Novel Diagnostic and Therapeutic Techniques for Surveillance of Dysplasia in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The risk for developing dysplasia and colorectal cancer in patients with longstanding inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) involving the colon is well documented. Random biopsies during white-light, standard-definition colonoscopy (33 to 50 biopsies) with or without dye spraying chromoendoscopy has been the recommended strategy in North America to detect dysplastic lesions in IBD. However, there are several limitations to this approach including poor physician adherence, poor sensitivity, increased procedure time and considerable cost. The new generation of high-definition endoscopes with electronic filter technology provide an opportunity to visualize colonic mucosal and vascular patterns in minute detail, and to identify subtle flat, multifocal, polypoid and pseudopolypoid neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions. The application of these new technologies in IBD is slowly being adopted in clinical practice. In addition, the advent of confocal laser endomicroscopy provides an opportunity to explore real-time histology, thus redefining the understanding and characterization of the lesions in IBD. There is emerging evidence that serrated adenomas are also associated with longstanding IBD colitis and may be recognized as another important contributing factor to colorectal cancer development. The circumscribed neoplastic lesions can be treated using endoscopic therapeutic management such as mucosal resection or, especially, endoscopic submucosal dissection. This may replace panproctocolectomy in selected patients. The authors review the potential of these techniques to transform endoscopic diagnosis and therapeutic management of dysplasia in IBD.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".