Predictors of Relapse to Significant Alcohol Drinking after Liver Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: End-stage alcoholic liver disease is common, with many of these patients referred for liver transplantation (LT). Alcohol relapse after LT can have detrimental outcomes such as graft loss and can contribute to a negative public perception of LT. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that predict the recurrence of harmful alcohol consumption after LT. METHODS: A total of 80 patients who underwent LT for alcoholic cirrhosis or had significant alcohol consumption in association with another primary liver disease, from July 1992 to June 2006 in British Columbia, were retrospectively evaluated by chart review. Several demographic-, psychosocial- and addiction-related variables were studied. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to test possible associations among the variables studied and a return to harmful drinking after LT. RESULTS: The relapse rate of harmful alcohol consumption post-liver transplant was 10%, with two patient deaths occurring directly as a result of alcohol relapse. Univariate analysis revealed relapse was significantly associated with pretransplant abstinence of less than six months (P=0.003), presence of psychiatric comorbidities (P=0.016), female sex (P=0.019) and increased personal stressors (P=0.044), while age at transplant of younger than 50 years approached significance (P=0.054). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed the following independent factors for relapse: pretransplant abstinence of less than six months (OR 77.07; standard error 1.743; P=0.013) and female sex (OR 18.80; standard error 1.451; P=0.043). CONCLUSION: The findings of the present study strongly support a required minimum of six months of abstinence before LT because duration of abstinence was found to be the strongest predictor of recidivism. Female sex, younger age at transplant and psychiatric comorbidities were also associated with relapse to harmful drinking.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".