MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336416912 · doi:10.1111/ajt.13828

First-Degree Living-Related Donor Liver Transplantation in Autoimmune Liver Diseases

2016· article· en· W2336416912 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aloysious Aravinthan, Adam Doyle, Assaf Issachar, Martin J. Dib, David Peretz, Mark S. Cattral, Anand Ghanekar, Ian D. McGilvray, Markus Selzner, Paul D. Greig, David Grant, Nazia Selzner, L. Lilly, Eberhard L. Renner

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Transplantation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAutoimmune hepatitisPrimary sclerosing cholangitisLiver transplantationGastroenterologyLiver diseaseInternal medicineTransplantationAutoimmune diseaseDiseaseLiving donor liver transplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liver transplantation (LT) is the treatment of choice for end-stage autoimmune liver diseases. However, the underlying disease may recur in the graft in some 20% of cases. The aim of this study is to determine whether LT using living donor grafts from first-degree relatives results in higher rates of recurrence than grafts from more distant/unrelated donors. Two hundred sixty-three patients, who underwent a first LT in the Toronto liver transplant program between January 2000 and March 2015 for autoimmune liver diseases, and had at least 6 months of post-LT follow-up, were included in this study. Of these, 72 (27%) received a graft from a first-degree living-related donor, 56 (21%) from a distant/unrelated living donor, and 135 (51%) from a deceased donor for primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) (n = 138, 52%), primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) (n = 69, 26%), autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) (n = 44, 17%), and overlap syndromes (n = 12, 5%). Recurrence occurred in 52 (20%) patients. Recurrence rates for each autoimmune liver disease were not significantly different after first-degree living-related, living-unrelated, or deceased-donor LT. Similarly, time to recurrence, recurrence-related graft failure, graft survival, and patient survival were not significantly different between groups. In conclusion, first-degree living-related donor LT for PSC, PBC, or AIH is not associated with an increased risk of disease recurrence. Liver transplantation (LT) is the treatment of choice for end-stage autoimmune liver diseases. However, the underlying disease may recur in the graft in some 20% of cases. The aim of this study is to determine whether LT using living donor grafts from first-degree relatives results in higher rates of recurrence than grafts from more distant/unrelated donors. Two hundred sixty-three patients, who underwent a first LT in the Toronto liver transplant program between January 2000 and March 2015 for autoimmune liver diseases, and had at least 6 months of post-LT follow-up, were included in this study. Of these, 72 (27%) received a graft from a first-degree living-related donor, 56 (21%) from a distant/unrelated living donor, and 135 (51%) from a deceased donor for primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) (n = 138, 52%), primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) (n = 69, 26%), autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) (n = 44, 17%), and overlap syndromes (n = 12, 5%). Recurrence occurred in 52 (20%) patients. Recurrence rates for each autoimmune liver disease were not significantly different after first-degree living-related, living-unrelated, or deceased-donor LT. Similarly, time to recurrence, recurrence-related graft failure, graft survival, and patient survival were not significantly different between groups. In conclusion, first-degree living-related donor LT for PSC, PBC, or AIH is not associated with an increased risk of disease recurrence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of TransplantationSame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207