Anifrolumab in Refractory Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Real-World, Multicenter Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To report real-world experience on the use of anifrolumab (ANI) in refractory systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods The present study is a multicenter, retrospective study involving 9 Italian SLE referral centers participating in a compassionate use program for the use of ANI in adult patients with active SLE in whom all the available treatment choices failed, were not tolerated, or were contraindicated. At baseline and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment, overall and organ-specific disease activity, flares, daily glucocorticoid (GC) dose, and adverse events were recorded. Results A total of 26 patients were enrolled. At 4 weeks after starting ANI, a significant decrease in the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 ( P = 0.01), Systemic Lupus Erythematosus–Disease Activity Score ( P = 0.01), and physician global assessment ( P = 0.001) was recorded, and the same trend was maintained over time. A significant reduction in Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index-activity ( P < 0.001) and in tender ( P = 0.03) and swollen ( P = 0.02) joint counts was also recorded. At 3 months of follow-up, 33% of patients already achieved a remission state, whereas 46% were in Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS); at 6 months, 50% were in remission and 80% were in LLDAS. A significant reduction in the mean GC daily dose was observed, starting from week 4 ( P = 0.04). A total of 4 disease flares according to the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment–Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index were recorded (3 mild-moderate and 1 severe). Overall, 4/20 patients with at least 24 weeks of follow-up (20%) were considered nonresponders. Conclusion This study provides real-world experience on the use of ANI in patients with refractory SLE, confirming its rapid effectiveness and an overall acceptable safety profile.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".