MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133771634 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab002.204

A206 EVOLUTION OF PEDIATRIC AUTOIMMUNE CHOLANGITIS AND PRIMARY SCLEROSING CHOLANGITIS INTO ADULTHOOD

2021· article· en· W3133771634 on OpenAlexaffabout
Philippe Willems, Julian Hercun, Catherine Vincent, Fernando Álvarez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary sclerosing cholangitisMedicineAutoimmune hepatitisInternal medicineLiver biopsyGastroenterologyCohortRetrospective cohort studyNatural historyUrsodeoxycholic acidInflammatory bowel diseaseBiopsyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The natural history of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) in children seems to differ from PSC in adults. However, studies on this matter have been limited by short follow-up periods and inconsistent classification of patients with autoimmune cholangitis (AIC) (or overlap syndrome). Consequently, it remains unclear if long-term outcomes are affected by the clinical phenotype. Aims The aims of this is study are to describe the long-term evolution of PSC and AIC in a pediatric cohort with extension of follow-up into adulthood and to evaluate the influence of phenotype on clinical outcomes. Methods This is a retrospective study of patients with AIC or PSC followed at CHU-Sainte-Justine, a pediatric referral center in Montreal. All charts between January 1998 and December 2019 were reviewed. Patients were classified as either AIC (duct disease on cholangiography with histological features of autoimmune hepatitis) or PSC (large or small duct disease on cholangiography and/or histology). Extension of follow-up after the age of 18 was done for patients followed at the Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal. Clinical features at diagnosis, response to treatment at one year and liver-related outcomes were compared. Results 40 patients (27 PSC and 13 AIC) were followed for a median time of 71 months (range 2 to 347), with 52.5% followed into adulthood. 70% (28/40) had associated inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (78% PSC vs 54% AIC; p=0.15). A similar proportion of patients had biopsy-proven significant fibrosis at diagnosis (45% PSC vs 67% AIC; p=0.23). Baseline liver tests were similar in both groups. At diagnosis, all patients were treated with ursodeoxycholic acid. Significantly more patients with AIC (77% AIC vs 30 % PSC; p=0.005) were initially treated with immunosuppressive drugs, without a significant difference in the use of Anti-TNF agents (0% AIC vs 15% PSC; p= 0.12). At one year, 55% (15/27) of patients in the PSC group had normal liver tests versus only 15% (2/13) in the AIC group (p=0.02). During follow-up, more liver-related events (cholangitis, liver transplant and cirrhosis) were reported in the AIC group (HR=3.7 (95% CI: 1.4–10), p=0.01). Abnormal liver tests at one year were a strong predictor of liver-related events during follow-up (HR=8.9(95% CI: 1.2–67.4), p=0.03), while having IBD was not (HR=0.48 (95% CI: 0.15–1.5), p=0.22). 5 patients required liver transplantation with no difference between both groups (8% CAI vs 15% CSP; p=0.53). Conclusions Pediatric patients with AIC and PSC show, at onset, similar stage of liver disease with comparable clinical and biochemical characteristics. However, patients with AIC receive more often immunosuppressive therapy and treatment response is less frequent. AIC is associated with more liver-related events and abnormal liver tests at one year are predictor of bad outcomes. Funding Agencies None

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207