Altered epithelial barrier functions in the colon of patients with spina bifida
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objectives were to better characterize the colorectal function of patients with Spina Bifida (SB). Patients with SB and healthy volunteers (HVs) completed prospectively a standardized questionnaire, clinical evaluation, rectal barostat, colonoscopy with biopsies and faecal collection. The data from 36 adults with SB (age: 38.8 [34.1-47.2]) were compared with those of 16 HVs (age: 39.0 [31.0-46.5]). Compared to HVs, rectal compliance was lower in patients with SB (p = 0.01), whereas rectal tone was higher (p = 0.0015). Ex vivo paracellular permeability was increased in patients with SB (p = 0.0008) and inversely correlated with rectal compliance (r = - 0.563, p = 0.002). The expression of key tight junction proteins and inflammatory markers was comparable between SB and HVs, except for an increase in Claudin-1 immunoreactivity (p = 0.04) in SB compared to HVs. TGFβ1 and GDNF mRNAs were expressed at higher levels in patients with SB (p = 0.02 and p = 0.008). The levels of acetate, propionate and butyrate in faecal samples were reduced (p = 0.04, p = 0.01, and p = 0.02, respectively). Our findings provide evidence that anorectal and epithelial functions are altered in patients with SB. The alterations in these key functions might represent new therapeutic targets, in particular using microbiota-derived approaches.Clinical Trials: NCT02440984 and NCT03054415.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".