Beyond Neutrophils for Predicting Relapse and Remission in Ulcerative Colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study examines colonic histological features in ulcerative colitis [UC] in endoscopic remission to determine which cell types and biopsy sites best predict a patient's likelihood of remaining in remission. METHODS: This is a retrospective chart, endoscopy and histology review of 166 patients with UC in endoscopic remission followed in a single inflammatory bowel disease practice over a median of 6 years [range, 2-11 years]. Clinical remission was based on global physician assessment and colonoscopy reports, and clinical relapse on chart review. Histological features of previous injury and also number and location of plasma cells and eosinophils were assessed. We evaluated all of these features semi-quantitatively using a standard set of illustrations for the grade to maintain consistency. Multiple logistic regression and survival analyses were used to identify features associated with relapse. RESULTS: Clinical relapse occurred in 44 patients. Ulceration, especially in the left colon, was highly predictive of relapse. In the absence of acute inflammation of ulceration, the variables most predictive of relapse were increased plasma cells in the basal 20% of the lamina propria, and eosinophils in the left colon. The variable most predictive of persistent remission was the presence of intra-epithelial eosinophils whether in the surface epithelium or within crypts, especially in the right colon. Lamina propria eosinophils [grade > 2] throughout the colon predicted relapse. CONCLUSION: In the absence of neutrophils or ulceration, left-sided plasmacytosis in the basal 20% of the lamina propria and increased lamina propria eosinophils provide the best indicators of relapse in UC in clinical and endoscopic remission.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".