Clinical Features and Outcomes of Paediatric Patients With Isolated Colonic Crohn Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Adult studies suggest that patients with isolated colonic Crohn disease (L2 CD) exhibit unique characteristics differentiating them from patients with ileo-caecal (L1) CD and ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to characterize clinical features and outcomes of paediatric patients with L2. METHODS: Retrospective data was collected through the Porto Inflammatory Bowel Disease group of the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) on Paediatric patients with L2, L1 or UC at different time-points. Outcome measures included time to first flare, hospital admissions, initiation of anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) drug, stricture and surgery. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were included: 102 L1, 94 L2 and 104 UC. Rates of hematochezia at presentation were 14.7%, 44.7% and 95.2%, while rates of fever were 12.7%, 26.6% and 2.9%, for patients with L1, L2 and UC, respectively (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). Skip lesions were identified in 65% of patients with L2, and granulomas in 36%, similar to L1 patients. Rates of anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibodies (ASCA) and perinuclear antineutrophil cytoplasmic (pANCA) positivity significantly differed between the three groups: 25.4% and 16.7% for patients with L2, compared with 55.2% and 2.3%, and 1.8% and 52.9% for patients with L1 and UC, respectively. Response rates to exclusive enteral nutrition were comparable between L1 and L2 (78.3-82.4%), as was the response to oral steroids (70.4-76.5%) in the three groups. While times to first flare and admission were similar between groups, patients with L1 were commenced on anti-TNFα earlier. Moreover, stricturing phenotype and need for colectomy were very rare in patients with L2. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences are observed in the clinical presentation and outcomes of Paediatric patients with L2, compared to patients with L1 and UC.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".