Treatment Considerations in Patients With Hepatitis C and Cirrhosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with cirrhosis due to hepatitis C have a high chance of dying from progressive liver disease and thus have much to gain from successful antiviral therapy. The highest sustained virologic responses in patients with cirrhosis have been achieved using pegylated interferon alfa plus Ribavirin; 43% or more remain with undetectable virus 6 months after the cessation of 48 weeks of treatment. In those who achieve a sustained virologic response, the degree of fibrosis is less as judged on posttreatment liver biopsy; cirrhosis may even regress. In those individuals with cirrhosis who achieve a sustained virologic response, the risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma is significantly reduced and it is likely that their chance of developing liver failure is less. Patients who do not achieve sustained virologic response can still show histologic improvement as demonstrated on liver biopsy posttherapy as compared to baseline. Patients with compensated cirrhosis can benefit from therapy while those who are decompensated are prone to more safety issues. Thus, individuals with any evidence of hepatic decompensation should generally not be given interferon-based antiviral therapy, but treatment should be encouraged for those whose status is Child Class A.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".