MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391873253 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwad061.157

A157 ASSOCIATION OF SUBMUCOSAL INVASION WITH THE PARIS CLASSIFICATION OF POLYPS IN THE LOWER GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT

2024· article· en· W4391873253 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael A. Scaffidi, Robert Bechara

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGastrointestinal tractMedicineAssociation (psychology)GastroenterologyInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Endoscopic evaluation of the colorectum allows for diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced polyps. In particular, polyps can be described in terms of gross morphology using the Paris classification. Previous work has demonstrated that submucosally invasive (SMI) cancer may correlate with the Paris classification subtypes. Aims To determine whether the Paris classification is associated with SMI in a Canadian setting. Methods We conducted a retrospective single-centre study using data from 2016 to 2023 of patients with colorectal lesions that were referred for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Using the Paris classification, we classified polyps as either protruding type (0-I) or flat type (0-IIa, 0-IIb, 0-IIc, 0-III) lesions. Protruding type lesions were further classified as sessile (0-Is), pedunculated (0-Ip) and pseudo-pedunculated (0-Isp) subtypes. Mixed lesions, with two concomitant subtypes, were categorized using the higher classification subtype. We categorized polyps as: protruded lesions, including any mixed lesions with a flat lesion; isolated flat elevated lesions; and flat lesions, both mixed and isolated lesions. We also recorded polyp location, prior endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), previous biopsy, and polyp diameter (in cm), age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) class. The primary outcome was SMI as identifed on histopathology. We used logistic regression with backward stepwise entry, Fisher exact test with relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI), and independent samples t-test. Statistical tests were two-tailed and significant at Pampersand:003C0.05. Results In our sample of 130 patients, the mean age was 69.2 years (standard deviation [SD] 10.4), most were male (n=78, 60%), and typically had an ASA score of 3 (n=77, 59.2%). Most polyps occured in the rectum (n=65, 50%) with a mean length was 4.5 cm (SD 2.2 cm). The most common subtype was IIa (n=59, 45.4%). Starting with the covariates of age, sex, ASA, prior EMR, prior biopsy at the same, and length of polyp, the logistic regression model reduced them to three: prior EMR, prior biopsy at the same site, and length. Univariate analysis of these three variables found that there was no significant difference with polyp length and SMI (P=0.147) and no significant association with prior EMR on SMI (RR=0.8 [95% CI 0.3 to 1.9]. The presence of prior biopsies at the same site of the lesions was significantly associated with SMI (RR=2.4 [95% CI 1.2 to 4.7]) Conclusions We did not find that the Paris classification for type of polyp lesion did not correlate with the presence of submucosal invasion, nor did prior EMR, age, sex, or length of polyp. The presence of a prior biopsy, however, did in fact tend to predict submucosal invasion. Future work should aim to incorporate mortality data and response to treatment into the above analysis. Funding Agencies None

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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207