MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412611007 · doi:10.1016/j.jaccas.2025.104209

Coronary Vasculitis in a Patient With IgG4RD and Possible EGPA Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndrome

2025· article· en· W4412611007 on OpenAlexaff
Khaled Sayer, Jon-David Schwalm, Natalia Pinilla‐Echeverri

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC Case Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIgG4-Related and Inflammatory Diseases
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesPopulation Health Research InstituteMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcute coronary syndromeMedicineVasculitisCardiologyCoronary angiographyInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: IgG4-related disease (IgG4RD) is a systemic inflammatory disorder that can rarely affect the coronary arteries, leading to acute coronary syndrome (ACS). CASE SUMMARY: A 54-year-old man with IgG4RD and possible cytoplasmic antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody vasculitis presented with exertional chest pain. An electrocardiogram showed T-wave inversions, and rising troponin levels confirmed ACS. Imaging revealed right coronary artery dissection and left circumflex aneurysmal remodeling, consistent with vasculitis-related coronary pathology. He was treated with antiplatelet therapy, corticosteroids, and rituximab, leading to symptom resolution and a significant reduction in IgG4 levels. DISCUSSION: This case highlights the complexity of ACS secondary to IgG4RD-associated vascular disease. Coronary involvement in IgG4RD remains under-recognized, necessitating a high index of suspicion and multimodal imaging for diagnosis. The successful use of rituximab underscores its potential in managing IgG4-related cardiovascular manifestations. TAKE-HOME MESSAGES: IgG4RD can present with ACS due to coronary vasculitis or dissection. Multidisciplinary collaboration and immunosuppressive therapy are key to optimal 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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 venueJACC Case ReportsSame topicIgG4-Related and Inflammatory DiseasesFrench-language works237,207