MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

IDDF2019-ABS-0299 Gut microbiome diversity and specific microbial genera correlate with the severity of non-alcoholic liver disease in indonesia

2019· article· en· W2966898214 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chyntia Olivia Maurine Jasirwan, Cosmas Rinaldi Adhitya Lesmana, Irsan Hasan, Marcellus Simadibrata, Ikhwan Rinaldi, Juferdy Kurniawan, Andri Sanityoso, Saut Horas Hatoguan Nababan, Rino Alvani Gani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth and Medical Research FundChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationChinese University of Hong KongUniversity Grants CommitteeTerry Fox FoundationLi Ka Shing Foundation
KeywordsSteatosisFirmicutesGastroenterologyInternal medicineFatty liverFibrosisMedicineTransient elastographyBiologyDisease16S ribosomal RNALiver fibrosisBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is increasing. In Indonesia Hasan, I et al. (2002) reported the prevalence of 30.6%. This study evaluated the first time the profile of gut microbiota and correlation with severity of NAFLD in Indonesia. Methods We included 37 subjects age 18–60 years. The characteristic data of the patients and the food recalls were recorded. Abdominal ultrasound, liver transient elastography with controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) were performed. Next generation 16S rRNA metagenomic sequencing was conducted using stool samples. The Spearman correlation test was used to examine the correlation between specific microbial taxa with the severity of NAFLD based on fibrosis and steatosis degree. Results The subjects included 62.2% (n=23) females and 37.8% males (n=14), mean age 50 ± 7.93 years old. They were divided based on fibrosis and steatosis degree into non-significant and significant fibrosis using cut off 7 KPa, mild and moderate-severe steatosis based on cut off 270 dB/m. From all subjects, we got 73% vs 27% non-significant and significant fibrosis, 51.4% vs 48.6% mild and moderate-severe steatosis. At the phylum level, the proportion of Bacteriodetes did not change in fibrosis or steatosis group. The proportion of Proteobacteria and Firmicutes was different in fibrosis and steatosis groups. Actinobacteria unknown bifidobacteriales bifidobacteriaceae bifidobacterium Bifidobacterium adolescentis correlate positively with non significant fibrosis (r = 0.532; p=0.004). Firmicutes clostridia clostridiales lachnospiraceae unknown fusicatenibacter saccharivorans and Firmicutes clostridia clostridales ruminococcaceae unknown [clostridium] leptum correlate negatively with significant fibrosis (r = -0.695; p=0.026 vs r = -0.732; p=0.016). In the group of steatosis, we got Bacteroidetes bacteroidia bacteroidales rikenellaceae alistipes alistipes onderdonkii and Firmicutes clostridia clostridales oscillospiracea oscillospiraceao scilibacter ruminantum correlate negatively with moderate-severe steatosis (r = -0.478; p=0.045 vs r = -0.518; p=0.028); Bacteroidetes bacteroidia bacteroidales rikenellaceae alistipes alistipes putredinis correlate positively with mild steatosis (r = 0.503; p=0.028). Conclusions The abundance of microbiota in NAFLD are not significantly different based on the group of fibrosis and steatosis, especially in phylum level. But at the lower level, some specific microbiota may correlate with the degree of fibrosis and steatosis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0630.014

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→