MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318186123 · doi:10.1093/ibd/izac247.034

WHICH IS IMPORTANT? GLUTEN FREE DIET OR INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE MEDICATIONS IN SUBJECTS WITH AN OVERLAP WITH CELIAC DISEASE AND INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE: OBSERVATIONS FROM A CASE SERIES AT A LARGE ACADEMIC CENTER

2023· article· en· W4318186123 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jonathan Montrose, Eleazar E. Montalvan-Sanchez, Wade Billings, Megan Walker, Matthew Bohm, Sashidhar Sagi, Monika Fischer, Satya Kurada

Bibliographic record

VenueInflammatory Bowel Diseases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInflammatory bowel diseasePancolitisUlcerative colitisInternal medicineGastroenterologyDiseaseGluten freeRetrospective cohort studyColonoscopyColorectal cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract INTRODUCTION Celiac disease (CeD) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are autoimmune diseases of the bowel with similar clinical symptoms. This study aims to characterize the clinical course of both diseases in subjects with overlap of CeD and IBD (CeD+IBD) on a gluten free diet (GFD) and IBD medications. METHODS We conducted a retrospective study of demographic and serological characteristics in subjects with CeD+ IBD at a large academic center using appropriate International Classification of Disease (ICD)-10 codes from 2017 to June 2022. RESULTS 36 subjects had IBD +CeD. 96% of subjects were Caucasian and 67% were female. The diagnosis of CeD post-dated the diagnosis of IBD by 3.6 years. Ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD) occurred equally in IBD +CeD. About 75% of subjects had L2+L3, B1 phenotype per Montreal classification. 44% of UC +CeD subjects had pancolitis with 72% of them being classified as S0 (never severe) per Paris classification. 83% of subjects initiated a self-taught GFD. Only 17% of subjects sough advice from a celiac dietician. Mean duration at which GFD was initiated was 0.7 yrs from the initial diagnosis of CeD. Only 1/36 subjects followed a strict GFD during 6.5 years of follow up. The second and third assessment of GFD happened after a mean of 3.7 yrs and 5.2 yrs from the time of initiation of a GFD with only 1/36 subjects adhering to a strict GFD at these time points. Serum tTG IgA levels were tested on average at 4, 91, 154, 186 and 192 weeks from the diagnosis of CeD, with a consistent drop in mean tTG IgA titers to 45, 33, 19, 25 and 4 respectively. Only 1 subject got tTG IgA measurements over the next 250 weeks of follow up. Over a 10.1 year follow up since the diagnosis of IBD, descending proportions of subjects needing IBD medications were as follows: topical 5-ASA (aminosalicyates) (19/36)>oral steroids (18/36)> anti-TNF (tumor necrosis factor) (18/36)> anti-integrins (12/36)> azathioprine (10/36)> anti-IL12/23 (8/36)> topical 5-ASA (4/36)> MTX (methotrexate) (5/36)> topical steroids at 2/36. Mean time to initiation of IBD medications (in weeks) after GFD initiation as a reference point were in an order of oral 5-ASA (-67) < anti-TNF (-39) < AZA (-14) CONCLUSIONS Majority of subjects depended on a self-educated GFD. A small proportion of CeD +IBD subjects were assessed per clinical guidelines with respect to adherence to a GFD, serology. At least 50% of subjects with CeD+IBD needed escalation of IBD treatment to biologics and/or steroid rescue over 10 years despite initiation of GFD (albeit suboptimal). We need to further substantiate these findings with exclusive IBD and celiac control groups. We suggest establishing CeD centers at tertiary hospitals for adequate clinical guideline adherence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInflammatory Bowel DiseasesSame topicCeliac Disease Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207