Non-alcoholic fatty liver degree and long-term risk of incident inflammatory bowel disease: A large-scale prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have shown similar worsening epidemic patterns globally and shared various overlapping pathophysiological mechanisms. However, evidence on the relationship between NAFLD and IBD risk is lacking. We aimed to investigate the associations between long-term risk of incident IBD and NAFLD in a large prospective cohort. METHODS: Participants from the United Kingdom Biobank cohort ( https://biobank.ndph.ox.ac.uk/ ) who were free of IBD and alcoholic liver disease at baseline were enrolled. Baseline non-alcoholic fatty liver degree was measured by the well-established fatty liver index (FLI). The outcomes of interest included incident IBD, ulcerative colitis (UC), and Crohn's disease (CD). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Among 418,721 participants (mean FLI: 48.11 ± 30.11), 160,807 (38.40%) participants were diagnosed as NAFLD at baseline. During a median of 12.4 years' follow-up, 2346 incident IBD cases (1545 UC, 653 CD, and 148 IBD-unclassified) were identified. Due to limited events, those IBD-unclassified were combined in UC or CD when examining the associated risk of UC or CD, separately. Compared with the lowest quartile of FLI, the highest quartile showed a separately 36.00%, 25.00%, and 58.00% higher risk of incident IBD (HR Q4 vs.Q1 = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.19-1.55, Ptrend <0.001), UC (HR Q4 vs.Q1 = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.07-1.46, Ptrend = 0.047), and CD (HR Q4 vs.Q1 = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.26-1.97, Ptrend <0.001) after multivariable adjustment. Compared with non-NAFLD, NAFLD participants had a significantly higher risk of incident IBD (HR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.04-1.24) and CD (HR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.17-1.58). CONCLUSIONS: Higher degree of non-alcoholic fatty liver is associated with increased risk of incident IBD. Interventions aimed at improving NAFLD may be a potential targeted strategy for the detection and treatment of IBD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".