MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921070118 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwz006.050

A51 EFFECT OF LYOPHILIZED STERILE FECAL FILTRATE VS LYOPHILIZED DONOR STOOL ON RECURRENT CLOSTRIDIUM DIFFICILE INFECTION (RCDI): PRELIMINARY RESULTS FROM A RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND PILOT STUDY

2019· article· en· W2921070118 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dina Kao, B Roach, Jens Walter, Raimar Löbenberg, Karen Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiarrheaClostridium difficileFecesInternal medicineSurgeryGastroenterologyAntibioticsMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fecal microbial transplantation (FMT) has been shown to be a highly effective therapy for rCDI. Success rate is > 90%. A recent study using sterile fecal filtrate successfully prevented CDI recurrence in 5 patients, suggesting live microbes may not be required for efficacy. To determine whether live microbes are necesary for the clinical efficacy of FMT by comparing treatment outomces in rCDI patients receiving either lyophilized sterile fecal filtrate (LSFF) or lyophilized FMT (LFMT). Primary outcome: proportion of patients in each group with no CDI recurrence at week 8. Secondary outcomes: mortality rate and infections directly attributable to CDI or treatment at week 8. In this single center pilot study, eligible participants with rCDI were randomized to LSFF or LFMT at 1:1. Inclusion criteria: age >18 years; diagnosis of at least 3 episodes of RCDI, each episode defined by presence of diarrhea (≥3 unformed stools/24 h), positive for C. difficile toxin, episodes occurring within 2 months of each other after finishing anti-CDI therapy, and recurring diarrhea after symptom resolution following at least 10 d of anti-CDI therapy; CDI infection under symptomatic control with <3 loose/unformed stools/24 h for at least 2 consecutive days before treatment; and d) ability to provide informed consent. Exclusion criteria: fulminant CDI; chronic diarrheal illness; taking or planning to take investigational drug within 3 months of enrolment; dysphagia; ileus or bowel obstruction, pregnancy; active infection requiring antibiotic therapy; or life expectancy <6 months. Each patient received a single dose of 15 capsules of LFMT or LSFF according to group assigned, under direct observation in clinic. All capsules appeared identical. All patients were seen in the clinic at screening, at week 0 for treatment, and 1, 4, 8 and 24 weeks after treatment. Recurrence of diarrhea ( ≥3 unformed bowel movements/24 h) was evaluated at each follow-up and tested for C difficile. In the event that the first assigned treatment failed to prevent CDI recurrence, open-label FMT was offered. Between Feb 15 and Aug 1, 2019, 4 participants were randomized to the LSFF group and 5 to the LFMT group (table 1). Primary outcome was achieved by 75% (3/4) of the LSFF group and 80% (4/5) of the LFMT group. Both failure cases received a single dose of open-label LFMT and achieved cure. No mortality or FMT-related infections were observed. Our preliminary findings suggest live microbes may not be necessary for the clinical efficacy of FMT in treating rCDI. Further characterization of sterile filtrate and mechanistic studies will lay the foundation for development of refined microbiome-derived therapy for rCDI. University of Alberta Hospital Foundation

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations38
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207