MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406704267 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjae190.0707

P0533 Extremely Rare Case of Isolated Colonic Inflammatory Cap Polyps in a Patient with Known Long-Standing Ulcerative Colitis

2025· article· en· W4406704267 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raffaele Pellegrino, Giuseppe Palladino, Ilaria De Costanzo, Mary Jane Izzo, G Imperio, Fabio Landa, Alessandro Federico, Antonietta Gerarda Gravina

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Thrombus and Embolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUlcerative colitisGastroenterologyInflammatory bowel diseaseColitisInternal medicineDermatologyPathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Inflammatory cap polyp (ICP) is a very rare benign colonic polyp, with fewer than one hundred reported cases worldwide, of uncertain origin. Typically found in adults around fifty years old, it affects the rectum or sigmoid colon. In its more common form (i.e., multiple ICP referred to as cap polyposis), it can mimic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) due to symptoms like rectal bleeding, abdominal pain, and weight loss. Multiple forms of ICP can also be associated with severe hypoproteinaemia, as highlighted in a report employing scintigraphy with Tc-99m-labeled DTPA. Methods A 73-year-old H. pylori-negative woman with long-standing ulcerative colitis (diagnosed in 2016) and Alzheimer’s disease, under treatment with vedolizumab 300 mg every eight weeks, was referred to our digestive endoscopy unit for an endoscopic re-evaluation of her condition. The examination revealed severe pancolitis (E3 according to the Montreal classification, Mayo endoscopic score 3 at the rectum). During the endoscopic procedure, two sessile polypoid formations (0-Is according to the Paris classification), measuring approximately 10 and 8 mm, were en bloc resected using hot snare polypectomy, one from the transverse colon and the other from the descending colon (Figures A-D). Histological assessment confirmed the diagnosis of ICP due to erosive surface changes and granulation tissue with a “capping” morphology. Results In the context of the rarity of ICP, those associated with known IBD are indeed anecdotal. Moreover, the already reported cases that are clinically comparable to IBD have generally been associated with cap polyposis rather than isolated ICP. When subjected to thorough diagnostic evaluation, these cases have typically ruled out the diagnosis of IBD, revealing cap polyposis as merely a mimicking factor with a similar clinical presentation. In any case, our situation involves the rarer occurrence of isolated ICPs within the context of a long-standing, already-established diagnosis of ulcerative colitis and with an atypical (non-rectal) localisation. In the only reported case available in an IBD patient, it was a cap polyposis. Conclusion In conclusion, this case highlights that, although exceedingly rare, ICP can be associated with known IBD and, in addition to mimicking an IBD-like clinical picture (especially in the form of cap polyposis), it can also occur outside the typical location of the left colon. Furthermore, ICP may coexist in an isolated form without forming polyposis as isolated ICP. References Mason M, Faizi SA, Fischer E, Rajput A. Inflammatory cap polyposis in a 42-year-old male. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2013;4(3):351-353. doi:10.1016/j.ijscr.2012.12.0142. Batra S, Johal J, Lee P, Hourigan S. Cap Polyposis Masquerading as Inflammatory Bowel Disease in a Child. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2018;67(3):e57. doi:10.1097/MPG.00000000000013433. Valdés Delgado T, Barranco Castro D, Argüelles Arias F. Cap-Polyposis: A Cause of Treatment Failure in Ulcerative Colitis. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2022;28(7):e108-e109. doi:10.1093/ibd/izac023

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designCase report
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 ColitisSame topicAortic Thrombus and EmbolismFrench-language works237,207