Efficiency and Safety of an Early Dose Adjustment of Ribavirin in Patients Infected With Hepatitis C Underexposed to the Drug and Treated With Peginterferon Ribavirin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ribavirin exposure after the first dose (D0AUC0-4h) >1755 mcg·h·L is predictive of sustained virological response (SVR) in patients with hepatitis C treated with peginterferon and ribavirin. The aim of this study was to test the benefit of ribavirin early dose adjustment based on this target in naïve patients infected with genotype 1. METHODS: A multicenter randomized controlled trial with two parallel groups; fixed-dose (FD) group: standard of care in 2010-2011, ie, peginterferon-α2a 180 mcg·wk and weight-based ribavirin 1000-1200 mg/d during 48 weeks; adapted-dose (AD) group: increase of ribavirin dose if D0AUC0-4h <1755 mcg·h·L. RESULTS: A total of 221 patients were included, 110 in the AD group and 111 in the FD group with similar baseline characteristics. In the perprotocol analysis, SVR was higher in the AD group (55.1% versus 40.4%; P = 0.042), especially in patients with D0AUC0-4h <1755 mcg·h·L (54.3% versus 31.9%; P = 0.029). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the difference was not significant (50% versus 41%; P = 0.197). Ribavirin trough concentrations (C0s) at week 4 of treatment (intention-to-treat analysis) were higher in patients achieving SVR (2.06 versus 1.72 mg/L, P = 0.003). In the subgroup of patients with AUC0-4h <1755 mcg·h·L, 46% of patients with AD achieved a C0 >2.0 mg/L versus 22% of patients with FD (P = 0.013). Grade 1 anemia (but not other grades) was more frequent in the AD group (70% versus 48%, P = 0.001). The number of dose reductions or discontinuation of ribavirin was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Early ribavirin dose adjustment increases SVR in patients underexposed to ribavirin without increasing grade II-IV anemia. Such a strategy could be useful in patients with no access to new antiviral drugs.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".