Apoptosis in Barrett's oesophagus following antireflux surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intestinal metaplasia persists in Barrett's mucosa despite control of reflux. Tissue homeostasis is maintained by the balance between apoptosis and proliferation. There is an unexplained temporary increase in proliferation in patients with Barrett's mucosa after antireflux surgery, and the long-term effect of any therapy in altering this balance remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess apoptosis in Barrett's oesophagus following antireflux surgery. METHODS: Apoptosis was evaluated in endoscopic biopsy specimens from 19 patients with Barrett's oesophagus 4 years after Collis-Nissen gastroplasty using an in situ terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated deoxyuridine triphosphate-biotin nick end labelling (TUNEL) method. RESULTS: Intestinal metaplasia had a lower apoptosis index than gastric metaplasia (0.27 versus 2.14 per cent; P < 0.001). After operation there was a steady increase of apoptosis in intestinal metaplasia over time (from 0.23 per cent before operation to 0.42 per cent within 2 years and to 0.59 per cent 4 years after operation; P = 0.015). Patients with persistent acid exposure did not show any increase in apoptosis in comparison with patients without acid exposure (0.41 versus 0.59 per cent; P = 0.91). CONCLUSION: Apoptosis is less in intestinal metaplasia than in gastric metaplasia, although there is an increase after antireflux surgery. Persistent acid reflux may predispose to malignancy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".