MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Personalizing cardiovascular risk prediction for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus

2024· article· en· W4397001445 on OpenAlexafffund
May Y. Choi, Hongshu Guan, Kazuki Yoshida, Misti L. Paudel, Benjamin A. Kargere, Daniel Li, Jack Ellrodt, Emma Stevens, Tianrun Cai, Brittany Weber, Brendan M. Everett, Karen H. Costenbader

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchIpsenHorizon TherapeuticsMassachusetts General HospitalNovo NordiskCelltrionNational Cancer InstituteKiniksa PharmaceuticalsAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbGilead SciencesNational Institutes of HealthLupus Foundation of America
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineLupus erythematosusSystemic lupusDermatologySystemic diseaseSystemic lupus erythematosusCardiologyImmunologyImmunopathologyDiseaseAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk is increased in SLE and underestimated by general population prediction algorithms. We aimed to develop a novel SLE-specific prediction tool, SLECRISK, to provide a more accurate estimate of CVD risk in SLE. METHODS: We studied patients in the Brigham and Women's Hospital SLE cohort. We collected one-year baseline data including the presence of traditional CVD factors and SLE-related features at cohort enrollment. Ten-year follow-up for the first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or cardiac death) began at day +1 following the baseline period (index date). ICD-9/10 codes identified MACE were adjudicated by board-certified cardiologists. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression selected SLE-related variables to add to the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Pooled Cohort Risk Equations 10-year risk Cox regression model. Model fit statistics and performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive value, c-statistic) for predicting moderate/high 10-year risk (≥7.5 %) of MACE were assessed and compared to ACC/AHA, Framingham risk score (FRS), and modified FRS (mFRS). Optimism adjustment internal validation was performed using bootstrapping. RESULTS: We included 1,243 patients with 90 MACEs (46 MIs, 36 strokes, 19 cardiac deaths) over 8946.5 person-years of follow-up. SLE variables selected for the new prediction algorithm (SLECRISK) were SLE activity (remission/mild vs. moderate/severe), disease duration (years), creatinine (mg/dL), anti-dsDNA, anti-RNP, lupus anticoagulant, anti-Ro positivity, and low C4. The sensitivity for detecting moderate/high-risk (≥7.5 %) of MACE using SLECRISK was 0.74 (95 %CI: 0.65, 0.83), which was better than the sensitivity of the ACC/AHA model (0.38 (95 %CI: 0.28, 0.48)). It also identified 3.4-fold more moderate/high-risk patients than the ACC/AHA. Patients who were moderate/high-risk according to SLECRISK but not ACC/AHA, were more likely to be young women with severe SLE and few other traditional CVD risk factors. Model performance between SLECRISK, FRS, and mFRS were similar. CONCLUSION: The novel SLECRISK tool is more sensitive than the ACC/AHA for predicting moderate/high 10-year risk for MACE and may be particularly useful in predicting risk for young females with severe SLE. Future external validation studies utilizing cohorts with more severe SLE are needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Arthritis and RheumatismSame topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchFrench-language works237,207