Hepatotoxicity Due to Hydroxycut: A Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Muscletech Hydroxycut (Iovate Health Sciences Research, Oakville, Ontario, Canada) was a popular weight-loss supplement that was recalled by the manufacturer in May 2009 on the basis of reports of hepatotoxicity associated with this supplement. We sought to characterize the clinical presentation of Hydroxycut-associated liver injury and to adjudicate these cases for causal association with Hydroxycut. METHODS: We assessed the causality and grading of severity of liver injury using methodology developed by the Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) study. RESULTS: Eight patients who developed liver injury after taking Hydroxycut treated at different medical centers were identified. All were hospitalized, and three of eight patients required liver transplantation. Nine other cases with adequate clinical information were obtained from the FDA MedWatch database, including one fatal case of acute liver failure. Usual symptoms were jaundice, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. Most patients exhibited a hepatocellular pattern of injury. Adjudication for causality revealed eight cases as definite, five highly likely, two probable, and two were considered to be possible. CONCLUSIONS: Hydroxycut has been clearly implicated as a cause for severe liver injury that may lead to acute liver failure and death. Weight-loss supplements represent a class of dietary supplements that should be regarded as capable of causing severe hepatic toxicity when the usual causes of identified liver injury cannot be otherwise elucidated.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".