Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glucocorticoids (GC) have long been one of the cornerstones of the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). However, it is now a well-established fact that GC are a major cause of irreversible damage.1 Therefore, strategies to decrease GC load without compromising the adequate control of disease activity are essential in the management of SLE. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) should be considered the main GC-sparing drug in lupus. Its continued use has been associated to a myriad of beneficial effects, including the prevention of damage accrual and the improvement of survival, but also to a better control of lupus activity and, thus, a reduced need for GC use. Also, immunosuppressive drugs such as cyclophosphamide, azathioprine and methotrexate, have been extensively used throughout different clinical scenarios in order to decrease GC doses.2 Although clinical trials with this group of drugs are few, their use has long been validated by clinical practice. More recently, biologic agents approved for SLE such as belimumab and anifrolumab have also been shown to allow a good control of disease activity whilst reducing the dose of GCs.3 4 However, it is my view that the best GC-sparing drugs are…GCs. Pulses of methyl-prednisolone (MP), 125–500 mg/d, given for short periods of time (usually 3 days) have been shown to be the most effective way of rapidly controlling lupus flares through the activation of the non-genomic pathway.5 6 Therefore, the use of MP in the induction of remission, not only in life-threatening scenarios, combination therapy with HCQ and immunosuppressive drugs and a rapid tapering with a slow withdrawal of prednisone is our proposal for the successful management of SLE. In cases in which this scheme fails to adequately control lupus activity, the addition of biologic drugs should be considered. References Ugarte-Gil MF, et al. Impact of glucocorticoids on the incidence of lupus-related major organ damage: a systematic literature review and meta-regression analysis of longitudinal observational studies. Lupus Sci Med. 2021 Dec;8(1):e000590. doi: 10.1136/lupus-2021-000590. Pego-Reigosa JM, et al. Efficacy and safety of nonbiologic immunosuppressants in the treatment of nonrenal systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review. Arthritis Care Res. (Hoboken). 2013 Nov;65(11):1775–85. doi: 10.1002/acr.22035. Touma Z, et al. Belimumab use, clinical outcomes and glucocorticoid reduction in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus receiving belimumab in clinical practice settings: results from the OBSErve Canada Study. Rheumatol Int. 2017 Jun;37(6):865–873. doi: 10.1007/s00296-017-3682-9. Epub 2017 Mar 9. Bruce IN, et al. Sustained glucocorticoid tapering in the phase 3 trials of anifrolumab: a post hoc analysis of the TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 trials. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2023 Apr 3;62(4):1526–1534. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac491. Ruiz-Irastorza G, et al. Prolonged remission in SLE is possible by using reduced doses of prednisone: an observational study from the lupus-cruces and lupus-bordeaux inception cohorts. Autoimmun Rev. 2019 Sep;18(9):102359. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2019.102359. Epub 2019 Jul 16. Ruiz-Irastorza G, Bertsias G. Treating systemic lupus erythematosus in the 21st century: new drugs and new perspectives on old drugs. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2020 Dec 5;59(Suppl5):v69-v81. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keaa403. Learning Objectives Describe the concept and the need for sparing GC Describe different drugs used to treat SLE with a GC-sparing effect Discuss results from recent studies on the efficacy and toxicity of therapeutic schemes using methyl-prednisolone pulses followed by lower doses of prednisone in active lupus Describe practical guidelines for using glucocorticoid-sparing drugs in the different settings of active lupus
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".