METHODS: Patients enrolled in the Asia Pacific Lupus Collaboration cohort with ≥3 years of prospectively captured data were studied. Flares were assessed at routine visits, while damage ((Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology) Damage Index) was assessed annually. Multivariable, multifailure survival analyses were carried out to quantify the association between flares and damage accrual.
RESULTS: 1556 patients with SLE with a median (IQR) of 5.7 (3.9, 7.0) years of follow-up were studied. 39.5% (n=614) of patients had damage at enrolment, and 31.9% (n=496) accrued damage during the study observation period. The incidence of damage accrual during observation was ~58/1000 person-years. Overall, 74.1% (n=1153) of patients experienced a flare of any severity (mild/moderate or severe) at least once; 56.9% (n=885) experienced recurrent (≥2) flares. The risk of subsequent damage accrual in patients who experienced mild-to-moderate flare, after controlling for confounders, was 32% greater than in patients without flares (adjusted HR) (95% CI 1.32 (1.17 to 1.72)). The risk of damage accrual was greater if patients had severe flares (HR (95% CI) 1.58 (1.18 to 2.11)). For each additional flare, the risk of damage accrual increased by 7% (HR (95% CI) 1.07 (1.02 to 1.13)).
CONCLUSIONS: Flares independently increased the risk of damage accrual. Prevention of flares should be considered a necessary goal of SLE disease management to minimise permanent damage.
METHODS: This was a multi-national survey of ophthalmologists between March 1st, 2020 to February 29th, 2021 disseminated via the major global ophthalmology societies. The survey was designed based on microsystem, mesosystem and macrosystem questions, and the software as a medical device (SaMD) regulatory framework chaired by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Factors associated with AI adoption for ophthalmology analyzed with multivariable logistic regression random forest machine learning.
RESULTS: One thousand one hundred seventy-six ophthalmologists from 70 countries participated with a response rate ranging from 78.8 to 85.8% per question. Ophthalmologists were more willing to use AI as clinical assistive tools (88.1%, n = 890/1,010) especially those with over 20 years' experience (OR 3.70, 95% CI: 1.10-12.5, p = 0.035), as compared to clinical decision support tools (78.8%, n = 796/1,010) or diagnostic tools (64.5%, n = 651). A majority of Ophthalmologists felt that AI is most relevant to DR (78.2%), followed by glaucoma (70.7%), AMD (66.8%), and cataract (51.4%) detection. Many participants were confident their roles will not be replaced (68.2%, n = 632/927), and felt COVID-19 catalyzed willingness to adopt AI (80.9%, n = 750/927). Common barriers to implementation include medical liability from errors (72.5%, n = 672/927) whereas enablers include improving access (94.5%, n = 876/927). Machine learning modeling predicted acceptance from participant demographics with moderate to high accuracy, and area under the receiver operating curves of 0.63-0.83.
CONCLUSION: Ophthalmologists are receptive to adopting AI as assistive tools for DR, glaucoma, and AMD. Furthermore, ML is a useful method that can be applied to evaluate predictive factors on clinical qualitative questionnaires. This study outlines actionable insights for future research and facilitation interventions to drive adoption and operationalization of AI tools for Ophthalmology.