Outcomes of patients admitted with acute, severe ulcerative colitis on biologic therapy: a retrospective analysis from a tertiary referral hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background In steroid-refractory acute, severe, ulcerative colitis (ASUC), salvage medical therapy with infliximab is recommended to reduce the risk of colectomy. However, the evidence supporting this practice is based on cohorts naïve to biologics. Consequently, the management of patients on biologic or small molecule therapy (BST) with ASUC is not well defined. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients admitted with ASUC to Mount Sinai Hospital (MSH) in Toronto, Ontario from January 2018 until January 2022. Included subjects were considered to be on BST if they had received a dose of these agents within 56 days prior to admission. Our outcomes of interest included the mean difference in hospital length of stay (HLOS), rates of surgical consultation, rates of inpatient colectomies, and 90-day readmission rates between the 2 groups. Results Of the 185 admissions for ASUC, 76 were on BST prior to admission and 109 were not. Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. There were no significant differences in hospital length of stay (7.46 days vs 7.45 days P = .52) or in-hospital colectomy rates between the 2 groups. Patients on BST had higher rates of surgical consultation (36.8% vs 8.3% P < .01) and 90-day readmission rates (26.3% vs 13.8% P = .03). Conclusions We did not identify significant differences in the majority of our outcomes between the 2 groups. However, patients on BST were more likely to receive a surgical consultation during their admission and had higher rates of readmission at 90 days. Further studies evaluating the underlying factors that contribute to readmission in patients on BST in hospitals are needed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".