ArticleRMD open2021
New risk model is able to identify patients with a low risk of progression in systemic sclerosis.
Article in RMD open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Harnessing artificial intelligence to advance insights in systemic sclerosis skin and lung disease.Current opinion in rheumatology · 2025Review
- Leveraging Artificial Intelligence for the Diagnosis of Systemic Sclerosis Associated Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2025Review
- Latent trajectory modelling of pulmonary artery pressure in systemic sclerosis: a retrospective cohort study.RMD open · 2022Article
- Over-the-Counter Breast Cancer Classification Using Machine Learning and Patient Registration Records.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Use and Utility of Machine Learning in Achieving Precision Medicine in Systemic Sclerosis: A Narrative Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop a prediction model to guide annual assessment of systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients tailored in accordance to disease activity.
methodsA machine learning approach was used to develop a model that can identify patients without disease progression. SSc patients included in the prospective Leiden SSc cohort and fulfilling the ACR/EULAR 2013 criteria were included. Disease progression was defined as progression in ≥1 organ system, and/or start of immunosuppression or death. Using elastic-net-regularisation, and including 90 independent clinical variables (100% complete), we trained the model on 75% and validated it on 25% of the patients, optimising on negative predictive value (NPV) to minimise the likelihood of missing progression. Probability cutoffs were identified for low and high risk for disease progression by expert assessment.
resultsOf the 492 SSc patients (follow-up range: 2-10 years), disease progression during follow-up was observed in 52% (median time 4.9 years). Performance of the model in the test set showed an AUC-ROC of 0.66. Probability score cutoffs were defined: low risk for disease progression (<0.197, NPV:1.0; 29% of patients), intermediate risk (0.197-0.223, NPV:0.82; 27%) and high risk (>0.223, NPV:0.78; 44%). The relevant variables for the model were: previous use of cyclophosphamide or corticosteroids, start with immunosuppressive drugs, previous gastrointestinal progression, previous cardiovascular event, pulmonary arterial hypertension, modified Rodnan Skin Score, creatine kinase and diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide.
conclusionOur machine-learning-assisted model for progression enabled us to classify 29% of SSc patients as 'low risk'. In this group, annual assessment programmes could be less extensive than indicated by international guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.