Budesonide Use in Pediatric Crohn Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Budesonide (BUD) is being used in pediatric Crohn disease (CD) because it is believed to have the potential to reduce corticosteroid-related toxicity; however, few data are available describing its use. The aim of the present study was to describe BUD use in an inception cohort of pediatric patients with CD. METHODS: Data were derived from the prospective Pediatric IBD Collaborative Research Group Registry established in 2002 in North America. Use of BUD in children with CD was examined. RESULTS: BUD was used in 119 of 932 (13%) of children with newly diagnosed CD, with 56 of 119 (47%) starting BUD ≤ 30 days of diagnosis (26/56 with ileum and/or ascending colon [IAC] disease). BUD was used as monotherapy (9%), in combination with 5-aminosalicylates (77%), or in combination with immunomodulators (43%). Forty-three percent (24/56) went on to receive conventional corticosteroid at some point following their first BUD course. For the 63 of 119 (53%) who started BUD beyond the diagnosis period, 51 of 63 (81%) also received prednisone, with BUD used as a means of weaning from prednisone in 17 of 63 (27%). Patients with IAC disease who received BUD ≤ 30 days of diagnosis were just as likely to have received conventional corticosteroids by 1 year as were those who did not receive BUD ≤ 30 days of diagnosis. Two-thirds (77/119) of patients received BUD for ≤ 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: BUD is being used among pediatric patients newly diagnosed as having CD, although the majority does not have disease limited to the IAC. BUD monotherapy was rare, and further data are required to better define the role of BUD in the treatment of pediatric CD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".