MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4235714572 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy008.276

A275 DONOR BODY MASS INDEX (BMI) DOES NOT IMPACT RECIPIENT BMI FOLLOWING FECAL MICROBIOTA TRANSPLANTATION FOR RECURRENT CLOSTRIDIUM DIFFICILE INFECTION

2018· article· en· W4235714572 on OpenAlexaffabout
Justin Smith, B Roach, Ammar Hassanzadeh Keshteli, D H Kao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClostridium difficileBody mass indexMedicineOverweightObesityInternal medicineColonoscopyGastroenterologyWeight lossFecal bacteriotherapyFecesTransplantationBiologyMicrobiologyColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), which restores gut dysbiosis, is an effective treatment option for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (RCDI). Although there are guidelines for stool donor screening to minimize risk of disease transmitted by stool, there are no recommendations on donor BMI. Obesity, a condition associated with intestinal dysbiosis, can be transferred by FMT in the mouse model. Further, there is a case report of a woman who developed new-onset obesity after receiving stool from a healthy but overweight donor. However, it remains unknown whether stool donor BMI has any significant impact on recipient BMI after FMT in RCDI. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of stool donor BMI on recipient BMI in RCDI. Forty-six patients with RCDI were randomized to receiving FMT by colonoscopy or by capsules (1:1) from one of three different volunteer donors registered with the Edmonton FMT Program. The donors are healthy and between the ages of 32–45, with BMIs of 18.3 kg/m2, 24.9 kg/m2, and 30 kg/m2. Pre-FMT weight and height were measured at screening visit, and weight was measured 1 week, 4 weeks and 12 weeks post-FMT. Weight lost during RCDI was recorded to calculate baseline BMI. Statistical measures were used to determine trends in weight loss from RCDI, changes in BMI over time, and effects of donor and method of FMT delivery on recipient BMI. There were no significant differences between participant baseline characteristics. The mean reported weight loss from RCDI was 5.44 ± 4.34 kg in the capsules arm and 3.72 ± 4.73 kg in the colonoscopy arm (p = 0.89). Participant BMI was significantly lower at time of FMT delivery when compared to reported baseline BMI (p < 0.05). Compared to BMI at baseline, BMI at week 12 was not significantly different, irrespective of donor or treatment method (Fig. 1). Fourteen patients (30%) gained weight 12 weeks post-FMT compared to baseline, but the difference was not statistically significant; furthermore, this observation was not donor or FMT method dependent. Our study highlighted the trends in weight recovery in RCDI patients after receiving FMT. Most patients regained weight lost during RCDI by week 12, irrespective of donor BMI or method of FMT delivery. For those patients who gained weight after FMT, the difference was not significant, and was not dependent of stool donor or FMT treatment modality. Trends of weight loss from RCDI. University of Alberta Hospital Foundation

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research→French-language works237,207→