Current treatment in macrophage activation syndrome worldwide: a systematic literature review to inform the METAPHOR project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess current treatment in macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) worldwide and to highlight any areas of major heterogeneity of practice. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in both EMBASE and PubMed databases. Paper screening was done by two independent teams based on agreed criteria. Data extraction was standardized following the PICO framework. A panel of experts assessed paper validity, using the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tools and category of evidence (CoE) according to EULAR procedure. RESULTS: Fifty-seven papers were finally included (80% retrospective case-series), describing 1148 patients with MAS: 889 systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA), 137 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), 69 Kawasaki disease (KD) and 53 other rheumatological conditions. Fourteen and 11 studies specified data on MAS associated to SLE and KD, respectively. All papers mentioned glucocorticoids (GCs), mostly methylprednisolone and prednisolone (90%); dexamethasone was used in 7% of patients. Ciclosporin was reported in a wide range of patients according to different cohorts. Anakinra was used in 179 MAS patients, with a favourable outcome in 83% of sJIA-MAS. Etoposide was described by 11 studies, mainly as part of HLH-94/04 protocol. Emapalumab was the only medication tested in a clinical trial in 14 sJIA-MAS, with 93% of MAS remission. Ruxolitinib was the most reported Janus kinase inhibitor in MAS. CONCLUSION: High-dose GCs together with IL-1 and IFNγ inhibitors have shown efficacy in MAS, especially in sJIA-associated MAS. However, the global level of evidence on MAS treatment, especially in other conditions, is still poor and requires standardized studies to be confirmed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".