Hepatic Safety of Febuxostat Compared with Allopurinol in Gout Patients with Fatty Liver Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Febuxostat has superior renal safety to allopurinol, but data on its hepatic safety are limited. Thus we compared the hepatotoxicity of febuxostat and allopurinol, and the clinical factors associated with hepatotoxicity, in patients with gout and fatty liver disease (FLD). METHODS: We included gout patients treated with allopurinol or febuxostat who were diagnosed with fatty liver based on ultrasonography or computed tomography. Hepatotoxicity was defined as follows: (1) elevation of aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT) at least 3× the upper limit of normal, when the baseline AST/ALT was normal; or (2) doubling of the baseline AST/ALT, when the baseline AST/ALT was elevated. The factors associated with hepatotoxicity were evaluated by Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 134 patients identified with gout and FLD, 32 (23.9%) received febuxostat and 102 (76.1%) received allopurinol. There were no significant differences in age, body mass index, comorbidity, or disease severity between the groups; however, the incidence of hepatotoxicity was significantly lower in the febuxostat group (3/32, 9.4%) than in the allopurinol group (36/102, 35.3%, p = 0.005). Diabetes (HR 3.549, 95% CI 1.374-9.165, p = 0.009) and colchicine use (HR 11.518, 95% CI 5.515-24.054, p < 0.001) were associated with a higher risk of hepatotoxicity, whereas febuxostat use was associated with a lower risk of hepatotoxicity (HR 0.282, 95% CI 0.086-0.926, p = 0.037). CONCLUSION: In the 32 patients studied, febuxostat was well tolerated in patients with gout and FLD. However, the presence of diabetes and colchicine use may increase the risk of hepatotoxicity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".