MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193946021 · doi:10.14740/gr1423

Usefulness of the Eosinophilic Esophagitis Histologic Scoring System in Distinguishing Active Eosinophilic Esophagitis From Remission and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

2021· article· en· W3193946021 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bo Lin, Simon S. Rabinowitz, M.A. Haseeb, Raavi Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Esophagitis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEosinophilic esophagitisMedicineEsophagusGERDHigh-power fieldGastroenterologyInternal medicineDysphagiaEosinophilEsophagitisRefluxPathologyNerdDiseaseRadiologyAsthmaImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is defined as esophageal dysfunction in the presence of > 15 intraepithelial eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf) in either the mid or distal esophagus. The current focus of EoE pathologic evaluation is the peak eosinophil count (PEC), although histologic features other than eosinophilic inflammation are also commonly observed. In addition, histologic variance between the mid and distal esophagus in EoE has not been rigorously studied. The aim of our study was to utilize a recently developed EoE histologic scoring system (EoEHSS) to compare the mid and the distal esophageal histology in patients with active EoE (EoE-A), EoE in remission (EoE-R), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: EoEHSS was used to prospectively evaluate the severity and extent of changes in multiple histopathologic features (PEC; basal zone hyperplasia (BZH); eosinophilic abscesses (EA); eosinophil surface layering (ESL); dilated intercellular spaces (DIS); surface epithelial alteration (SEA); dyskeratotic epithelial cells (DEC); lamina propria fibrosis (LPF)) in the mid and distal esophageal biopsies in 85 pediatric patients at a tertiary medical center. These patients were divided into three cohorts: EoE-A (n = 36), EoE-R (n = 12) and GERD (n = 37). RESULTS: Total grade (severity) and stage (extent) scores were significantly higher in EoE-A compared to EoE-R and GERD patients in both the mid and the distal esophagus. The mean total grade scores in the mid esophagus, but not the distal esophagus remained higher in EoE-R as compared to GERD patients. Specific histopathologic features independent of PEC were different in distal and mid esophagus in EoE-A. About one-half of children with active EoE had different EoEHSS scores in their mid and distal esophageal biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: EoEHSS yields histologic insights beyond those derived from PEC and helps in more objective, reproducible and accurate diagnosis of EoE and GERD. It also provides a more comprehensive understanding into the pathophysiology of EoE.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastroenterology ResearchSame topicEosinophilic EsophagitisFrench-language works237,207