Profiling Circulating and Urinary Bile Acids in Patients with Biliary Obstruction before and after Biliary Stenting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Bile acids are considered as extremely toxic at the high concentrations reached during bile duct obstruction, but each acid displays variable cytotoxic properties. This study investigates how biliary obstruction and restoration of bile flow interferes with urinary and circulating levels of 17 common bile acids. Bile acids (conjugated and unconjugated) were quantified by liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry in serum and urine samples from 17 patients (8 men and 9 women) with biliary obstruction, before and after biliary stenting. Results were compared with serum concentrations measured in 40 age- and sex-paired control donors (20 men and 20 women). The total circulating bile acid concentration increases from 2.7 µM in control donors to 156.9 µM in untreated patients with biliary stenosis. Serum taurocholic and glycocholic acids exhibit 304- and 241-fold accumulations in patients with biliary obstruction compared to controls. The enrichment in chenodeoxycholic acid species reached a maximum of only 39-fold, while all secondary and 6α-hydroxylated species--except taurolithocholic acids--were either unchanged or significantly reduced. Stenting was efficient in restoring an almost normal circulating profile and in reducing urinary bile acids. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that biliary obstruction affects differentially the circulating and/or urinary levels of the various bile acids. The observation that the most drastically affected acids correspond to the less toxic species supports the activation of self-protecting mechanisms aimed at limiting the inherent toxicity of bile acids in face of biliary obstruction.
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".