Association Between Proton Pump Inhibitors and the Risk of Intestinal Behçet Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to investigate the association between proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and the incidence of intestinal Behçet disease (BD) in patients with BD. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted at The University of Tokyo Hospital, including patients with BD diagnosed between April 2005 and November 2023. Cox models and Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to evaluate hazard ratios (HRs) and cumulative incidence of intestinal BD, respectively. Secondary analyses were performed to assess the duration and dose-response relationship of PPI use. Results Among 194 patients with BD, 25.3% developed intestinal BD during a mean follow-up of 12 years. PPI users had a significantly higher incidence of intestinal BD compared to nonusers (adjusted HR 2.48, 95% CI 1.38-4.47,P= 0.002), with a confirmed duration/dose-dependent relationship. The cumulative incidence of intestinal BD was markedly elevated in PPI users (log-rankP< 0.001). The result was similar to that in the propensity score–matched cohort. Conclusion This study demonstrates a significant association between PPI use and increased incidence of intestinal BD in patients with BD. Caution in prescribing PPIs for patients with BD is warranted due to the potential risk of severe complications associated with intestinal BD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".