MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lymphoproliferative and Intestinal Malignancies in 214 Patients With Biopsy-defined Celiac Disease

2004· article· en· W2326476150 on OpenAlexaff
Hugh James Freeman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Gastroenterology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymphomaGastroenterologyDermatitis herpetiformisBiopsyPathologyEsophagusInternal medicineCoeliac diseaseIncidence (geometry)DiseaseLymphocytosisLymphoproliferative disorders

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior studies have suggested that the incidence of some neoplastic disorders, particularly malignant lymphoma, is increased in celiac disease. In the present study, lymphoproliferative and intestinal cancers in 214 consecutive biopsy-defined celiac disease patients, including 148 females (69.2%) and 66 males (30.8%), seen by a single clinician over more than 20 years were tabulated. Of the 214 patients, 151 were diagnosed with celiac disease before age 60 and 63 at or after age 60. In total, 18 malignant lymphomas and 3 small intestinal adenocarcinomas were detected. While the overall incidence of malignant lymphoma was 8.4%, similar to other European centers, the incidence in elderly celiacs in this study was 22.2%. Celiac disease was detected before or even after the diagnoses of lymphoma or small intestinal adenocarcinoma were established. In some, epithelial lymphocytosis was evident in gastric, colonic, or biliary ductal epithelium. In addition, other immune-mediated disorders, dermatitis herpetiformis, and autoimmune thyroid disease were common, suggesting a distinct clinical and pathologic phenotype in celiac disease that may predispose to malignant complications. Finally, except for a single hypopharyngeal carcinoma in a celiac disease patient with a malignant lymphoma, other malignant disorders of esophagus, stomach, and colon were not detected.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations74
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical GastroenterologySame topicCeliac Disease Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207