Effect modification of cancer on the association between dysphagia and mortality in early idiopathic inflammatory myopathies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The interplay between dysphagia, cancer, and mortality in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) has not been carefully studied. The aim of this study was to investigate possible effect modification of cancer on the association between dysphagia and mortality in early IIM. METHODS: A multi-center cohort of 230 adult IIM patients with dysphagia assessment within 6 months of disease onset was assembled. Crude mortality rates in IIM patients exposed or not to dysphagia were estimated for the 5-year period following cohort entry. To explore possible effect modification of cancer on the association between dysphagia and mortality, adjusted Cox models stratified on cancer status were performed as well as an interaction model. RESULTS: Mortality rates per 100 person-years for IIM patients exposed to dysphagia were 2.3 (95 %CI 1.0 to 4.5) in those without cancer compared to 33.3 (95 %CI 16.6 to 59.5) in those with cancer. In stratified Cox models, the main effect of dysphagia was HR 0.5 (95 %CI 0.2 to 1.5) in non-cancer and 3.1 (95 %CI 1.0 to 10.2) in cancer patients. In the interaction model, the combination of dysphagia and cancer yielded a HR of 6.4 (1.2 to 35.1). CONCLUSION: In this IIM cohort, dysphagia in non-cancer patients was not associated with increased mortality, while it was in presence of cancer, supporting effect modification of cancer on the association between dysphagia and mortality. This suggests that IIM patients with and without cancer differ and separate analyses for the two groups should be conducted when the outcome of interest is mortality.
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 | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".