Genetic polymorphisms predict response to anti-tumor necrosis factor treatment in Crohn’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To investigate genetic factors that might help define which Crohn's disease (CD) patients are likely to benefit from anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study. Patients were recruited from a university digestive disease practice database. We included CD patients who received anti-TNF therapy, had available medical records (with information on treatment duration and efficacy) and who consented to participation. Patients with allergic reactions were excluded. Patients were grouped as ever-responders or non-responders. Genomic DNA was extracted from peripheral blood, and 7 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were assessed. The main outcome measure (following exposure to the drug) was response to therapy. The patient genotypes were assessed as the predictors of outcome. Possible confounders and effect modifiers included age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status disease, as well as disease characteristics (such as Montreal criteria). RESULTS: = 0.015, OR = 4.76, 95%CI: 1.35-16.77). No difference was seen for the remaining SNPs. CONCLUSION: gene -308 SNP are associated with anti-TNF treatment response in CD and may help select patients likely to benefit from therapy.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".