Aging in Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis and Microscopic Polyangiitis: From Pathophysiology to Clinical Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitides (AAV) predominantly affect individuals aged 55-75 years, with granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) being diagnosed most often between 55 and 65 years and microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) between 65 and 75 years. Owing to the general increase in life expectancy, the average age at diagnosis increases, encompassing also those over 75 years old. Unfortunately, the exclusion of these older patients from many clinical trials has limited our understanding of the progression of these diseases in older subjects. The role of immunosenescence and aging in AAV pathogenesis and progression is underexplored, despite potential implications in the understanding of the disease, and potentially for disease management. Although AAV manifestations are largely consistent across age groups, certain features, such as renal involvement and the association with interstitial lung disease, may be more prevalent in older patients. Frailty must be a key consideration in therapeutic decision-making, especially when balancing the efficacy of immunosuppressants with potential side effects. Recent evidence supports the use of rituximab in addition to low-dose glucocorticoids for remission induction in life- or organ-threatening AAV, including in older populations. Furthermore, preliminary evidence supports that avacopan might be as efficient as glucocorticoids in these patients. The immunosuppressive treatment of AAV reduces the immune response to environmental pathogens, with rituximab worsening age-related hypogammaglobulinemia. Thus, prophylactic measures, including vaccination and Pneumocystis pneumonia prevention, as well as strategies to mitigate glucocorticoid side effects, should be implemented in AAV management.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".