the same cluster subsequently, with a notable exception being patients with early disease (< 6 months duration), where switching between clusters was frequent. Patients in Cluster 1 at follow-up were more likely to remain active or flare than those in Cluster 4. Analysis of IFN-induced protein expression, revealed considerable variability in the levels of these proteins between immune populations in the same patient and between patients, with significantly higher levels in flaring than in quiescent patients in most immune populations. Cluster 1 visits tended to have higher levels of IFN-induced proteins than Cluster 4 visits, particularly within B cell populations and the T helper cell populations that support their activation. Conclusion Accumulation of activated B cells and ABCs can occur during or after flare, is associated with high levels of IFN-induced proteins in these populations, and defines patients who are more likely to have ongoing disease activity or subsequent flares.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research→French-language works237,207→