Advances in the pharmacotherapeutic management of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is a rare but potentially lethal systemic vasculitis. Only a few prospective therapeutic trials had been conducted in EGPA, and its treatment was mostly adapted from other vasculitides. Monoclonal antibodies inhibiting various pathways (e.g. interleukin-5 [IL5] or B cells) have been investigated. AREAS COVERED: Published studies on treatments for EGPA using glucocorticoids, conventional immunosuppressants (such as cyclophosphamide or azathioprine), antiIL5 pathway agents (mepolizumab, approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) for EGPA; benralizumab and reslizumab), other and future possible treatments [PubMed search, 01/1990-02/2023] are reviewed. EXPERT OPINION: With advances made in the pharmacotherapeutic management of EGPA, the prognosis has gradually shifted from a potentially fatal to a more chronic course, for which more targeted and safer treatments can be used. However, glucocorticoids remain central. Rituximab is now a possible alternative to cyclophosphamide for induction, although data are still limited. AntiIL5 pathway therapies have been shown to be safe and effective in relapsing patients with EGPA, who often experience asthma and/or ears, nose, and throat (ENT) manifestations, but long-term data are needed. Treatment strategies need to be optimized based on individual patient characteristics, likely with sequential, combination-based approaches, while topical airway treatments should not be forgotten.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".