Systematic review of response criteria and endpoints in autoimmune hepatitis by the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
•Consensus among experts on response criteria in autoimmune hepatitis is lacking.•A consensus on endpoints is required to set a standard for reporting study results.•Herein, the IAIHG presents a statement on 5 agreed response criteria and endpoints. Background & AimsAutoimmune hepatitis (AIH) has been well characterised and codified through the development of diagnostic criteria. These criteria have been adapted and simplified and are widely used in clinical practice. However, there is a need to update and precisely define the criteria for both treatment response and treatment.MethodsA systematic review was performed and a modified Delphi consensus process was used to identify and redefine the response criteria in autoimmune hepatitis.ResultsThe consensus process initiated by the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group proposes that the term ‘complete biochemical response’ defined as ‘normalization of serum transaminases and IgG below the upper limit of normal’ be adopted to include a time point at 6 months after initiation of treatment. An insufficient response by 6 months was a failure to meet the above definition. Non-response was defined as ‘<50% decrease of serum transaminases within 4 weeks after initiation of treatment’. Remission is defined as liver histology with a Hepatitis Activity Index <4/18. Intolerance to treatment was agreed to stand for ‘any adverse event possibly related to treatment leading to potential drug discontinuation’.ConclusionsThese definitions provide a simple and reproducible framework to define treatment response and non-response, irrespective of the therapeutic intervention. A consensus on endpoints is urgently required to set a global standard for the reporting of study results and to enable inter-study comparisons. Future prospective database studies are needed to validate these endpoints.Lay summaryConsensus among international experts on response criteria and endpoints in autoimmune hepatitis is lacking. A consensus on endpoints is urgently required to set a global standard for the reporting of study results and to enable the comparison of results between clinical trials. Therefore, the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group (IAIHG) herein presents a statement on 5 agreed response criteria and endpoints: complete biochemical response, insufficient response, non-response, remission, and intolerance to treatment, which can be used to guide future reporting. Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) has been well characterised and codified through the development of diagnostic criteria. These criteria have been adapted and simplified and are widely used in clinical practice. However, there is a need to update and precisely define the criteria for both treatment response and treatment. A systematic review was performed and a modified Delphi consensus process was used to identify and redefine the response criteria in autoimmune hepatitis. The consensus process initiated by the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group proposes that the term ‘complete biochemical response’ defined as ‘normalization of serum transaminases and IgG below the upper limit of normal’ be adopted to include a time point at 6 months after initiation of treatment. An insufficient response by 6 months was a failure to meet the above definition. Non-response was defined as ‘<50% decrease of serum transaminases within 4 weeks after initiation of treatment’. Remission is defined as liver histology with a Hepatitis Activity Index <4/18. Intolerance to treatment was agreed to stand for ‘any adverse event possibly related to treatment leading to potential drug discontinuation’. These definitions provide a simple and reproducible framework to define treatment response and non-response, irrespective of the therapeutic intervention. A consensus on endpoints is urgently required to set a global standard for the reporting of study results and to enable inter-study comparisons. Future prospective database studies are needed to validate these endpoints.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle