MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379207287 · doi:10.1111/1751-2980.13197

Endoscopic features help to identify the histopathological patterns of colorectal polyps in <scp>Cronkhite–Canada</scp> syndrome

2023· article· en· W4379207287 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qiu Shi Xu, Yan You, Shuang Liu, Wen You, Sheng Yu Zhang, Jing Nan Li, Aiming Yang, Ji Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Digestive Diseases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPeking Union Medical College Hospital
KeywordsMedicineGastroenterologyColonoscopyDysplasiaInternal medicineColorectal PolypAdenomatous polypsAdenomaGastric PolypPathologyEndoscopyColorectal cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives Cronkhite–Canada syndrome (CCS) is a rare nonhereditary gastrointestinal hamartomatous polyposis syndrome with a high risk of colorectal cancerogenesis. It is challenging to discriminate adenomas from nonneoplastic colorectal polyps macroscopically. This study aimed to explore the endoscopic features of different histopathological patterns of colorectal polyps in CCS. Methods Sixty‐seven lesions from 23 CCS patients were prospectively biopsied or resected during the colonoscopic examination for histopathological analysis. The Fisher's exact test and multivariate logistical analysis were conducted to reveal the predictive endoscopic features of CCS polyps with low‐grade dysplasia (LGD) and adenomas. Results There were seven (10.4%) adenomas, 20 (29.9%) CCS‐LGD, and 40 (59.7%) nonneoplastic CCS polyps. Polyps were large (&gt;20 mm) in none of the adenomas, 30.0% of CCS‐LGD polyps, and 2.5% of nonneoplastic CCS polyps ( P &lt; 0.001). The color of the polyps was whitish for 71.4% of adenomas, 10.0% of CCS‐LGD polyps, and 15.0% of nonneoplastic CCS polyps ( P = 0.004). Pedunculated polyps were detected in 42.9% of adenomas, 45.0% of CCS‐LGD polyps, and 5.0% of nonneoplastic CCS polyps ( P &lt; 0.001). The proportions of types IV and V I in the Kudo classification were 42.9%, 95.0%, and 35.0% in adenomatous, CCS‐LGD, and nonneoplastic CCS polyps, respectively ( P = 0.002). The endoscopic activity was in remission for 71.4% of adenomas, 5.0% of CCS‐LGD polyps, and 10.0% of nonneoplastic CCS polyps ( P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion Endoscopic features, including the size, color, sessility, Kudo's pit pattern classification of polyps, and endoscopic activity, help identify the histopathological patterns of colorectal polyps in CCS.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Digestive DiseasesSame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207