MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2532318579 · doi:10.1038/srep35410

Hepatitis C RNA assay differences in results: Potential implications for shortened therapy and determination of Sustained Virologic Response

2016· article· en· W2532318579 on OpenAlexaff
Gavin Cloherty, Stéphane Chevaliez, Christoph Sarrazin, Christine Herman, Vera Holzmayer, George J. Dawson, Benjamin Maasoumy, Johannes Vermehren, Heiner Wedemeyer, Jordan J. Feld, Jean–Michel Pawlotsky

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSofosbuvirHepatitis CInternal medicineChronic hepatitisTaqManGastroenterologyImmunologyReal-time polymerase chain reactionRibavirinVirusBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approval of Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C (HCV) includes the truncation of therapy from 12 to 8 weeks in treatment naïve, non-cirrhotic patients with baseline HCV RNA levels <6 million IU/mL (6.8 log10 IU/mL). The aim of this study was to evaluate this clinical cutoff with a different widely used commercially available HCV RNA test. Results from samples tested prospectively with Roche High Pure TaqMan HCV 2.0 test (HPS) were compared to those tested retrospectively with the Abbott RealTime HCV RNA test (ART). Using 6 million IU/mL as the cut-off, pre-treatment results were concordant in 70.4% of cases. When results with the same test measured at screening and baseline, clinical decisions could be impacted in 14.4% and 6.2% of cases for HPS and ART respectively. Using only HCV RNA cutoff of 6 million IU/mL, 29.55% of subjects would receive a different and potentially incorrect treatment duration based solely on HCV RNA test method used. A further 6-14% of subjects would have treatment decision change based on the day the sample was taken.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.119
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.239
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1190.239
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicHepatitis C virus research→French-language works237,207→