Development of an Assay for Antibodies to <i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i>: Easy, Cheap and Specific for Crohn′s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop a serological test to measure antibodies to Saccharomyces cerevisiae in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. METHODS: An ELISA to the mannan of S cerevisiae that is commercially available was developed. Sera were tested from randomly chosen sera specimens kept frozen at the University of Manitoba Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinical and Research Centre, Winnipeg, Manitoba. Clinical diagnoses were kept blinded until the assay results were finalized. One hundred thirty-six sera were tested, including 51 with Crohn's disease, 32 with ulcerative colitis, one with indeterminate colitis and 16 other control subjects. Thirty-six samples were duplicates from patients already studied but were either run on separate days or drawn on different days. RESULTS: Using a cutoff of 15 binding units as a positive result, Crohn's disease was found to have a sensitivity of 53% but a specificity of 100% compared with ulcerative colitis. Compared with all other diagnoses (including ulcerative colitis), Crohn's disease had a sensitivity of 53% and a specificity of 96%. For patients with Crohn's disease only, those who were anti-S cerevisiae antibody (ASCA) positive (n=27) were significantly more likely to have proximal gastrointestinal disease and significantly less likely to have colonic or inflammatory type disease than those who were ASCA negative (n=24). The direct cost of this assay was $6.00 per positive test, and the total charge was set at $38.15. CONCLUSIONS: A reasonably inexpensive, easy and reproducible assay to assess for antibodies to S cerevisiae has been developed. Using a cutoff for positivity of 15 binding units, this test had a specificity of 100% for ruling out Crohn's disease and a lower (60%) sensitivity compared with ulcerative colitis. This test could identify a specific phenotype of patients with Crohn's disease as being more likely to have small bowel Crohn's disease and less likely to have colonic (isolated) or inflammatory disease, as opposed to fibrostenotic disease or penetrating disease. The test proved reliable when assaying samples drawn or assayed on different days.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".