Risk of total metachronous advanced neoplasia after detection of proximal hyperplastic polyps, adenomas, and their combination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Study Aims: Recent research has identified an association between proximal sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) and an increased risk of advanced metachronous neoplasia (TMAN), with no significant impact from distal SSL. This study aimed to assess the risk of TMAN at follow-up colonoscopy after detecting proximal hyperplastic polyps (HP), adenomas, or their combination at the initial colonoscopy. Methods: Medical records from patients who underwent colonoscopies in 2014 and 2015 were reviewed. The primary outcome was the presence of TMAN (advanced adenomas or high-risk SSL) at follow-up, based on the presence of proximal HP, adenomas, or their combination during the index colonoscopy. Results: Out of 2014 patients screened, 764 were included in the final analysis (44.1% male; mean age 63 years; median follow-up of 3.46 years). Patients with both proximal HPs and adenomas during the initial colonoscopy had a significantly higher risk of developing TMAN compared with patients with adenomas and distal HP or adenomas alone (30.5% vs 19%; HR = 1.87; 95% CI, 1.3-2.7). Additionally, a combination of proximal HPs and adenomas posed a higher risk of TMAN than proximal HP alone (30.5% vs 13.9%; HR = 3.6; 95% CI, 1.4-9.5). No significant difference in TMAN risk was observed between patients with adenomas alone versus proximal HP (19.1% vs 13.9%; HR = 1.8; 95% CI, 0.73-4.4). Conclusion: The presence of both proximal HPs and adenomas significantly increases the risk of TMAN compared with adenomas or HPs alone, highlighting the need for further studies to evaluate the effect of these variables on postcolonoscopy CRC.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".