MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

S326 Does Clostridioides Difficile Infection Play a Role in Premalignant Colonic Lesion? A Retrospective Cohort Study

2024· article· en· W4403719581 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nadera Altork, Thomas Chameli, Advait Suvarnakar, Mina Al-Hamadani, Amer Arman, Spyridon Peppas, Akram I. Ahmad, Mark Mattar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverticular Disease and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClostridioidesMedicineRetrospective cohort studyCohortInternal medicineLesionGastroenterologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and Colorectal Cancer (CRC) are prevalent in the US with CRC carrying a significant mortality risk. However, the link between CDI and colorectal cancer in humans has not been investigated. Prior research only suggests CDI may be linked to tumorigenesis through Wnt signaling and reactive oxygen species induction in mice. This retrospective cohort study aims to investigate the association between CDI and the risk of malignant and premalignant findings on colonoscopy. Methods: Retrospective chart review was conducted at 4 healthcare facilities. Adult patients from Jan 2012 to Dec 2018 were identified using C. difficile test (CDT) reports. Colonoscopy reports at least 5 years after CDT were then compared. The study included 448 charts, with 64 CDT-positive cases. Statistical analyses included Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Odds Ratios and Type 2 Factorial ANOVA tests to compare observed lesions. The study looked for rates of malignant and premalignant lesions as the primary outcome with overall lesion frequency, size, histology, and ulcerative lesions as secondary outcomes. Results: Group demographics were similar except for smoking status (Table 1). There was no significant difference in the development of polyps and masses between the CDT-positive and CDT-negative patients (OR=1.1; [95% CI 0.7, 2.1]). Both groups had the same median number of polyps (2 [1-3] vs 2 [1-3]; P = 0.79) and polyp size (4mm [2-5.3] vs 4mm [3-6.1]; P = 0.59)). Adenocarcinoma was insufficiently captured for analysis; however, the CDT-positive group had a greater frequency of ulcerative lesions compared to the CDT-negative (OR= 6.149; [95% CI 1.6, 22.65]) (Figure 1). Conclusion: This study explores the potential link between CDI and CRC. Prior human research was limited, making this investigation significant due to CRC's high prevalence. A recent animal study suggested CDI Toxin B could promote tumorigenesis. This study found no significant difference between rates of malignant and premalignant lesions in CDT-positive and negative patients. However, this study demonstrates the potential link between CDI and the risk of developing inflammatory pathologies such as ulcerative colorectal lesions. Limitations include a small sample size and shorter follow-up time than the average polyp-to-cancer progression period. Furthermore, this research could guide future, larger prospective studies that may impact CRC screening for CDI patients.Figure 1.: Forest Plot of Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel OR for lesion observations by subtype. Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Odds Ratios were used to compare lesion observations between patients with negative and positive CDT while controlling for smoking status. CI (horizontal lines) that include 1 (vertical line) indicate no effect. The lesions with narrower CI represent larger samples with stronger evidence. This Forest Plot shows that only ulcer observations were increased in the CDT-positive compared to the CDT-negative group. There was no effect on the overall observance of any lesion type. OR, odds ratio; CDT, C. difficile tests; CI, confidence interval. Table 1. - Baseline characteristics of the patients CDT-positive Group (n = 64) CDT-negative Group (n = 384) P-value Age at Colonoscopy (median [IQR]) 62.0 [54.3, 69.0] 62.0 [51.8, 69.0] 0.9447 Years between CDT and Colonoscopy (median [IQR]) 6.0 [5.0, 7.0] 6.0 [5.0, 7.0] 0.3273 Sex, Female, n (%) 45 (70.3) 231 (60.2) 0.1592 Race, n (%)WhiteAfrican AmericanAsianOther 26 (40.6)32 (50.0)1 (1.6)5 (7.8) 165 (43.0)206 (53.6)5 (1.3)8 (2.1) 0.0982 Ethnicity, Hispanic, n (%) 1 (1.6) 8 (2.1) 1.0 BMI (median [IQR]) 28.2 [23.4, 33.8] 28.2 [24.4, 33.1] 0.8732 Smoking status, n (%)SmokerNonsmokerEx-smoker 23 (35.9)34 (53.1)7 (10.9) 75 (19.6)204 (53.3)105 (27.3) 0.0197 1 0.0301 Family History of CRC, n (%)First DegreeSecond DegreeNo Family History 2 (3.1)0 (0)62 (96.9) 33 (8.6)10 (2.6)341 (88.8) 0.1522 IBD, n (%)UCCrohn'sNo IBD 1 (1.6)3 (4.7)60 (93.8) 18 (4.7)32 (8.4)334 (87.0) 0.3968 PSC, Yes, n (%) 2 (3.1) 2 (0.5) 0.0996 Comorbidities, Yes, n (%)HTNDMCKDHIV 41 (64.1)19 (29.7)8 (12.5)5 (7.8) 249 (64.8)147 (38.3)68 (17.7)22 (5.7) 1.00.23870.39650.5675 Quality of bowel Preparation, Ottawa Scoring (%)ExcellentGoodFairPoorInadequateNot Mentioned 19 (29.7)32 (50.0)2 (3.1)3 (4.7)4 (6.3)4 (6.3) 75 (19.5)163 (42.4)46 (12.0)20 (5.2)8 (2.1)72 (18.8) 0.06970.278 0.0297 10.077 0.0114 CDT (Clostridioides difficile test), BMI (Body mass index), CRC (colorectal cancer), IBD (inflammatory bowel disease), UC (ulcerative colitis), PSC (primary sclerosing cholangitis), IQR (interquartile range), HTN (hypertension), diabetes mellitus (Diabetes mellitus), CKD (Chronic Kidney disease), HIV (Human immunodeficiency virus).

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.267 · 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.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of GastroenterologySame topicDiverticular Disease and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207