Impact of Endoscopic and Histologic Activity on Disease Relapse in Ulcerative Colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic healing is currently considered the main target in the management of ulcerative colitis (UC). There are conflicting data about the role of histology as a stricter treatment objective. We aim at evaluating the additional benefit of histologic remission over endoscopic remission. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study at the McGill University Health Center. We enrolled adult patients with UC in clinical remission for at least 3 months undergoing a colonoscopy. Endoscopic disease activity was based on the Mayo endoscopic score. Rectal biopsies were obtained, and the histologic activity was evaluated using the Geboes score (active disease defined as Geboes score ≥ 3.1) with the addition of assessing the presence of basal plasmacytosis. Patients were followed up for 12 months for disease relapse defined as a partial Mayo score of > 2. At the time of relapse or end of follow-up, all patients underwent repeat endoscopic evaluation. The primary end point was clinical relapse. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-three patients were included. The presence of basal plasmacytosis was associated with relapse (adjusted odd ratio = 2.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-4.18, P = 0.042). Time to clinical relapse was significantly higher for patients with Mayo endoscopic score > 0 with adjusted hazard ratio = 2.65, 95% CI 1.31-5.39, and P = 0.007. Time to clinical relapse was not significantly higher for Geboes score ≥ 3.1 with adjusted hazard ratio = 1.29, 95% CI 0.67-2.49, and P = 0.45. DISCUSSION: Active histologic disease did not affect time to clinical relapse in patients with UC who achieved endoscopic remission while the presence of basal plasmacytosis is associated with relapse.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".