MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

P-106 Evaluation of the Association Between Fecal Lactoferrin Status and Clinical, Serologic and Endoscopic Outcomes

2014· article· en· W2320144058 on OpenAlexaff
Sandborn William, Mantzaris Gerassimos, Walter Reinisch, Colombel Jean-Frédéric, Asher Kornbluth, Rutgeerts Paul, Cornillie Freddie, Molenda Mark, Tang Linda

Bibliographic record

VenueInflammatory Bowel Diseases · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineAzathioprineGastroenterologyInfliximabPost-hoc analysisCalprotectinSerologyLactoferrinCrohn's diseaseFecesInflammatory bowel diseaseDiseaseImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the SONIC trial, patients with Crohn's disease (CD) treated with infliximab (IFX) alone or in combination with azathioprine achieved higher rates of mucosal healing (MH) at wk 26 than patients treated with azathioprine alone. In a post-hoc analysis of SONIC, clinical symptoms as measured by the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) were inaccurate to detect MH1. Recently, fecal biomarkers, such as lactoferrin (LF) and calprotectin, are being increasingly used in monitoring the activity of CD. This post-hoc analysis of SONIC reports on the association of fecal LF to clinical, serologic and endoscopic outcomes, and serum IFX levels in CD patients enrolled in centers in the United States who had evaluable measurements of LF, CDAI, serum CRP, and ileocolonoscopy both at baseline and wk 26, and evaluable serum IFX levels at wk 30. LF was measured by an ELISA assay and expressed as positive (pooled +2, +3, and +4 scores) or negative (pooled negative and +1 scores). MH was defined as absence of any ulceration. Corticosteroid-Free Clinical Remission (CFCR) was defined as clinical remission (CDAI <150) and no treatment with corticosteroids for >6 weeks. Post-hoc analyses were performed using the Fisher's exact test and the Kruskal-Wallis test where appropriate. Among the 109 patients (median age 43 yrs, 54% male), 33.9% were LF+ and 19.3% were LF- at both baseline and wk26; 36.7% patients changed from LF+ to LF- from baseline at wk 26 whereas 10.1% changed from LF- to LF+ (P < 0.0001). At baseline, LF was significantly associated with CDAI (P = 0.024) and serum CRP (P = 0.01) (Table 1); in addition, LF showed a trend of association with normal levels of CRP (65.6% versus 36.4% with CRP <0.8 mg/dL for LF—and LF+, respectively, P = 0.064, Table 1). At wk 26, there was no association between LF and CDAI (P = 0.09), serum CRP (P = 0.18), CRP normalization (0.512), CFCR (P = 0.245) (Table 1). The association between LF and MH (ulceration) was evaluated in 168 patients at baseline and 110 patients at wk 26 who had both LF and MH data at these measurement points. At baseline, ulcerations were not found in 43.1% (25/58) LF- patients versus 21.8% (24/110) LF+ patients (sensitivity 0.72, specificity 0.51, P = 0.004). In contrast, at wk26, 44.3% (27/61) of LF- patients versus 30.6% (15/49) LF+ patients had MH (sensitivity 0.50, specificity 0.64, P = 0.143). In this post-hoc analysis of the SONIC trial, LF was collected as a categorical variable. The association between LF and other clinical parameters may be better estimated if LF was on a continuous scale. Semi-quantitative LF does not seem to be a good biomarker in CD. Although it was useful to identify active clinical and biological disease at baseline, it could not confirm clinical, biological, or endoscopic remission at wk26. 1. L Peyrin-Biroulet, WJ Sandborn, et al. Clinical disease activity, C-reactive protein normalization and mucosal healing in Crohn's disease in the SONIC trial. Gut. 2013;63:88–95.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInflammatory Bowel Diseases→Same topicInfant Nutrition and Health→French-language works237,207→