Risk of infections during interferon‐based treatment in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection and advanced hepatic fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIM: Pegylated interferon-based treatment is still the backbone of current hepatitis C therapy and is associated with bone marrow suppression and an increased risk of infections. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to assess the risk of infections during interferon-based treatment among patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and advanced hepatic fibrosis and its relation to treatment-induced neutropenia. METHODS: This cohort study included all consecutive patients with chronic HCV infection and biopsy-proven bridging fibrosis or cirrhosis (Ishak 4-6) who started treatment between 1990 and 2003 in five large hepatology units in Europe and Canada. Neutrophil counts between 500-749/μL and below 500/μL were considered as moderate and severe neutropenia, respectively. RESULTS: This study included 723 interferon-based treatments, administered to 490 patients. In total, 113 infections were reported during 88 (12%) treatments, of which 24 (21%) were considered severe. Only one patient was found to have moderate neutropenia and three patients were found to have severe neutropenia at the visit before the infection. Three hundred and twelve (99.7%) visits with moderate neutropenia and 44 (93.6%) visits with severe neutropenia were not followed by an infection. Multivariable analysis showed that cirrhosis (odds ratio [OR] 2.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38-5.90, P=0.005) and severe neutropenia at the previous visit (OR 5.42, 95% CI 1.34-22.0, P=0.018) were associated with the occurrence of infection, while moderate neutropenia was not. Among a subgroup of patients treated with pegylated interferon, severe neutropenia was not significantly associated (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.19-14.2, P=0.660). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of patients with bridging fibrosis and cirrhosis, infections during interferon-based therapy were generally mild. Severe interferon-induced neutropenia rarely occurred, but was associated with on-treatment infection. Moderate neutropenia was not associated with infection, suggesting that current dose reduction guidelines might be too strict.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".