MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410513053 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.2025-0390.o017

ERYTHEMA AND SCALE INFLUENCE QUALITY OF LIFE AND IMPRESSION OF DISEASE PROGRESSION IN CUTANEOUS LUPUS PATIENTS

2025· article· en· W4410513053 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Grace Lu, Shae Chambers, Tyler Cepica, Lillian Xie, Rui Feng, Victoria P. Werth, Benjamin F. Chong

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineErythemaDermatologyQuality of life (healthcare)Systemic lupus erythematosusCutaneous Lupus ErythematosusConnective tissue diseaseDiseaseLupus erythematosusAutoimmune diseaseInternal medicineImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O017 / #393 Topic: AS07 - Cutaneous Lupus ABSTRACT CONCURRENT SESSION 02: SLE METRICS – IMPROVING OUTCOMES & MEASURES 22-05-2025 1:40 PM - 2:40 PM Background/Purpose The Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index (CLASI) evaluates disease activity (CLASI-A) by assessing signs including erythema and scale in patients with cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE). While erythema and scale have been frequently mentioned as significant signs from patient interviews, their impact on how CLE patients feel about their skin disease has not been studied in larger patient cohorts. Understanding whether erythema and/or scale are important to patients would further justify their inclusion as scoring drivers in CLASI-A. Methods We conducted a prospective study investigating the relationships between CLASI-A erythema and scale scores and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at baseline, and changes in these scores over 6 months. 131 CLE patients were recruited in outpatient dermatology clinics at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Parkland Health, and University of Pennsylvania between July 2018 and November 2023. Examined PROMs included the CLE Quality of Life Index (CLEQoL), Dermatology Quality of Life Index (DLQI), Patient Impression of Disease Progression (PIDP), and Analogue Pain, Itch, and Fatigue Scales (APIFS). Spearman correlation analyses were performed to examine relationships between CLASI-A erythema or scale and PROMs. To compare the degree of association between CLASI-A erythema and scale vs PROMs, Spearman’s rho between erythema vs scale and PROMS were compared using paired t-test after Fisher’s transformation separately at baseline and then after 6 months. Results At baseline (N = 131), CLASI-A erythema had significant correlation to all PROMs, whereas scale directly correlated to all PROMs excluding the photosensitivity domain in CLEQoL (Table 1). Skin health from APIFS had the strongest correlation to erythema (r=-0.38, p<0.01) and scale (r=-0.32, p<0.01). After 6 months (N = 107), PIDP scores were most notably correlated to change in erythema (ρ = -0.41, p < 0.01) and scale (r = -0.23, p = 0.02) (Figure 1). The association between erythema and PROMs was not statistically different from that between scale and PROMs at baseline (p = 0.42) or after 6 months (p = 0.22). Table 1. Correlation Between CLASI-A Erythema and Scale vs. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures at Baseline Figure 1. Erythema and scale are correlated to PIDP scores after six months. Conclusions At baseline, erythema and scale had a significant correlation to nearly all PROMs, which validate the importance of both signs in affecting CLE patient lives. We also found that changes in erythema and scale were significantly correlated to PIDP after 6 months, suggesting that erythema and scale can contribute greatly to disease progression that matter to patients. These results affirm the substantial impact of erythema and scale in quality of life in CLE patients and demonstrate that improvement in erythema and scale can result in clinically meaningful benefit for CLE patients. They also justify the greater weighting of erythema in CLASI-A scoring, which can be responsive to treatments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research→French-language works237,207→