MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000557494 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjz203.267

P138 Basal plasma cells in normal large bowel: what is normal?

2020· article· en· W3000557494 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. Paola Castelli, Dua Abuquteish, Mirko Di Ruscio, Gianluigi Lunardi, Giuseppe Zamboni, Robert H. Riddell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRectumCecumBasal (medicine)ColonoscopyLamina propriaMedicineGastroenterologyInflammatory bowel diseaseInternal medicineColorectal cancerPathologyCancerEpitheliumDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Basal plasma cells (BPC) are a diagnostic criterion for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and their persistence following therapy also indicates an increased risk of relapse. However neither the definition of basal plasma cells nor what is normal has been well established. We examined these parameters and determined whether there is reginal variability throughout the large bowel. Methods We looked at two patient populations. Group A) Biopsies from 6 standardised sites around the colon (cecum to rectum) from 37 patients who had normal colonoscopy at IRCCS Sacro Cuore Hospital, Negrar, Verona, Italy for symptoms suggesting irritable bowel syndrome, who were free of all medical therapy. Group B) a validation cohort from Mt Sinai Hospital Toronto using sections from the same 6 sites from 16 subtotal and total colectomy specimens performed for non-obstructing colonic carcinoma, primarily Lynch syndrome. Basal plasma cells were counted between two crypts in both the basal 5%, and the basal 20% of the mucosa. A partitioned visual analogue scale (PVAS) was also developed to see if this could replace counting, especially as the distance between crypts in IBD is variable Results In group A, in the lowest 5% part of the lamina propria, basal plasma cells were found throughout the large bowel and were highest in the proximal colon and lowest in the rectosigmoid. The maximum number of plasma cells between crypts was seven for the cecum and two for the rectum, with a gentle gradation between these two. The PVAS (range 1–5) varied from a maximum of 2 proximally to 1 distally. When the basal 20% was counted, the scores ranged from 35 in the cecum to 12 in the rectum, again with a gradation between, but the PVAS increased from a maximum of 3 proximally to 2 in the rectum. In group B the results were virtually to Group A and the PVAS scores were also virtually identical, The main difference was that at least one plasma cell was seen in all sections, likely because tissue sections encompass a much larger area. These results were all statistically significant. Conclusion The normal large bowel has a gradation of plasma cells that is highest proximally and lowest distally, however assessed, and needs to be taken into account when assessing the presence of basal plasma cells as an indicator of increased likelihood of relapse of IBD. The PVAS developed can replace the chore of counting, and is likely more meaningful when architectural distortion is present.

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)0.004
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207