MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2752895831 · doi:10.1093/dote/dox088

Human papillomavirus does not play a role in the Barrett esophagus: a French cohort

2017· article· en· W2752895831 on OpenAlexaff
Charlène Brochard, Alexandra Ducancelle, Adeline Pivert, Madeline Bodin, Anne Ricard, Emmanuel Coron, Caroline Couffon, Nina Dib, Dominique Luet, Nicolas Musquer, Marc Le Rhun, Sandrine Bertrais, S. Michalak, Françoise Lunel‐Fabiani, Élodie Cesbron-Métivier

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of the Esophagus · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDysplasiaEsophagusBarrett's esophagusGastroenterologyInternal medicineEtiologyHPV infectionHuman papillomavirusProspective cohort studyCohortCancerCervical cancerAdenocarcinoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of human papillomavirus (HPV) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) has been examined but remains unclear. The purpose of the study is to dispute the connection between HPV and BE in a prospective case-control study. Biopsies were performed above and inside the Barrett's segment for BE patients and in the distal third of the esophagus for control patients for histological interpretation and for virological analysis. Biopsies for virological analysis were placed in a virus transport medium and immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen. Virological analysis involved real-time PCR using the SyBr® green protocol with modified SPF10 general primers. A total of 180 patients (119 control and 61 BE, respectively) were included. In BE patients, 31, 18, and 12 patients had, respectively, no dysplasia, low-grade dysplasia, and high grade dysplasia. Overall, nine were found to be HPV positive: five were control patients and four BE patients. HPV positive status was not associated with BE. No factors were associated with HPV, in particular the degree of BE dysplasia. HPV infection appears unlikely to be significant in the etiology of BE compared with control patients. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number NCT02549053).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of the EsophagusSame topicEsophageal Cancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207