Baseline Patient-reported Symptoms Less Predictive Than MM-SES-CD for Endoscopic Remission in Crohn’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This analysis evaluates the association between baseline patient-reported symptom (PRS) severity in Crohn's disease (CD), including abdominal pain, stool frequency, general well-being, and achievement of clinical and endoscopic outcomes. We compared baseline PRS to baseline endoscopic scores for the prediction of endoscopic remission (ER). METHODS: This post hoc analysis of 2 clinical trials of infliximab in CD included 601 patients and evaluated baseline PRS variables (abdominal pain, stool frequency, and general well-being) as measured by the Crohn's disease activity index and their association with 6-month clinical remission (CR) (Crohn's Disease Activity Index<150), corticosteroid-free CR, and week 26/54 ER (absence of mucosal ulceration). Logistic regression models assessed the relationships between PRS and outcomes of interest. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses compared the sensitivity and specificity of the different baseline PRS compared with baseline endoscopic scores for achievement of ER at weeks 26 and 54. RESULTS: No difference was found comparing patients with higher baseline PRS to those with lower PRS in achieving 6-month CR, 6-month corticosteroid-free CR, or week 26/54 ER. Modified multiplier of the SES-CD (MM-SES-CD) at baseline demonstrated a significant ability to predict week 54 ER (area under the curve, 0.71; 95% CI 0.65-0.78; P =0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline PRS in CD is not prognostic of clinical or endoscopic response. In contrast, active endoscopic disease as measured by the MM-SES-CD, more accurately predicts endoscopic outcomes. Endoscopic scores such as the MM-SES-CD may be considered for selection criteria and as a primary outcome of interest in CD trials, with PRS as a co-primary or secondary endpoint.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".