Clinical Characteristics of Anti‐Synthetase Syndrome: Analysis From the Classification Criteria for Anti‐Synthetase Syndrome Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Anti-synthetase syndrome (ASSD) is a rare systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD) with significant heterogeneity and no shared classification criteria. We aimed to identify clinical and serological features associated with ASSD that may be suitable for inclusion in the data-driven classification criteria for ASSD. METHODS: We used a large, international, multicenter "Classification Criteria for Anti-synthetase Syndrome" (CLASS) project database, which includes both patients with ASSD and controls with mimicking conditions, namely, SARDs and/or interstitial lung disease (ILD). The local diagnoses of ASSD and controls were confirmed by project team members. We employed univariable logistic regression and multivariable Ridge regression to evaluate clinical and serological features associated with an ASSD diagnosis in a randomly selected subset of the cohort. RESULTS: Our analysis included 948 patients with ASSD and 1,077 controls. Joint, muscle, lung, skin, and cardiac involvement were more prevalent in patients with ASSD than in controls. Specific variables associated with ASSD included arthritis, diffuse myalgia, muscle weakness, muscle enzyme elevation, ILD, mechanic's hands, secondary pulmonary hypertension due to ILD, Raynaud phenomenon, and unexplained fever. In terms of serological variables, Jo-1 and non-Jo-1 anti-synthetase autoantibodies, antinuclear antibodies with cytoplasmic pattern, and anti-Ro52 autoantibodies were associated with ASSD. In contrast, isolated arthralgia, dysphagia, electromyography/magnetic resonance imaging/muscle biopsy findings suggestive of myopathy, inflammatory rashes, myocarditis, and pulmonary arterial hypertension did not differentiate between patients with ASSD and controls or were inversely associated with ASSD. CONCLUSION: We identified key clinical and serological variables associated with ASSD, which will help clinicians and offer insights into the development of data-driven classification criteria for ASSD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".