MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406699523 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjae190.0922

P0748 Characterisation of Remission Levels in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis Treated with 5-Aminosalicylates: Results of the CARUC-ASA Prospective Multicentre Study

2025· article· en· W4406699523 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cathérine Reenaers, Clara Caenepeel, Guy Lambrecht, Lieven Pouillon, F Baert, Anneline Cremer, A Colard, Christophe Claessens, Thomas Billiet, J Gedolf, Beatrijs Strubbe, Evelien Humblet, Astrid De Zutter, J F Rahier, Marilyn S. Sommers, David Reynders, Laura Vansteenkiste, Ingrid Arijs, A Raeves, Edouard Louis, B Verstockt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUlcerative colitisGastroenterologyInternal medicineProspective cohort studyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The treatment goals for chronic inflammatory bowel diseases are increasingly ambitious, targeting steroid-free remission, mucosal healing, and biomarker normalisation. In ulcerative colitis (UC), histological remission lowers risks of hospitalisation, cancer, and relapse. This study aims to describe remission levels in UC patients in symptomatic remission on first-line 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) and factors associated with remission. Methods This national, multicentre, prospective, phase 4 interventional study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05992142) included UC patients in symptomatic remission, defined by a stool frequency score ≤ 1 and no rectal bleeding, on 5-ASA monotherapy (oral and/or rectal) for at least 6 months. Patients on corticosteroids, immunomodulators, biologics, or small molecules were excluded. Assessments included stool frequency, rectal bleeding, urgency, rectosigmoidoscopy (Mayo score, UCEIS), biopsies with the Geboes score assessed by central reading, faecal calprotectin (FCP), and MARS (Medication Adherence Report Scale) questionnaire. The different levels of remission were defined as followed: Complete Symptomatic Remission (CSR: PRO-2 = 0, no urgency), Endoscopic Remission (ER: Mayo 0–1, UCEIS 0–1), Complete Endoscopic Remission (CER: Mayo 0, UCEIS 0–1), Histological Remission (HR: Geboes 0–1), and FCP <150 μg/g; and Deep Remission as combined CCR, CER, and HR. In the absence of CER, physicians completed a questionnaire to investigate the reasons for not altering therapy. Results From December 2022 to February 2024, 198 UC patients (median age 50, 41% female) were enrolled from 14 centres. Montreal classifications were E1 (37%), E2 (44%), and E3 (18%). Treatment included oral 5-ASA (n=134, 68%), rectal 5-ASA (n=19, 9%), and a combination (n=45, 23%) with a median duration of 2.0 years (1.0 - 4.0). The median MARS-5 score was 24. ER was observed in 172/198 patients (87%), CER in 138/198 (70%), and HR in 156/196 (80%). Among those in ER and CER, 151/172 (88%) and 127/137 (93%) also had HR, respectively. Normal FCP was seen in 152/194 (78%) and in 128/153 (83%) of the HR subgroup. Deep remission was achieved in 47/197 (24%) of patients. The main reason for absence of deep remission was the absence of CSR (63%). The main reason for not altering treatment, despite the absence of CER, was physician reluctance in 37% of cases. 5-ASA administration form was significantly associated with ER (p=0.5, OR=2.9, 95%CI 1.1-7.3) for oral against combined. Conclusion In UC patients in clinical remission on 5-ASA, the majority achieved endoscopic and/or histological remission, suggesting that higher remission levels beyond clinical remission alone are attainable in selected, highly adherent patients on first-line therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→