P272. Azathioprine drug monitoring and faecal calprotectin levels in ulcerative colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methods: Patients with confirmed IBD attending for endoscopic evaluation were invited to participate.Patients undergoing colonoscopy completed a 4-day food record diary before the procedure.Endoscopic activity was evaluated using the SES-CD (simple endoscopic score for CD) and Mayo endoscopic sub-score for UC.Endoscopically active disease was defined as SES-CD > = 4 or Mayo score > = 1.Dietary intake was converted to nutrient components using the ESHA Food Processor Software (Salem, Oregon, USA).Laboratory parameters including CRP were obtained on the day of colonoscopy.Other pertinent information collected included disease duration, Montreal classification for location and behaviour, current treatment, previous surgery, smoking status, extraintestinal manifestations, and family history.Results: Included in the analysis were 82 IBD patients (54 % male, mean age 33.9 years): 44 with CD and 38 with UC.There were 36 patients (19 CD and 17 UC) in endoscopic remission (inactive), and 46 patients (25 CD and 21 UC) with active endoscopic disease.The mean ± SD reported intakes of macro/micro nutrients significantly associated with disease activity in the whole IBD cohort and those particular to CD and UC are summarised in Table 1.There was no difference in mean caloric intake (p = 0.3), or mean total food weights (p = 0.5) comparing groups with active and inactive disease.Conclusions: Dietary content substantially varies between IBD patients.A higher intake of monounsaturated fats, retinol, dietary fibre, polyunsaturated fats, and magnesium is associated with endoscopic remission.Interestingly, soluble fibre intake is higher in CD patients with endoscopic activity; this could be due to patients changing their diet during periods of increased disease activity to include fibre that is soluble because it may reduce symptoms of diarrhoea.In summary, the composition of the diet may affect disease course and endoscopic activity, but further prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".