Donor Efficacy in Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Recurrent Clostridium difficile: Evidence From a 1,999-Patient Cohort
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background. Recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a public health challenge and fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has emerged as an effective therapeutic option. Although FMT is used for treating recurrent CDI, there is no robust evidence evaluating if different donors have an impact on the clinical cure rate. We aim to evaluate if there are differences in FMT efficacy for CDI between donors from a public stool bank. Methods. Donors were selected using a 178-point clinical assessment and 30 laboratory investigations for infectious and microbiome-mediated diseases where only 2.8% of candidate donors qualify. Among selected donors, fecal microbiota preparations (FMPs) were produced according to standard FMP manufacturing practices. Donor-specific units were tracked by a quality assurance (QA) system that linked to de-identified individual patient outcomes. QA data was consecutively collected from 482 healthcare facilities across 50 states and 7 countries between January 16, 2014 and April 12, 2016. Donors were included if their material was used in over 10 reported patients over the study period. The primary outcome was physician reported clinical cure as per standard of care follow-up. Descriptive statistics and chi-square analysis was conducted. Results. Overall, 28 donors (Figure 1) were used in 1,999 patients. Overall, the clinical cure rate from physician-reported data across all 28 donors was 84.4% with a range of 69.2–95.2% (Figure 2). One outlier donor was found to have a statistically significant lower clinical cure rate (70.9%, p = 0.05). However, upon sensitivity analysis, the lower efficacy was driven by one site (overall clinical cure for all donors at site of 50.7%, p < 0.05) and the reduced clinical cure rate was not seen across other hospitals that the donor's material was used. Otherwise, there was no statistically significant differences between donor FMT material and clinical cure for CDI not responsive to standard therapy. Figure 1: Donor characteristics Figure 2: Clinical efficacy reported by donor Conclusion. To our knowledge, this is the largest study assessing clinical efficacy for FMT in CDI by donor and suggests it is unlikely that different donors have an impact on efficacy. Disclosures. M. Osman, OpenBiome: Employee, Salary; Z. Stoltzner, OpenBiome: Employee, Salary; K. O'Brien, OpenBiome: Employee, Salary; K. Ling, OpenBiome: Employee, Salary; E. Koelsch, OpenBiome: Employee, Salary; N. Dubois, OpenBiome: Employee, Salary; M. Smith, OpenBiome: Employee, Salary. Finch Therapeutic: Board Member, Employee and Shareholder, Equity and Salary; Z. Kassam, OpenBiome: Employee, Salary. Finch Therapeutic: Consultant and Shareholder, Equity and Research support
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle