Early biochemical response to ursodeoxycholic acid and long-term prognosis of primary biliary cirrhosis: Results of a 14-year cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The biochemical response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) in primary biliary cirrhosis is a strong predictor of long-term outcome and thus facilitates the rapid identification of patients needing new therapeutic approaches. Numerous criteria for predicting outcome of treatment have been studied based on biochemical response to UDCA at 1 year. We sought to determine whether an earlier biochemical response at 3 or 6 months could as efficiently identify patients at risk of poor outcome, as defined by liver-related death, liver transplantation, and complications of cirrhosis. We analyzed the prospectively collected data of 187 patients with a median follow-up of 5.8 years (range, 1.3-14 years). The survival rates without adverse outcome at 5 years and 10 years were 86% and 63%. Under UDCA therapy, laboratory liver parameters experienced the most prominent improvement in the first 3 months (P < 0.0001) and then stayed relatively stable for the following months. The Paris, Barcelona, Toronto, and Ehime definitions, but not the Rotterdam definition, applied at 3, 6, and 12 months significantly discriminated the patients in terms of long-term outcome. Compared with biochemical responses evaluated after 1 year of UDCA therapy, biochemical responses at the third month demonstrated higher positive predictive value (PPV) but lower negative predictive value (NPV) and increased negative likelihood ratio (NLR) by all definitions; biochemical responses at the sixth month showed higher or the same PPV and NPV and lower NLR by all definitions. CONCLUSION: For the previously published criteria, biochemical responses at the sixth month can be used in place of those evaluated after 1 year of UDCA therapy. Our findings justify a more rapid identification of patients who need new therapeutic approaches.
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) | 0.001 | 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".