MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749132076 · doi:10.1002/acr.23346

Risk of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Patients With Inflammatory Arthritis Receiving Disease‐Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2017· review· en· W2749132076 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tzu‐Chieh Lin, Kazuki Yoshida, Sara K. Tedeschi, Mirhelen Mendes de Abreu, Nikroo Hashemi, Daniel H. Solomon

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis B Virus Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineHepatitis B virusPsoriatic arthritisMeta-analysisRheumatoid arthritisArthritisHepatitis BHBsAgConfidence intervalImmunologyGastroenterologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation rates in patients with resolved or chronic HBV infection, receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and with or without antiviral prophylaxis. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Medline, and Embase using Ovid through December 31, 2015. A search strategy was developed for each database using the following inclusion criteria: for participants, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and resolved or chronic HBV infection; for intervention, tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors or non-TNF biologic or nonbiologic DMARDs; and for outcome, HBV reactivation. Four reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. To determine the pooled HBV reactivation rate, the variances of the raw proportions were stabilized using a Freeman-Tukey-type arcsine square root transformation, using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. The overall pooled rate of HBV reactivation was 1.6% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.8-2.6) in patients with resolved HBV. Similar rates were observed in resolved patients taking TNF inhibitors (1.4% [95% CI 0.5-2.6]), non-TNF biologics (6.1% [95% CI 0.0-16.6]), and nonbiologic DMARDs (1.7% [95% CI 0.2-4.2]). We also found that the reactivation rate was lower in patients with chronic HBV infection who received antiviral prophylaxis (9.0% [95% CI 4.1-15.5]) than in those who did not (14.6% [95% CI 4.3-29.0]). CONCLUSION: We found that the HBV reactivation rate in inflammatory arthritis patients receiving DMARDs was low in resolved patients and moderate in patients with chronic HBV infection. Further, lower rates were observed in patients with chronic HBV infection who were using antiviral prophylaxis.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.038
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.306 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations43
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicHepatitis B Virus StudiesFrench-language works237,207