LSO-100 Does early complete remission preclude adverse outcomes in lupus nephritis?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Early complete remission (within 12 months) is considered an important protective factor against development of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in lupus nephritis (LN). However, a certain proportion of such patients still develop advanced CKD. Our objective was to describe the factors associated with the development of CKD stage IV or worse in LN patients who achieved early complete remission. Methods Patients with LN based on biopsy or abnormal proteinuria (>0.5g/day) and/or urinary sediment for two consecutive visits in the absence of other plausible explanation were retrieved from the Toronto Lupus Clinic database. Individuals with advanced CKD at baseline (eGFR&x2266;29ml/min/1.73m2) were excluded. All patients achieved complete remission (proteinuria<0.5g/24h, inactive urinary sediment and serum creatinine &x2266;120% of baseline) within 12 months. Patients were followed for at least 5 years after LN diagnosis. Results Of 273 eligible patients, 21 (7.7%) developed advanced CKD after a median of 5.8 years from the time of remission (range 0.7–31.7 years). At baseline, these patients had higher SCR (124.9±71.9 vs. 80.7±25.8μmol/L, p<0.001); other baseline characteristics were not significantly different. Multivariate survival analysis for predictors of advanced CKD is shown in table 1. The major factors for early CKD were poor compliance or insufficient therapy due to concomitant infections in 7 and moderate-to-severe interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IFTA) in 4 patients. In late progressors, compliance was poor in 2, moderate-to-severe IFTA in 3, poorly controlled hypertension in 2, thrombotic microangiopathy in one, refractory disease in one while one patient progressed very slowly over 32 years. Conclusions Patients with impaired kidney function, low complement C3 at baseline and histopathologic features of chronic irreversible damage (interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy), are at risk for CKD despite early remission and should be followed closely. The importance of maintenance therapy should be communicated to prevent non-compliance and 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 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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".