MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3134915465 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab002.161

A163 MAJORITY OF INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE PATIENTS WITH RECURRENT CLOSTRIDIOIDES INFECTION DO NOT REQUIRE FECAL MICROBIOTA TRANSPLANTATION

2021· article· en· W3134915465 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bhairavi Balram, Nichole Winczura, D H Kao, Levinus A. Dieleman, Brendan P. Halloran, Karen I. Kroeker, Farhad Peerani, Vivian Huang, Karen Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineUlcerative colitisInflammatory bowel diseaseClostridioidesGastroenterologyColonoscopyColectomyRetrospective cohort studyDiseaseColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of developing Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and have worse outcomes including higher rates of colectomy and death, and experience higher rates of recurrent CDI (rCDI). However, it is still not clear whether rCDI is a cause of refractory IBD or a consequence of the inflammatory state in the colon. Aims We aimed to assess the outcomes of rCDI in patients with active IBD compared to inactive IBD in the era of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) Methods This is a retrospective cohort of adult IBD patients with rCDI at the IBD centre at the University of Alberta hospital between 2014–2017. rCDI was defined as a recurrent episode occurring within 60 days of the prior after successful treatment with antibiotics. We collected demographic and clinical characteristics, along with the rCDI-related and FMT outcomes in patients with active and inactive IBD. Active IBD was based on clinical assessment using a combination of disease severity scores (Harvey Bradshaw Index, partial Mayo scores), presence of active disease on colonoscopy, clinical symptoms and/or treatment escalation or change in the month leading up to rCDI diagnosis. Results Over the study period, 56 IBD patients (50% ulcerative colitis, 28/56) had a total of 85 rCDI episodes. Thirty-four percent (19/56) of patients had two or more rCDI episodes. Forty-one percent (35/85) of rCDI episodes were toxin positive while the remainder were only PCR positive. Thirty-nine percent (33/85) had active IBD at the time of CDI diagnosis. Patients with active IBD were more likely to have rCDI (1.7 rCDI episodes vs. 1.5, p=0.018). IBD treatment escalation was also more likely in the active IBD cases (79% vs. 44%, p = 0.002) with the use of steroids (27% vs 2%, p = 0.001) and addition of biologics (18% vs. 2%, p = 0.013). Active IBD cases were also more likely to be hospitalized (30% vs. 10%, p = 0.02) and were more likely to receive FMT (27% vs. 4%, p = 0.003). There was no difference in the time between rCDI episodes, antibiotic exposure or colectomy rates between the two groups. Conclusions Compared to IBD patients in remission, patients with active IBD are more likely to experience rCDI, IBD treatment escalation and FMT. It is interesting to note that only 27% of patients with recurrent CDI required FMT suggesting CDI may be a marker of active or refractory disease rather than a cause. Larger, prospective studies are needed to help clarify this association. 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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 Gastroenterology→Same topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research→French-language works237,207→