Similarities and differences in clinical and pathologic features of inflammatory bowel disease-associated colorectal cancer in China and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) has become one of the major life-threatening complications in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which includes ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). This study aimed to explore the clinical-pathologic similarities and differences in the IBD-associated CRC (IBD-CRC) between patients in China and Canada. METHODS: Data of 78 patients with IBD-CRC retrospectively retrieved from two representative medical institutions in Beijing (China) and Calgary (Canada) over the same past 13 years, including 25 (22 UC-associated and three CD-associated) from Beijing group and 53 (32 UC-associated and 21 CD-associated) from Calgary group, were compared with regards to their clinical and pathologic characteristics. RESULTS: Several known features of IBD-CRC were seen in both groups, including long duration and large extent of colitis, active inflammation background, multifocal lesions, and advanced tumor-node-metastasis stage. Beijing group showed a significantly higher percentage of UC (88.0% vs. 60.4%, P = 0.018), younger age at diagnosis of CRC (48.6 ± 12.8 years vs. 61.6 ± 14.7 years, P < 0.001), lower ratio of mucinous adenocarcinoma (7.1% vs. 42.4%, P = 0.001) compared with Calgary group. None of the Beijing group had concurrent primary sclerosing cholangitis, while 5.7% of Calgary group did. Surveillance colonoscopy favored the detection rate of precancerous lesions (41.4% vs.17.0%, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with patients from the Calgary group, the IBD-CRC patients in Beijing group were younger, less CD-associated and had less mucinous features, otherwise they were similar in many common features.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".