P291 Diagnostic utility of the neutrophil-platelet rate (NeuPla) as a marker of activity in patients with ulcerative colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic disease characterised by periods of activity and remission. There are biomarkers such as C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and faecal calprotectin that are elevated in patients with active UC. The platelet, one of the main activators of neutrophils, contains IL-8, a potent neutrophil chemo-attractant and P-selectin that induces excretion of superoxide in the neutrophils, forming platelet-neutrophil aggregates that are increased in individuals with UC activity. No previous studies have evaluated the neutrophil-platelet (NeuPla) rate as a tool for evaluating disease activity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical utility of NeuPla rate in patients with UC. Methods A total of 158 patients with a definitive diagnosis of UC were included and NeuPla index was calculated on the ratio between neutrophil differential count and platelets from complete blood count (CBC) at least 1 day after the colonoscopy and colon biopsies. The activity was classified according to Mayo endoscopic sub-score, Riley score, Truelove-Witts, Montreal, full Mayo, and Yamamoto-Furusho indexes. Results The correlation of the NeuPla index with all activity indexes was statistical significant (p <0.001) as well as faecal calprotectin (rho: 0.532, p = .0001). The ROC curve was used to determine the cut off level of NeuPla according to moderate activity (optimal cut off 14.63 with a sensibility of a 79.5% and specificity of 51.3% with an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of .635 and severe activity (optimal cut off 18.7 with a sensibility of 80% and specificity of 81.8% AUC of .749) considering as a gold standard the endoscopy findings as shown in Figure 1. Conclusion The NeuPla index has a good diagnostic utility in order to distinguish patients with clinical and endoscopic activity without the need to perform invasive studies such as colonoscopy. This index is a cheap and easy access monitoring tool and a better diagnostic performance in comparison with other serum biomarkers CPR, ESR and serum albumin.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".