MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323350709 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwac036.219

A219 BIOLOGIC USE DURING PREGNANCY IN WOMEN WITH INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE AND ASSOCIATED NEONATAL OUTCOMES: A RETROSPECTIVE CHART REVIEW

2023· article· en· W4323350709 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yaanu Jeyakumar, Katie O’Connor, Vivian Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and Medication Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyPediatricsRotavirusInflammatory bowel diseaseRetrospective cohort studyDiseaseDiarrheaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Biologics are the mainstay of therapy for patients with advanced inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Most biologics readily undergo placental transfer during the second trimester and remain detectable in infant serum for up to 12 months. Therefore, most clinical guidelines currently recommend avoiding live vaccines in the first 6 to 12 months for exposed infants. In Canada, the rotavirus vaccine is the only live vaccine administered before 6 months. Emerging evidence is suggesting that the vaccine may safely be given to infants with normal immune function, even if serum biologic level is detectable. Specialist assessment of infant immune function may help guide decision-making about rotavirus vaccine administration, but there remains a large gap in our knowledge of the impact of biologic exposure on the immune function of infants, necessitating further study. Purpose In this single-centre retrospective chart review, we aim to study the clinical outcomes, immune function, and rotavirus vaccine recommendations for infants exposed to biologics in utero during their first year of life. Method The study included mothers seen at the Pregnancy IBD Clinic at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto, ON, who were offered a referral to the Special Immunization Clinic (SIC) at The Hospital for Sick Children due to biologic exposure in utero. Data was collected on the recommendations made by paediatric specialists at SIC, based on complete blood count, lymphocyte phenotyping, and T-cell receptor excision analysis. Data was obtained on adverse neonatal outcomes in the first year of life, including prematurity, congenital malformations, and infections based on post-partum surveys completed by mothers and follow-up letters from SIC. Result(s) 43 patients were referred to and seen by paediatric specialists at SIC between 2 to 12 months of age. 18 infants (42%) were exposed to Adalimumab in utero, 16 (37%) to Infliximab, 5 (12%) to Vedolizumab, and 4 (9%) to Ustekinumab. The rotavirus vaccine was recommended to 34 infants (81%) and not recommended to 3 (7%) for reasons including gastrointestinal illness, neutropenia, and low lymphocyte counts. Recommendation is pending for 6 infants (14%). Two infants (5%) had premature births. Four infants (9%) were admitted to the NICU for reasons including respiratory distress, and prematurity (9%). One infant (2%) had a congenital malformation, specifically bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Six infants (14%) had upper respiratory tract infections, none of which required hospital admission or antibiotics. Conclusion(s) This study is currently in progress. Further data is required to assess whether biologic exposure in utero has a significant impact on neonatal immune function, especially beyond the first year of life, and whether there is a significant difference in vaccine recommendations and response based on the type of biologic received. 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)0.001
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.238
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 topicPregnancy and Medication ImpactFrench-language works237,207