[Treatment of chronic hepatitis C with interferon alpha and ribavirin. Results in "real life"].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The applicability of the results of controlled, randomised, therapeutic trials in the general population is not well known. The aim of this prospective study was to assess the results of the treatment of chronic hepatitis C with interferon alpha and ribavirin in "real life." METHODS: In an independent observatory, clinicians from 31 hepatogastroenterology units in French general hospitals registered patients treated with interferon alpha and ribavirin outside clinical trials. Results were compared with those of the best arm (twelve months of bitherapy) of the European-Canadian trial published in 1998 by Poynard et al. RESULTS: 262 naïve patients were included. Patients were significantly older, had more severe liver fibrosis, with cirrhosis in 17 percent, but were comparable for sex, contamination mode and viral genotype with those of the Poynard et al. trial. Sustained virological response rate (37%, IC 95%: 31-43%) was not significantly lower (difference 6%, IC 95%: - 18% to + 6%) than in the Poynard et al. trial. Results for response factors were similar. Comorbid conditions which would have prevented our inclusion of patients in the Poynard et al. trial were present in 46% and had an independent negative effect on sustained virological response rate. Side-effects were similar. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of the combination of interferon alpha and ribavirin remains good in real life, but depends on the characteristics of the treated population. The results of trials should be presented more cautiously to general population.
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 | 0.032 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".