MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318539824 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjac190.0319

P189 Prospective Validation Study Regarding Disease Complications of the Toronto IBD Global Endoscopic Reporting (TIGER) Score in Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn’s Disease Patients

2023· article· en· W4318539824 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eran Zittan, Moshe Levy, L. Saban, Shiraz Vered, A.H. Steinhart, R Milgrom, IM Gralnek, Mark S. Silverberg, Shira Zelber‐Sagi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineUlcerative colitisProspective cohort studyTigerCalprotectinCrohn's diseaseCohortAdverse effectInflammatory bowel diseaseGastroenterologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The recently developed TIGER endoscopy score was established to reliably describe disease severity as it can be utilized for both Ulcerative Colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD) patients.1 The aim of this study was to assess the TIGER score’s ability to predict outcomes regarding complications such as surgeries, hospitalizations, and drug or disease-related side effects in a sample of both UC and CD patients. Methods A cohort of 78 patients with UC (n=40) and CD (n=38) were included in a 52-week multiple visit prospective study. Each visit included patient interviews, IBD disk questionnaire, blood draws for C-reactive protein (CRP), and fecal calprotectin (FC). Endoscopy was performed at baseline. Baseline total TIGER scores were dichotomized as <100 (remission-mild activity) or ≥100 (moderate-severe activity) as a predictor of complications such as surgeries, hospitalizations, and side effects. Results At baseline, compared to patients with TIGER scores <100, UC patients with TIGER scores ≥100 had significantly higher CRP, FC, and IBD disk. In CD patients, at baseline, compared to patients with TIGER scores <100, patients with TIGER scores ≥100 had significantly higher CRP, FC, and IBD disk. In terms of hospitalizations, at 52-weeks, compared to patients with baseline TIGER scores <100, UC and CD patients with baseline TIGER scores ≥100 had a significantly increased likelihood of being hospitalized (p<0.02). More specifically, at 52-weeks, 38.5% and 34.5% of UC and CD patients with baseline TIGER scores ≥100 experienced at least one disease-related hospitalization, respectively. Comparatively, there were zero hospitalizations in UC or CD patients with baseline TIGER scores <100. In terms of surgeries, at 52-weeks, 0% and 11.1% of UC and CD patients with baseline TIGER scores <100 had surgery compared to 3.9% and 24.1% of UC and CD patients with baseline TIGER scores ≥100, respectively. In terms of side effects, at 52-weeks, compared to patients with baseline TIGER scores <100, UC and CD patients with baseline TIGER scores ≥100 had a significantly increased likelihood of reporting a side effect from both medications and the disease (p<0.006). More specifically, 0% and 11.1% of UC and CD patients with baseline TIGER scores <100 reported medication and disease side effects compared to 11.5% and 19.2% of UC and CD patients with baseline TIGER scores ≥100, respectively. Conclusion The TIGER endoscopic score demonstrates significant association with CRP, FC and IBD disk in both UC and CD patients. Moreover, the TIGER score can be utilized as a measure to predict the likelihood of UC and CD patients with moderate-to-severe disease burden experiencing a disease complications. 1. Zittan E, et al. J Crohns Colitis 2022;16:544-553.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designObservational
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207