ArticleiGIE : innovation, investigation and insights2026
Validation of the immune-mediated colitis endoscopic score using a retrospective cohort of patients with immune-mediated colitis.
Article in iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Journey: From Early Promise to Lasting Impact.Journal of immunotherapy and precision oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Immune-mediated colitis (IMC) is a challenging adverse effect of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, often leading to treatment interruption or discontinuation. Current IMC endoscopic scoring systems were adapted from those used for inflammatory bowel disease but fail to fully capture IMC. The newly proposed IMC endoscopic score (IMCES) seeks to help guide prognosis and treatment. We aimed to validate IMCES and explore its association with IMC clinical severity and outcomes. Methods: This single-center retrospective study included patients with IMC who received immune checkpoint inhibitors and underwent endoscopic evaluation. IMCESs were calculated on the basis of 10 gross endoscopic features, as previously reported. Patients were divided into those with IMCES <4 and IMCES ≥4. Primary end points were selective immunosuppressive therapy (SIT) use, hospitalization, and clinical and endoscopic remission. Results: We evaluated 807 patients, including the 308 previously used to develop IMCES, with 499 in a validation cohort. We found that IMCES ≥4 was associated with need for steroids and SIT ( Conclusions: IMCES ≥4 had a high specificity for the need for SIT and was associated with worse outcomes. Given the importance of risk stratification in the treatment of IMC to inform the early introduction of SIT, IMCES may be a powerful clinical tool to estimate prognosis and guide management but requires further validation.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.