HIV and Liver transplantation: The British Columbia Experience, 2004 to 2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The demand for definitive management of end-stage organ disease in HIV-infected Canadians is growing. Until recently, despite international evidence of good clinical outcomes, HIV-infected Canadians with end-stage liver disease were ineligible for transplantation, except in British Columbia (BC), where the liver transplant program of BC Transplant has accepted these patients for referral, assessment, listing and provision of liver allograft. There is a need to evaluate the experience in BC to determine the issues surrounding liver transplantation in HIV-infected patients. METHODS: The present study was a chart review of 28 HIV-infected patients who were referred to BC Transplant for liver transplantation between 2004 and 2013. Data regarding HIV and liver disease status, initial transplant assessment and clinical outcomes were collected. RESULTS: Most patients were BC residents and were assessed by the multidisciplinary team at the BC clinic. The majority had undetectable HIV viral loads, were receiving antiretroviral treatments and were infected with hepatitis C virus (n=16). The most common comorbidities were anxiety and mood disorders (n=4), and hemophilia (n=4). Of the patients eligible for transplantation, four were transplanted for autoimmune hepatitis (5.67 years post-transplant), nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (2.33 years), hepatitis C virus (2.25 years) and hepatitis B-delta virus coinfection (recent transplant). One patient died from acute renal failure while waiting for transplantation. Ten patients died during preassessment and 10 were unsuitable transplant candidates. The most common reason for unsuitability was stable disease not requiring transplantation (n=4). CONCLUSIONS: To date, interdisciplinary care and careful selection of patients have resulted in successful outcomes including the longest living HIV-infected post-liver transplant recipient in Canada.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".