MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Development and Validation of a Multi-marker Serum Test for the Assessment of Mucosal Healing in Crohnʼs Disease Patients

2017· article· en· W2912291923 on OpenAlexaff
Orlaith Kelly, Mark S. Silverberg, Parambir S. Dulai, Brigid S. Boland, Séverine Vermeire, David Laharie, Édouard Louis, Giorgia Bodini, Edoardo Savarino, Venkateswarlu Kondragunta, Lauren Okada, Michael Hale, Xiaojun Li, Jessica Ho, Crystal Kuy, Benjamin Huang, Kelly Hester, Kurt Bray, Larry Mimms, Anjali Jain, William J. Sandborn, Geert D’Haens

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCrohn's diseaseGastroenterologyInternal medicineDiseaseInflammatory bowel diseaseGold standard (test)Surrogate endpointPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Mucosal healing (MH) has become the primary therapeutic target in Crohn's Disease (CD). Ileocolonoscopy, currently the gold standard for assessing MH, is invasive and time-consuming with poor patient acceptance. This limits the practical feasibility for serial monitoring of mucosal disease activity and response to treatment. We developed a serum-based, multi-analyte MH algorithm incorporating a panel of biomarkers associated with biological pathways important for mucosal homeostasis in CD patients. Methods: Retrospective serum samples were taken from adult CD patients at or within 30 days of ileocolonoscopy. A panel of serum proteomics biomarkers, selected from a total of 48 markers based on their correlation with endoscopic activity, were used to train a logistic regression model against visualized endoscopic disease severity determined by either CDEIS or SES-CD scores. The model was independently validated in a prospectively collected, centrally read, longitudinal cohort of 118 patients from the TAILORIX clinical trial. The final model utilized 13 biomarkers to produce a 0-100 scale termed as the Mucosal Healing Index (MHI). The markers represent multiple biological pathways thought to be involved in the MH process including angiogenesis (Ang1, Ang2), cell adhesion (CEACAM1, VCAM1), growth factor signaling (TGF||), inflammation (CRP, SAA1), matrix remodeling (mmp-1, -2, -3, -9 and EMMPRIN), and immune modulation (IL7). Results: A total of 748 samples from 396 patients (mean age: 34 years, 49% males, 26% ileal, 52% ileocolonic and 22% colonic disease) were used for the training and validation of the MH index. The overall accuracy of the test was 90% with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 92% for identifying patients in remission (CDEIS<3) or with mild (CDEIS 3-8) endoscopic disease (MHI range 0-40) and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 87% for identifying patients with endoscopic evidence of active disease (CDEIS ≥3; MHI range 50-100). 14% of the specimens fell within an intermediate zone (MHI 41-49) with an observed 78% probability of active disease. Test performance is shown in Table 1.Table: Table. Mucosal Healing Index Performance for Detecting Mucosal Disease Severity in CD PatientsConclusion: A peripheral blood-based test has been developed that can be used as a non-invasive surrogate for mucosal endoscopic activity assessed with ileocolonoscopy in CD patients. The incorporation of this test into current practice could aid in the management and monitoring of CD patients to help determine therapeutic efficacy in a treat to target paradigm.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→