Biochemical criteria at 1 year are not robust indicators of response to ursodeoxycholic acid in early primary biliary cirrhosis: results from a 29‐year cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC), biochemical criteria at 1 year are considered surrogates of response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). However, due to the slow natural history of PBC, evaluation at 1 year may be suboptimal to assess the therapeutic response, particularly in early disease. AIM: To determine whether evaluation of biochemical criteria at 1 year is a reliable surrogate of UDCA response in early PBC. METHODS: We analysed the prospectively collected data of 215 patients (untreated = 129; UDCA-treated = 86) with early PBC (normal baseline bilirubin/albumin) and a median follow-up of 8 years (range: 1-29.1). The 1-year attainment rates of the Barcelona, Paris-I, Paris-II and Toronto definitions, and their predictive relevance for a poor outcome (death, transplantation, complications of cirrhosis), were assessed either as a result of UDCA or no treatment. Independent associations with attaining each UDCA response definition were identified by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Untreated patients displayed 1-year biochemical features compatible with 'treatment response' at rates (Barcelona: 36.4%, Paris-I: 66.7%, Toronto: 59.7%, Paris-II: 40.3%) similar to those obtained under UDCA. Depending on the definition, baseline ALP≤3xULN (OR: 4.80-35.90), AST≤2xULN (OR: 5.63-9.34) and early histological stage (OR: 3.67-3.87) were the stronger predictors for attaining the criteria. UDCA treatment was associated with attaining Barcelona (OR = 2.16) and Paris-II (OR = 2.84), but not Paris-I, and not Toronto definition when excluding late histological cases. Paris-I criteria were significantly predictive of long-term outcomes (HR = 2.83) in untreated patients. CONCLUSIONS: In early PBC, biochemical criteria at 1 year reflect severity of the disease rather than the therapeutic response to UDCA.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".