Suppr超能文献

SLE 分类标准:基于科学的图标还是算法干扰 - 一个高智力要求的困境。

SLE classification criteria: Science-based icons or algorithmic distractions - an intellectually demanding dilemma.

机构信息

Fürst Medical Laboratory, Oslo, Norway.

Department of Medical Biology, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.

出版信息

Front Immunol. 2022 Sep 28;13:1011591. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1011591. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

It is, so to say, not a prerogative authority assigned to SLE classification criteria that allow them to declare something definitively important about SLE. This is particularly true as criteria-based classification processes overrule the highly needed evolution of concise diagnostic criteria. It is classification criteria that allocate SLE patients into cohorts intended to describe the nature of their disease. Therefore, all major SLE classification criteria since the 1971 preliminary criteria usurp the role of diagnostic criteria. Today´s practice silently accept that the SLE classification process "diagnose" SLE patients despite the fact that classification criteria are not accepted as diagnostic criteria! This is a central paradox in contemporary SLE research strategies. Contemporary SLE cohorts are designed to investigate SLE´s etiological features. However, each cohort that is categorized by classification criteria has one central inherent problem. From theoretical and practical arguments, they embody multiple distinct clinical phenotypes. This raises the critical and principal question if phenotypically heterogenic SLE cohorts are useful to identify basic SLE-specific etiology(ies) and disease process(es). In times to come, we must prioritize development of firm diagnostic criteria for SLE, as the classification criteria have not contributed to reduce the enigmatic character of the syndrome. No radical improvements are visible in the horizon that may lead to concise investigations of SLE in well-defined homogenous SLE cohorts. We must develop new strategies where studies of phenotypically standardized cohorts of SLE must be central elements. Problems related to contemporary SLE classification criteria are contemplated, analyzed, and critically discussed in this study.

摘要

可以说,SLE 分类标准并没有被赋予特权,可以对 SLE 做出明确的重要声明。这在基于标准的分类过程推翻了对简明诊断标准的高度需求的情况下尤其如此。正是分类标准将 SLE 患者分配到队列中,旨在描述其疾病的性质。因此,自 1971 年初步标准以来的所有主要 SLE 分类标准都篡夺了诊断标准的角色。尽管分类标准不被接受为诊断标准,但当今的实践却默认 SLE 分类过程可以“诊断” SLE 患者!这是当代 SLE 研究策略中的一个核心悖论。当代 SLE 队列旨在研究 SLE 的病因特征。然而,每个通过分类标准分类的队列都存在一个核心问题。从理论和实践的角度来看,它们体现了多种不同的临床表型。这就提出了一个关键而重要的问题,即表型异质的 SLE 队列是否有助于确定基本的 SLE 特异性病因和疾病过程。在未来,我们必须优先制定 SLE 的明确诊断标准,因为分类标准并没有有助于减少该综合征的神秘特征。在可预见的未来,没有明显的改进迹象可以使我们能够在明确的同质 SLE 队列中对 SLE 进行简明的研究。我们必须制定新的策略,其中表型标准化的 SLE 队列的研究必须是核心要素。本研究对当代 SLE 分类标准相关的问题进行了思考、分析和批判性讨论。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

4
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Lupus Erythematosus.免疫检查点抑制剂与红斑狼疮
Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2024 Feb 15;17(2):252. doi: 10.3390/ph17020252.

本文引用的文献

1
Getting the Diagnosis Right: What's in a Name?正确诊断:名称中有什么?
J Rheumatol. 2022 Jul;49(7):853-854. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.220017.
2
A glimpse into the future of systemic lupus erythematosus.系统性红斑狼疮的未来一瞥。
Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis. 2022 Mar 30;14:1759720X221086719. doi: 10.1177/1759720X221086719. eCollection 2022.
6
9
Criteria, criteria all around but not an insight into lupus.标准,到处都是标准,却没有对狼疮的深刻理解。
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2021 Jul 1;60(7):3037-3038. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keab287.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验