A264 IDENTIFYING CLINICAL PREDICTORS FOR SUCCESS OF EXCLUSIVE ENTERAL NUTRITION INDUCTION THERAPY IN PEDIATRIC CROHN DISEASE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Current treatments for IBD focus on reducing inflammation, mostly through suppression of the immune system. Exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) is recognized as the first line therapy for mild-to-moderate luminal pediatric Crohn disease patients pCD. Although EEN is safe, as it does not suppress the immune system, it poses considerable challenges to patients, mostly due to palatability and monotony of the formula and treatment costs. Moreover, the efficacy of EEN varies greatly from patient to patient. Therefore, there is a need to distinguish between responders and non-responder patients. Aims Identify clinical features associated with efficacy of EEN induction therapy and apply machine learning to build a classifier to identify EEN non-responders. Methods The Canadian Children Inflammatory Bowel Disease Network prospectively enrolled and followed new onset pediatric IBD cases. Prospective data for 308 pCD with EEN as their first treatment for CD are available. Patients with weighted Pediatric CD Activity Indexes (wPCDAI) collected after at least 4 weeks on EEN were compiled into a dataset (n=108). For this analysis, treatment response was defined as a wPCDAI reduction of at least 12.5 points of a patient’s wPCDAI baseline score. The dataset includes 26 features for each of the 108 pCD patients at time of diagnosis. This included blood test results (Hgb, ESR, CRP, Alb, Htc, Plt), Paris Classifications, height, and weight Z-scores, as well as wPCDAI, SES-CD (simple endoscopic score, CD), PGA (physician global assessment), and Mayo scores. Odds ratios were calculated to determine whether any features were associated with response to EEN induction therapy. Then, the most relevant features were identified with regularization techniques and a machine learning classifier for predicting response to EEN was built. Results Results showed that the appropriate subset of features to include for optimal accuracy over model simplicity are n=4 (PUCAI, PGA, SES-CD scores, and hematocrit). Also, an increase in PGA score (e.g., moving from “mild disease” to “moderate disease”) was associated with an increase in the chance of EEN failure (OR 3.1, 95% CI [1.7,5.8], p=0.0001). The best classifier for predicting EEN response was a random forest consisting of 20 decision trees. The classifier achieved an area under the ROC curve of 0.75 ± 0.07 Conclusions Our results suggest that it is possible to produce a classifier capable of predicting EEN clinical remission with an accuracy over 60%. Higher PGA, PUCAI, and SES-CD scores show potential for predicting patients less likely to respond to EEN induction. This research has the potential to provide better quality of life for children who live with IBD. Funding Agencies CIHRIMAGINE SPOR Network , Women and Children's Health Research Institute
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".