Prevalence of and Factors Associated With Extraintestinal Manifestations and Their Remission in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: The EXTRA-Intestinal Manifestation Prospective Study From the Groupe d'Etude Thérapeutique des Affections Inflammatoires du Tube Digestif
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Extraintestinal manifestations (EIMs) of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are challenging clinical situation. No prospective study assessed remission risk factors of EIMs. The aim of this study was to prospectively investigate the epidemiology, risk factors of EIM occurrence, and EIM remission in a large IBD cohort. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in 30 French referral centers. Between May 2021 and June 2021, all consecutive patients attending to hospital appointment were systematically invited to fill out a questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 1,971 consecutive patients with IBD were analyzed. There were 1,056 women (53.8%), and the median age of patients was 41 years (31-54). The median disease duration was 11 years (1-18). Overall, 544 (27.6%) had at least 1 EIM. In 20.2% of cases, patients had multiple EIMs. The most frequent EIMs were rheumatological (19%) and dermatological (10%) manifestations. Immunosuppressant treatment (odds ratio [OR] = 2.56; P < 0.001) was a risk factor of EIM, while the Montreal A3 classification (OR = 0.61, P = 0.023) and male gender (OR = 0.61, P < 0.001) were associated with a lower risk of EIM occurrence. IBD current clinical remission (OR = 2.42; P < 0.001) and smoking cessation (OR = 2.98; P < 0.001) were associated factors of EIM remission. Conversely, age at IBD diagnosis (OR = 0.98; P < 0.018) was associated with a lower risk of EIM remission. DISCUSSION: One quarter of patients had at least 1 EIM. Beyond factors associated with the presence of EIMs, patients with IBD current clinical remission and smoking cessation are more likely to achieve EIM remission, while increasing age at IBD diagnosis is associated with decreased chance of remission.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".