Mycophenolate Mofetil for the Treatment of Autoimmune Hepatitis in Patients Refractory or Intolerant to Conventional Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Autoimmune hepatitis is characterized by hepatocellular inflammation often progressing to cirrhosis. Standard treatment consists of corticosteroids and azathioprine. For the 20% of patients with refractory disease or those who are intolerant to medication, there is no standardized treatment. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) as an alternative therapy for autoimmune hepatitis. METHODS: The present retrospective study identified all patients with autoimmune hepatitis who were treated with MMF over a 10-year period at the Henry Ford Hospital (Michigan, USA). These patients were evaluated for tolerance and response. RESULTS: Of the 90 patients participating in the study, 48% had a complete response, 32% experienced relapses and 21% were refractory. MMF was initiated in 21 patients - 12 (57%) for refractory disease and nine (43%) for medication intolerance. Of the 12 patients converted for refractory disease, all showed biochemical improvement but none had a complete response. Of the patients converted due to intolerance, 88% maintained complete remission. For all patients converted to MMF, there was a mean decrease in steroid dose from 18.9 mg⁄day to 7.8 mg⁄day (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with autoimmune hepatitis who were intolerant to conventional therapy, MMF was well tolerated, with 88% of patients maintained in remission. MMF did not induce remission in those refractory to conventional therapy; however, it resulted in a significant decrease in steroid use. Prospective studies are needed to better assess the role of MMF as an alternative therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".