MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407285924 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwae059.155

A155 STOOL-BASED PROTEIN SIGNATURES FOR NON-INVASIVE ACCURATE DIAGNOSIS AND SUBTYPING OF INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE THROUGH HIGH-THROUGHPUT PROTEOMICS AND MACHINE LEARNING APPROACHES

2025· article· en· W4407285924 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elmira Shajari, David Gagné, M Malick, Pritha Roy, M J Delisle, Marie A. Brunet, François‐Michel Boisvert, Jean‐François Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubtypingProteomicsInflammatory bowel diseaseDiseaseComputational biologyComputer scienceThroughputArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMedicineBiologyPathologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Accurate diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is essential to distinguish it from other conditions with similar symptoms and to identify whether it’s ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn’s disease (CD), ensuring appropriate treatment and management. While colonoscopy and biopsy are the current gold standards, they are invasive, costly, and poorly accepted by asymptomatic patients. Fecal biomarkers like calprotectin are commonly used but lack the specificity and lack of ability to differentiate between CD and UC, highlighting the need for more precise, non-invasive diagnostic methods. Aims This study aims to develop a stool-based protein biomarker panel capable of accurately distinguishing IBD from IBD-mimicking conditions. It also seeks to classify the subtypes, CD and UC, by using high-throughput Data-Independent Acquisition mass spectrometry (DIA-MS) to identify precise biomarker signatures from complex stool samples, combined with advanced machine learning techniques for developing predictive model. Methods Stool samples were collected from 46 active-CD patients, 23 active-UC patients, and 53 patients with conditions presenting similar symptoms. Using DIA-MS, we analyzed the stool proteome, identifying and quantifying proteins. Data processing procedures were carefully optimized to establish a robust analytical pipeline. The samples were then split into training and testing groups. Feature selection algorithms were applied to the training group to identify proteins that significantly differed between the groups. Six machine learning algorithms (kNN, Naive Bayes, eXBoost, Random Forest, SVM, and glmnet) were subsequently evaluated to determine the best-performing classifier. Results Signature 1, consisting of 7 proteins for diagnosing true symptomatic IBD cases, and Signature 2, comprising 8 proteins for distinguishing between CD and UC, were developed using the best-performing classifier on the training dataset. Signature 1 achieved an AUC of 0.98, while Signature 2 reached an AUC of 0.96. For validation, the final predictive model was applied to a set of unseen samples. Impressively, the model demonstrated an AUC of 0.96 for both classifications, confirming its robustness and ability to generalize effectively to new samples. Conclusions In conclusion, this study illustrates the effectiveness of utilizing stool proteome obtained through DIA-MS in accurately diagnosing and subtyping active IBD. Further future validation on a larger cohort using targeted MRM mass spectrometry would be served to establish the clinical utility of this approach. Funding Agencies CCCFaculty of Medicine and Health Science of University of Sherbrooke

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207