Assessing the clinical value of faecal bile acid profiling to predict recurrence in primary <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Factors influencing recurrence risk in primary Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) are poorly understood, and tools predicting recurrence are lacking. Perturbations in bile acids (BAs) contribute to CDI pathogenesis and may be relevant to primary disease prognosis. AIMS: To define stool BA dynamics in patients with primary CDI and to explore signatures predicting recurrence METHODS: Weekly stool samples were collected from patients with primary CDI from the last day of anti-CDI therapy until recurrence or, otherwise, through 8 weeks post-completion. Ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry was used to profile BAs. Stool bile salt hydrolase (BSH) activity was measured to determine primary BA bacterial deconjugation capacity. Multivariate and univariate models were used to define differential BA trajectories in patients with recurrence versus those without, and to assess faecal BAs as predictive markers for recurrence. RESULTS: Twenty (36%) of 56 patients (median age: 57, 64% male) had recurrence; 80% of recurrences occurred within the first 9 days post-antibiotic treatment. Principal component analysis of stool BA profiles demonstrated clustering by recurrence status and post-treatment timepoint. Longitudinal faecal BA trajectories showed recovery of secondary BAs and their derivatives only in patients without recurrence. BSH activity increased over time only among non-relapsing patients (β = 0.056; likelihood ratio test p = 0.018). A joint longitudinal-survival model identified five stool BAs with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve >0.73 for predicting recurrence within 9 days post-CDI treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Gut BA metabolism dynamics differ in primary CDI patients between those developing recurrence and those who do not. Individual BAs show promise as potential novel biomarkers to predict CDI recurrence.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".