Inflammatory bowel diseases in the elderly population: epidemiology, long-term disease course, surgery rates, and biological use—data from the Veszprem county cohort between 1977 and 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Limited data are available on long-term disease outcomes in elderly-onset (EO) inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) from well-defined population-based cohorts. Our aim was to analyze incidence, disease course, surgery rates, and therapeutic strategies of EO IBD in a prospective population-based cohort. METHODS: Elderly-onset inflammatory bowel diseases were defined if diagnosis was established at ≥60 years of age. Patient inclusion lasted between 1977 and 2018. Study endpoints were compared between elderly- and adult-onset (AO) patients and different therapeutic eras. Data from medical records were prospectively collected and regularly reviewed, as part of the well-established Veszprem IBD cohort. RESULTS: Data from 946 Crohn's disease (CD) and 1370 ulcerative colitis (UC) patients were analyzed. The proportion of EO CD and UC patients was 6.1% (58/946) and 13.4% (183/1370) in the total cohort. Biological therapy exposure was significantly lower in EO CD compared to AO [pLogRank = 0.003], but similar exposure was seen amongst UC patients [pLogRank = 0.770]. Early surgery rates (≤1 year from diagnosis) were significantly higher in EO CD patients compared to AO (27.6% vs 15.6%; P < .001). However, there was no statistically significant difference in overall resective surgery rates between the EO and AO cohorts in CD [pLogRank = 0.838], nor colectomy rates differed in UC [pLogRank = 0.435]. Disease phenotype progression in CD and UC were both lower in EO disease [pLogRank = 0.015; pLogRank = 0.022]. CONCLUSION: Elderly-onset inflammatory bowel diseases represents an increasing proportion of IBD patients, with high exposure to biologicals in EO UC. Overall surgery rates were similar in EO and AO cohorts, however, early surgeries in CD were higher in EO patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".