The role of online hemodiafiltration with endogenous reinfusion in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus activity resistant to conventional therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Lupus is a diverse autoimmune disease with autoantibody formation. Lupus nephritis carries a grave prognosis. Complement involvement, namely, C1q deficiency, is linked to activity and renal involvement and could help in their assessment. LN therapies include plasma exchange, immune adsorption, and probably hemodiafiltration with online endogenous reinfusion (HFR), together with traditional immunosuppressive therapies. Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of HFR in improving signs and symptoms of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) activity and laboratory parameters in cases not responding to traditional immunosuppressive therapy. Settings and design: A controlled clinical study was conducted on 60 patients with lupus from Group A that was subdivided into two groups: cases 1 (47 patients), those who received traditional medical treatment, and cases 2 (13 patients), those who underwent HFR in addition to medical treatment. Group B consisted of two subgroups: control 1, composed of 20 healthy age- and sex-matched volunteers, and control 2, consisting of 10 cases with different glomerular diseases other than lupus. Methods and materials: Serum C1q was determined before and after the HFR as well as induction by medical treatment. Disease activity was assessed using SLEDAI-2K with a responder index of 50; quality of life was assessed using SLEQOL v2, and HFR was performed for the non-responder group. Results: C1q was lower in cases. It can efficiently differentiate between SLE patients and healthy controls with a sensitivity of 81.67% and a specificity of 90%. It can also efficiently differentiate between SLE patients and the control 2 group (non-lupus patients with renal glomerular disease) with a sensitivity of 83.33% and a specificity of 100%. C1q was more consumed in proliferative lupus, and correlated with anti-ds DNA, C3, and C4. Conclusions: C1q efficiently discriminates lupus patients and correlates with proliferative forms. HFR might ameliorate lupus activity and restore C1q.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".