Association of Helicobacter pylori genotype with gastroesophageal reflux disease and other upper gastrointestinal diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is a recognized pathogen, but it may also have a protective effect for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). We compared the prevalence of potential virulence factors (cagA, cagE, vacA genotypes) in GERD to other upper gastrointestinal diseases and controls. METHODS: A total of 405 patients underwent gastroscopy with H. pylori isolation and serum testing. Patient diagnostic subgroups were prospectively defined. Genotypes were determined by amplification using polymerase chain reaction. CagA antibodies were determined by western blot, enzyme-linked immunosorbent, and flow microsphere immunofluorescent assays. RESULTS: Patients were grouped as follows: nonulcer dyspepsia (26%), GERD (20%), gastric ulcer (17%), duodenal ulcer (12%), gastric cancer (6%), or controls (19%). The cagA gene was present in 94-97% of subjects in all categories, but the cagA antibody was less prevalent in nonulcer dyspepsia (69%, 95% CI: 48-86%, p = 0.02) and GERD (69%, CI: 39-91%, p < 0.05) than in those with gastroduodenal pathology including gastric ulcer, duodenal ulcer, and gastric cancer (92%, CI: 81-98%). The cagE gene and vacA S1 genotype were more frequent in patients with gastroduodenal pathology (p < 0.01). GERD was associated with a significantly lower rate of vacA S1 genotype than controls (29% (CI: 10-56%) versus 80% (CI: 59-93%), p < 0.01). The vacA S1 genotype was associated with the presence of cagA antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: The cagE and vacA S1 genotypes are more prevalent in patients with peptic ulcer or gastric cancer, suggesting a potential function in virulence for these genes. However, the vacA S1 genotype was also more prevalent in controls than GERD, suggesting a potential protective effect against GERD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".