MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402822005 · doi:10.1101/2024.09.11.612315

Detecting microbial engraftment after FMT: sorting signals from noise using placebo sequencing and culture-enriched metagenomics

2024· preprint· en· W4402822005 on OpenAlexafffund
Shahrokh Shekarriz, Jake C. Szamosi, Fiona Whelan, Jennifer Y. F. Lau, Josie Libertucci, Laura Rossi, Michelle Shah, Melanie Wolfe, Christine H. Lee, Paul Moayyedi, Michael G. Surette

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMitacsMcMaster University
KeywordsMetagenomicsSortingComputational biologyBiologyNoise (video)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeneticsGeneAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has shown efficacy for the treatment of ulcerative colitis but with variable response between patients and trials. The mechanisms underlying FMT's therapeutic effects remains poorly understood but is generally assumed to involve engraftment of donor microbiota into the recipient microbiome. Previous studies have reported microbial engraftment following FMT in various disease contexts but with inconsistent results between studies. Here we investigate engraftment in UC patients receiving FMT from a single donor applying amplicon-based profiling, shotgun metagenomics and culture-enriched metagenomics. Placebo samples were included to estimate engraftment noise, and a significant level of false-positive engraftment was observed which confounds the prediction of true engraftment. We show that analyzing engraftment across multiple patients from a single donor enhances the accuracy of detection. We identified a unique set of genes engrafted in responders to FMT which supports strain displacement as the primary mechanism of engraftment in our cohort.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.210
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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 venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207