Randomised clinical trial: the efficacy of treatment, guided by a shorter duration of response, using peginterferon alfa‐2a plus ribavirin for hepatitis C virus other than genotypes 2 or 3
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of individualised antiviral treatment durations for chronic hepatitis C remains unclear. AIM: To evaluate treatment durations based on virological responses at week 4, 8 and 12 of peginterferon alfa-2a plus ribavirin therapy. METHODS: Previously untreated patients with HCV genotypes, other than 2 or 3, initiated therapy with peginterferon alfa-2a 180 μg/week plus ribavirin 1000-1400 mg/day. HCV-RNA-negative patients at week 4 rapid virological response (RVR) were randomised to 24 or 48 weeks of treatment; those negative at week 8 were randomised to 36 or 48 weeks; and those who were negative or had a ≥ 2-log drop at week 12 were randomised to 72 or 48 weeks. Sustained virological response (SVR) was defined as undetectable HCV-RNA after 24 weeks of follow-up. RESULTS: The study was terminated prematurely due to lagging enrollment. Of 236 patients who started treatment, 195 were randomised at week 4 (n = 50), 8 (n = 61) or 12 (n = 84). Ninety-five per cent of patients had genotype 1. SVR rates were not significantly different between patients randomised to 24 (84%) or 48 weeks (84%) at week 4, to 36 (73%) or 48 weeks (74%) at week 8, or to 48 (49%) or 72 weeks (40%) at week 12. CONCLUSIONS: In this predominantly genotype 1 cohort, shortening therapy to 24 weeks in patients with a week-4 response and 36 weeks in those with a week-8 response produced SVR rates that were similar to a 48-week regimen. Lengthening treatment to 72 weeks did not improve SVR rates. Genotype 1 patients with RVR can be treated for 24 weeks.
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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".