MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411884079 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.2025-0314.35

Distinct Systemic Sclerosis Phenotypes Related to Race/Ethnicity: An Opportunity to Personalize Care?

2025· article· en· W4411884079 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Camille Guertin, Sasha Bernatsky, Maggie Larché, May Y. Choi, Mohammed Osman, Janet Pope, Carter Thorne, Marie Hudson, Sabrina Hoa

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalWestern UniversityUniversity of AlbertaArthritis Research Centre of CanadaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversity of CalgarySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEthnic groupDemographyCohortSerologyGerontologyInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives To describe and compare systemic sclerosis (SSc) phenotypes according to race/ethnicity. Methods SSc patients enrolled in the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group cohort from 2004 to 2020 were included. Demographic, clinical and serological characteristics at baseline were collected using standardized questionnaires. Race/ethnicity was self-reported by participants, who were asked to identify with 1 (or more) of the following groups: White, Chinese, South Asian, Black, Filipino, Latin American, Southeast Asian, Arab, West Asian, Japanese, Korean, Indigenous (First Nations, Metis, Inuit) or none of the above. We compared clinical characteristics and serology, according to race/ethnicity. Results Of the 1727 CSRG participants, 80% indicated White race/ethnicity (n=1385), 5 % Indigenous (n=79), 3% Latin American (n=58), 1.6% Middle Eastern (n=27), 1.5% East/Southeast Asian (n=26), 1.2 % Black (n=21) and 0.8 % South Asian (n=12). Differences in demographic, clinical and serological characteristics according to race/ethnicity are highlighted in Table 1. White individuals were older at cohort entry and more frequently had limited SSc. Most SSc subjects were women, but men were affected in higher proportions among South Asians (39%) and East/Southeast Asians (23%). Although Raynaud’s phenomenon is almost universal in SSc, its prevalence was slightly lower among East/Southeast Asians (86%), who also had numerically lower frequency of digital ulcers (29%). Arthritis was relatively common among Latin Americans (55%), Blacks (47%) and possibly Indigenous individuals (39%) versus Whites (29%). Blacks also had higher frequency of diffuse SSc (67%), telangiectasias (79%) and myositis (40%), and the lowest mean pulmonary function test values. Indigenous individuals had higher prevalence of lower gastrointestinal involvement, including malabsorption (22%), bacterial overgrowth (15%) and need for hyperalimentation (9%). In regard to serological profiles, anti-centromere autoantibodies were positive in about one-third of SSc patients, but rare among Black individuals (6%). Anti-topoisomerase I autoantibodies were present in about one-third of Latin American, Black, East/Southeast Asian, Middle Eastern and South Asian patients, but in only 13% of White and Indigenous individuals. Finally, anti-RNA polymerase III autoantibodies were overrepresented among Indigenous individuals (30%). Table 1: Baseline demographic, clinical and serological characteristics of SSc individuals according to race/ethnicity Conclusion In this Canadian cohort, race/ethnicity was associated with distinct SSc phenotypes. Some of these findings may be due to genetic factors, but some findings may be related to referral patterns or migration trends. Additional investigations are underway to better understand our findings. If validated, the results could help personalize care in SSc.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases→French-language works237,207→