MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323350610 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwac036.143

A143 PEDIATRIC EOSINOPHILIC ESOPHAGITIS IN CANADA: A MULTI-CENTER COHORT WITH FOCUS ON THE STRICTURING PHENOTYPE

2023· article· en· W4323350610 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Burnett, Vishal Avinashi, Thomas Hoang, A Otley, Rabindranath Persad, Mary Sherlock, Hien Q. Huynh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Esophagitis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of SaskatchewanDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEosinophilic esophagitisMedicineDysphagiaIncidence (geometry)CohortGastroenterologyGERDInternal medicinePediatricsRadiologyReflux

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic eosinophil-predominant esophageal inflammatory condition, and is now recognized as one of the most common organic causes of dysphagia in pediatrics. While fibrostenotic esophageal strictures are a common complication of adult EoE, characterization of the stricturing phenotype in pediatric EoE remains at an early stage. Purpose Describe the Canadian pediatric EoE experience, with focus on the stricturing phenotype. Method New pediatric EoE diagnoses from 2015-2018 were retrospectively identified in Vancouver (BC), Northern Alberta (AB), Hamilton (ON) and Nova Scotia (NS). Incidence rates were calculated using 2016 Federal census data. Clinical, endoscopic and histologic data were gathered for each patient’s initial clinical encounter and for any esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD) until the end of the follow-up period (fall 2019). Result(s) 332 new EoE cases were identified during the study period across all 4 sites. The incidence of EoE in patients less than 15 years old was 9.1 (AB), 6.5 (NS), 3.1 (BC) and 5.4 (combined) per 100,000 person-years. Incidence was not calculated for Hamilton due to risk of ascertainment bias given their catchment area overlaps with multiple other centers. Of identified cases, 40 (12.0%) had endoscopically-identified esophageal strictures at diagnosis or during the follow-up period, with a subset of 11 (3.3%) of these patients undergoing mechanical esophageal dilation. Another 11 (3.3%) patients had more subtle signs of esophageal narrowing (ex. mucosal rents), while the majority had no evidence of esophageal narrowing (281, 84.6%). The median age at diagnosis was higher in the cohort with strictures (12.4 years, IQR 8.9-14.1) than those without (10.3 years, IQR 6.1-13.6) but with wide IQR's. A similar trend was seen for the median duration of symptoms at diagnosis (1.5 years, IQR 0.5-3 versus 1.0 years, IQR 0.6-2.8). Patient reported food bolus impaction (OR 9.8, 95% CI 3.9-19.9) and dysphagia (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.3-7.8) were associated with stricturing disease, with other symptoms less clearly linked. Trachealization was the endoscopic finding most closely associated with esophageal strictures (OR 5.7, 95% CI 2.8-11.5). Esophageal stricture(s) were noted on 72 EGDs, including 27 endoscopic esophageal dilations, but excluding 10 esophageal dilations by interventional radiology. Of the 65 EGDs done in follow-up of a known esophageal stricture (see Table), 4 of 31 had resolution of this finding post mechanical dilation, and 19 of 39 had resolution of the stricture after initiation of new medical or dietary treatments (without dilation). Conclusion(s) EoE is common in Canadian children, with esophageal strictures within a few years of diagnosis in 12% of cases. Interestingly, a large portion of strictures resolved without mechanical dilation, which seems to point away from fibrosis as the primary driver of esophageal strictures in this patient population. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below CAG, Other Please indicate your source of funding; Women and Children's Health Research Institute Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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)0.001
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicEosinophilic EsophagitisFrench-language works237,207