Achieving Histologic Normalization in Ulcerative Colitis Is Associated With a Reduced Risk of Subsequent Dysplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Complete histologic normalization is associated with improved clinical outcomes in ulcerative colitis (UC). However, it is currently unknown what effect achieving histologic normalization has on the development of dysplasia. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 495 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of UC from a tertiary center. Patients were categorized according to the best histologic assessment they had during their disease course: histologic normalization, histologic quiescence, or persistent histologic activity. We assessed dysplasia rates in these patient groups after achieving histologic normalization or histologic quiescence, or 8 years after UC diagnosis in those with persistent histologic activity. Kaplan-Meier graphs and Cox regression analyses were performed to estimate this effect. RESULTS: The incidence rate of dysplasia development after achieving histologic normalization was statistically significantly less when compared with the incidence rate after achieving histologic quiescence (P = 0.001) and in those with persistent histologic activity 8 years after UC diagnosis (P = 0.033). In multivariate analysis, at any point throughout UC duration, dysplasia development was statistically lower in those with histologic normalization (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-0.81) but not in those with histologic quiescence (aHR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.25-1.10), compared with those with persistent histologic inflammation. When assessing the time after achieving histologic normalization, histologic quiescence, or 8 years post UC diagnosis in those with persistent histologic activity, we found that patients with histologic normalization had a subsequent decreased risk of developing dysplasia (aHR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.72), compared with patients without normalization. CONCLUSIONS: Histologic normalization is associated with a decreased risk in patients with UC of developing subsequent dysplasia, compared with patients without histologic normalization. These findings have implications for surveillance intervals.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".