A Multidisciplinary Approach to Pretransplant and Posttransplant Management of Cystic Fibrosis–Associated Liver Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Approximately 5%-10% of patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) will develop advanced liver disease with portal hypertension, representing the third leading cause of death among patients with CF. Cystic fibrosis with advanced liver disease and portal hypertension (CFLD) represents the most significant risk to patient mortality, second only to pulmonary or lung transplant complications in patients with CF. Currently, there is no medical therapy to treat or reverse CFLD. Liver transplantation (LT) in patients with CFLD with portal hypertension confers a significant survival advantage over those who do not receive LT, although the timing in which to optimize this benefit is unclear. Despite the value and efficacy of LT in selected patients with CFLD, established clinical criteria outlining indications and timing for LT as well as disease-specific transplant considerations are notably absent. The goal of this comprehensive and multidisciplinary report is to present recommendations on the unique CF-specific pre- and post-LT management issues clinicians should consider and will face.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".