Fecal Calprotectin, CRP and Leucocytes in IBD Patients: Comparison of Biomarkers With Biopsy Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare fecal calprotectin (FC) levels with other commonly used parameters as part of patient care during evaluation for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS: We recruited adult IBD patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) and compared the results of the patient's biopsy results (i.e., inflamed versus noninflamed) for six sites (i.e., ileum, ascending colon, transverse colon, descending colon, sigmoid colon, rectum) with concentrations of C-reactive protein (CRP), total leucocytes and fecal calprotectin (FC). RESULTS: We found that FC was significantly elevated in a concentration-dependent manner that correlated with the number of active inflammation sites reported in biopsy. Although CRP and leucocyte measurements trended upwards in line with inflammation reported from biopsy, the results were highly variable and highlighted poor reliability of these biomarkers for indicating IBD inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: These results strongly suggest that FC correlates best with biopsy reports and is a superior marker than CRP and leucocytes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".