Unfavorable Outcomes Associated With Glucocorticoid Use in Current <scp>Standard‐of‐Care</scp> Management of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to describe the administration of glucocorticoids (GCs) and characterize its association with organ damage in a longitudinal systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) cohort over a time period spanning the introduction of biologics in Canada. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted using data from a large SLE cohort in Canada, including adults without lupus nephritis or central nervous system lupus. Patients were observed from time of entry into the cohort to the last available clinic visit (up to December 31, 2020), with a minimum of 24 months of follow-up. Demographic and clinical characteristics, including average disease activity, treatment administration, and prevalence of organ damage, were examined. Organ damage was stratified by GC administration. RESULTS: A total of 1,255 patients were included. The mean follow-up duration was 10.5 (SD 8.6) years. One hundred eighty-two (15%) patients had organ damage at baseline. More than 80% of patients were prescribed GCs over the follow-up period, almost all patients had long-term GC treatment, and only 5% of patients took any biologics. Organ damage was more frequent in patients with a higher average GC dose and greater years of GC exposure. CONCLUSION: In this large cohort of patients with SLE, the majority of patients continue to rely on GC for SLE symptom management, with limited administration of biologics. GC administration was correlated with increased irreversible organ damage. Access to novel GC-sparing treatment options is critical to improve long-term outcomes for patients with SLE, especially given the continued reliance on GC despite the introduction of biologics.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".