MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

S1440 The Cecal Patch in Ulcerative Proctitis – A Harbinger of Disease Progression or Merely an Incidental Finding?

2024· article· en· W4403722258 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Sahyoun, Esther Liu, Robert Battat, Randy Longman, Ellen Scherl, Dana J. Lukin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverticular Disease and Complications
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProctitisDermatologyDiseaseUlcerative colitisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Ulcerative colitis classically consists of immune-mediated inflammation that is present in the rectum and can extend proximally in a continuous matter. Isolated rectal inflammation, or ulcerative proctitis, represents a limited form of disease that is not associated with increased risk of dysplasia. Existing literature is sparse and conflicting on the significance of peri-appendiceal inflammation, or a “cecal patch”, in otherwise isolated proctitis. Our aim was to assess if the presence of a cecal patch carried a higher risk of disease progression or complications. Methods: This is a single-center retrospective study of adult patients with ulcerative proctitis treated from 1/2002 to 4/2023. Patients were included in the study if they had a minimum of 2 endoscopic evaluations, with index colonoscopy showing Mayo Endoscopic Score (MES) with active disease (≥1) that was limited to the rectum (extent ≤ 20 cm). Endoscopic healing was defined as MES 0 or 1 on follow up endoscopy. Statistical significance was calculated using Chi-square for categorical variables and independent T-test for quantitative variables. Results: Of the 200 patients with isolated proctitis, 25 had a cecal patch present at index colonoscopy. Between those with a cecal patch and those without, there were no significant differences in patient demographics, baseline inflammatory marker values (C-reactive protein and fecal calprotectin), or baseline medication use (steroids, mesalamine, immunomodulator or biologic agents). In univariate analysis, the presence of a cecal patch was not significantly associated with proximal extension of disease (P =0.699). In multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and index MES score, cecal patch was not a significant risk factor for proximal extension, the need for medical therapy change or escalation, or disease relapse (Table 1). Conclusion: Patients with ulcerative proctitis had similar rates of proximal extension, medical therapy escalation or disease relapse regardless of the presence of a cecal patch. This suggests that a cecal patch does not confer increased risk of disease progression. Table 1. - Multivariate analysis on role of patient and disease characteristics on disease progression Proximal Extension Medical Therapy Change / Escalation Disease Relapse Independent Variable OR 95% CI P-value OR 95% CI P-value OR 95% CI P-value Age at diagnosis 0.99 0.96-1.01 0.251 1.00 0.97-1.03 0.974 0.99 0.98-1.02 0.733 Sex 1.02 0.51-2.02 0.967 1.18 0.48-2.92 0.719 1.37 0.69-2.73 0.298 Race/Ethnicity (ref=white) Black* 0.90 0.17-4.76 0.905 - - - 5.47 0.60-50.0 0.132 Hispanic* 0.61 0.07-5.57 0.659 - - - 1.03 0.19-5.53 0.977 Asian 1.17 0.33-4.08 0.810 0.43 0.05-3.55 0.435 0.47 0.14-1.67 0.245 Other 2.18 0.44-10.76 0.338 1.63 0.28-9.44 0.585 1.58 0.27-9.27 0.613 Unknown 1.58 0.73-3.45 0.248 0.79 0.27-2.31 0.672 1.89 0.87-4.13 0.108 MES Index Score (ref=1) 2 1.17 0.54-2.51 0.689 1.69 0.59-4.88 0.330 1.66 0.82-3.37 0.162 3 0.87 0.26-2.91 0.823 1.07 0.19-6.20 0.938 1.11 0.36-3.42 0.853 Cecal Patch 0.74 0.27-2.05 0.559 1.77 0.60-5.17 0.299 1.30 0.51-3.29 0.584 *There were no patients of Black race or Hispanic ethnicity who underwent medical therapy escalation in the timeframe of this study. CI, confidence interval; MES, Mayo Endoscopic Score.

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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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