Remaining clinical issues in hepatitis C treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Key advances in the evaluation and treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have positively transformed the management and outcomes of those living with this chronic viral infection. Previously difficult-to-cure populations, including those coinfected with HIV infection, now enjoy similarly high success rates with interferon-free, orally administered direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapies. Nonetheless, relevant unresolved clinical questions remain. The role and impact of viral resistance testing on treatment selection and outcome remain to be fully determined. The consequences of developing resistance while on DAA treatments that ultimately prove unsuccessful requires further evaluation. Optimal HCV management strategies in decompensated liver disease are unclear, and the role for ribavirin in DAA treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients is uncertain. A chief concern for those with cirrhosis relates to the risk for de novo and recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma among DAA recipients. In this article, we present and interpret current data and consider pragmatic, clinically useful options.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".