MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402147587 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.2024-0335

Performance of the 2022 ACR/EULAR Classification Criteria in Comparison With the European Medicines Agency Algorithm in Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody–Associated Vasculitis

2024· article· en· W4402147587 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuki Imai, Yuichiro Ota, Kotaro Matsumoto, Mitsuhiro Akiyama, Katsuya Suzuki, Yuko Kaneko

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVasculitis and related conditions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVasculitisAnti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodyAntibodyAlgorithmSystemic vasculitisInternal medicineImmunologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective This study aimed to compare the 2022 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) classification criteria with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) algorithm for antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV). Methods All consecutive, newly diagnosed patients with AAV according to the 2012 Chapel Hill Consensus Conference who visited Keio University Hospital between March 2012 and May 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were reclassified according to the EMA algorithm and the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria, and their clinical characteristics were statistically analyzed. Results A total of 114 patients with AAV were included in the analyses. Using the EMA algorithm as a reference, reclassification of the patients revealed sensitivity and specificity of the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria of 100% and 96% for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, 40% and 97% for granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), and 90% and 49% for microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), respectively. Approximately half of patients classified as EMA-GPA or EMA-unclassifiable were reclassified as 2022-MPA; these patients were older, were more disposed to be positive for myeloperoxidase (MPO)-ANCA, and had interstitial lung disease (ILD) more frequently than patients with 2022-GPA or non–2022-MPA. Further, some patients positive for MPO-ANCA with biopsy-proven granulomatous inflammation were also reclassified from EMA-GPA to 2022-MPA. Over the mean observation period of 4.0 years, 16 patients died. Overall survival for each classification group differed significantly from the 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria (P = 0.02), but not with the EMA algorithm (P = 0.21). Conclusion Among the patients classified as EMA-GPA or EMA-unclassifiable, older patients with MPO-ANCA and ILD tended to be reclassified as 2022-MPA. The 2022 ACR/EULAR criteria were more useful in prognostic prediction than the EMA algorithm.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicVasculitis and related conditionsFrench-language works237,207