• search hit 54 of 42887
Back to Result List

Machine learning in antibody diagnostics for inflammatory bowel disease subtype classification

  • Antibody testing in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) can add to diagnostic accuracy of the main subtypes Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Whether modern modeling techniques such as supervised and unsupervised machine learning are of value for finer distinction of subtypes such as IBD-unclassified (IBD-U) is not known. We determined the antibody profile of 100 adult IBD patients from the Swiss IBD cohort study with known subtype (50 CD, 50 UC) as well as of 76 IBD-U patients. We included ASCA IgG and IgA, p-ANCA, MPO- and PR3-ANCA, and xANCA measurements for computing different antibody panels as well as machine learning models. The AUC of an optimized antibody panel was 85% (95%CI, 78–92%) to distinguish CD from UC patients. The antibody profile of IBD-U patients was closely related to UC. No specific antibody profile was predictive for IBD-U nor for re-classification. The panel diagnostic was in favor of UC reclassification prediction with a correct assignment rate ofAntibody testing in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) can add to diagnostic accuracy of the main subtypes Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Whether modern modeling techniques such as supervised and unsupervised machine learning are of value for finer distinction of subtypes such as IBD-unclassified (IBD-U) is not known. We determined the antibody profile of 100 adult IBD patients from the Swiss IBD cohort study with known subtype (50 CD, 50 UC) as well as of 76 IBD-U patients. We included ASCA IgG and IgA, p-ANCA, MPO- and PR3-ANCA, and xANCA measurements for computing different antibody panels as well as machine learning models. The AUC of an optimized antibody panel was 85% (95%CI, 78–92%) to distinguish CD from UC patients. The antibody profile of IBD-U patients was closely related to UC. No specific antibody profile was predictive for IBD-U nor for re-classification. The panel diagnostic was in favor of UC reclassification prediction with a correct assignment rate of 69.2–73.1% depending on the cut-off applied. Supervised machine learning could not distinguish between CD, UC, and IBD-U. More so, unsupervised machine learning suggested only two distinct clusters as a likely number of IBD subtypes. Antibodies in IBD are supportive in confirming clinical determined subtypes CD and UC but have limited capacity to predict IBD-U and reclassification during follow-up. In terms of antibody profiles, IBD-U is not a distinct subtype of IBD.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Statistics

Number of document requests

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar
Metadaten
Author:Christiane Sokollik, Aurélie Pahud de Mortanges, Alexander B. LeichtleORCiDGND, Pascal Juillerat, Michael P. Horn
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:384-opus4-1247510
Frontdoor URLhttps://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/124751
ISSN:2075-4418OPAC
Parent Title (English):Diagnostics
Publisher:MDPI
Place of publication:Basel
Type:Article
Language:English
Year of first Publication:2023
Publishing Institution:Universität Augsburg
Release Date:2025/09/01
Volume:13
Issue:15
First Page:2491
Note:
Published on behalf of the Swiss IBD Cohort Study Group. Please see publisher's website for further details.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13152491
Institutes:Medizinische Fakultät
Medizinische Fakultät / Universitätsklinikum
Medizinische Fakultät / Professur für Laboratoriumsmedizin
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Licence (German):License LogoCC-BY 4.0: Creative Commons: Namensnennung (mit Print on Demand)