The impact of depression and antidepressant usage on primary biliary cholangitis clinical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Depression is prevalent in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) patients. Our aims were to examine the effects of depression and antidepressants on hepatic outcomes of PBC patients. METHODS: We used the UK Health Improvement Network database to identify PBC patients between 1974 and 2007. Our primary outcome was one of three clinical events: decompensated cirrhosis, liver transplantation and death. We assessed depression and each class of antidepressant medication in adjusted multivariate Cox proportional hazards models to identify independent predictors of outcomes. In a sensitivity analysis, the study population was restricted to PBC patients using ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). RESULTS: We identified 1,177 PBC patients during our study period. In our cohort, 86 patients (7.3%) had a depression diagnosis prior to PBC diagnosis, while 79 patients (6.7%) had a depression diagnosis after PBC diagnosis. Ten-year incidence of mortality, decompensated cirrhosis, and liver transplantation were 13.4%, 6.6%, and 2.0%, respectively. In our adjusted models, depression status was not a predictor of poor outcomes. After studying all classes of antidepressants, using the atypical antidepressant mirtazapine after PBC diagnosis was significantly protective (Adjusted HR 0.23: 95% CI 0.07-0.72) against poor liver outcomes (decompensation, liver transplant, mortality), which remained statistically significant in patients using UCDA (HR 0.21: 95% CI 0.05-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, depression was not associated with poor clinical outcomes. However, using the antidepressant mirtazapine was associated with decreased mortality, decompensated cirrhosis and liver transplantation in PBC patients. These findings support further assessment of mirtazapine as a potential treatment for PBC patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".