A virtual chromoendoscopy artificial intelligence system to detect endoscopic and histologic activity/remission and predict clinical outcomes in ulcerative colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic and histological remission (ER, HR) are therapeutic targets in ulcerative colitis (UC). Virtual chromoendoscopy (VCE) improves endoscopic assessment and the prediction of histology; however, interobserver variability limits standardized endoscopic assessment. We aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) tool to distinguish ER/activity, and predict histology and risk of flare from white-light endoscopy (WLE) and VCE videos. METHODS: 1090 endoscopic videos (67 280 frames) from 283 patients were used to develop a convolutional neural network (CNN). UC endoscopic activity was graded by experts using the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (UCEIS) and Paddington International virtual ChromoendoScopy ScOre (PICaSSO). The CNN was trained to distinguish ER/activity on endoscopy videos, and retrained to predict HR/activity, defined according to multiple indices, and predict outcome; CNN and human agreement was measured. RESULTS: The AI system detected ER (UCEIS ≤ 1) in WLE videos with 72 % sensitivity, 87 % specificity, and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.85; for detection of ER in VCE videos (PICaSSO ≤ 3), the sensitivity was 79 %, specificity 95 %, and the AUROC 0.94. The prediction of HR was similar between WLE and VCE videos (accuracies ranging from 80 % to 85 %). The model's stratification of risk of flare was similar to that of physician-assessed endoscopy scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our system accurately distinguished ER/activity and predicted HR and clinical outcome from colonoscopy videos. This is the first computer model developed to detect inflammation/healing on VCE using the PICaSSO and the first computer tool to provide endoscopic, histologic, and clinical assessment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".