MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Does the Time to the Onset of Lupus Nephritis Impact Renal Disease Presentation and Outcomes?

2025· article· en· W6966078315 on OpenAlexaffvenue

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLupus nephritisProteinuriaCohortRenal functionProportional hazards modelHazard ratioKidney diseaseNephritis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives Lupus nephritis (LN) most commonly develops in the initial years after the onset of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). In this study, we aimed to investigate the impact of the time to LN onset on the clinical presentation and outcomes of LN. Methods We included 246 inception cohort patients who developed LN at the time of clinic entry or during follow-up. We categorized patients into 3 groups based on the time to LN onset: group 1 (early, ≤1 year, 160 patients), group 2 (intermediate, >1 to ≤5 years, 42 patients), and group 3 (delayed, >5 years, 44 patients). The outcomes assessed were complete proteinuria recovery (CPR) at 1 year, the occurrence of an adverse composite outcome (end-stage kidney disease [ESKD], a sustained ≥40% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate [GFR], or death), and the development of subsequent LN flares. Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves with log-rank tests, as well as univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models, were conducted to assess the associations between the outcomes and the study groups. Results At baseline, the median [IQR] age of our cohort was 34.3 [26.2, 44.7] years, with a median disease duration of 0.6 [0.2, 2.6] years. Delayed LN patients were older at baseline (LN onset), had higher (SLICC)/ACR Damage Index (SDI), and used immunosuppressives less frequently. They were the least likely to achieve CPR at 1 year (53.9% for early LN vs. 47.6% for intermediate LN vs. 27.9% for delayed LN, p=0.01). Intermediate LN patients had the highest odds of experiencing an adverse composite outcome (27.5% for early LN vs. 50.0% for intermediate LN vs. 40.9% for delayed LN, p=0.01) on long-term follow-up (median of 8.5 [4.2, 15.5] years, with 2401 patient-years), with no significant difference in subsequent flares. In the KM curves, intermediate LN was associated with the shortest time to the adverse composite outcome (7.2 [2.9, 12.5] years for early LN vs. 4.4 [1.6, 14.3] years for intermediate LN vs. 7.0 [1.6, 13.9] years for delayed LN, p=0.02), with no significant differences in time to subsequent flares (Figure 1). In the Cox proportional hazard models, compared to early LN, intermediate LN was associated with a heightened risk of developing the adverse composite outcome and showed a trend toward a higher association with subsequent LN flares. Figure 1 A-B. Kaplan-Meier curves showing the differences between the early, intermediate, and delayed lupus nephritis groups in: A- Time to adverse composite outcome (end-stage kidney disease, a sustained ≥40% decline in eGFR, or death) B- Time to subsequent lupus nephritis flare Conclusion Intermediate LN, occurring 1 to 5 years after SLE onset, is associated with the worst renal outcomes.

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)0.008
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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