MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Analysis of AST to Platelet Ratio Index (APRI) for Determining Eligibility for 8 Weeks of Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir

2018· article· en· W2922486568 on OpenAlexaff
Tarik Asselah, Sabela Lens, Neddie Zadeikis, Magdy Elkhashab, Robert J. Fontana, Zhenyi Xue, Ana Gabriela Pires dos Santos, Federico Mensa, Robert S. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsToronto Liver Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCirrhosisInternal medicineGastroenterologyPopulationPost-hoc analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Studies have highlighted the usefulness of APRI for assessing liver cirrhosis. APRI ≤1 is currently proposed as a noninvasive blood test to exclude cirrhosis based on WHO guidelines. This posthoc analysis evaluates the sensitivity and specificity of APRI compared to the determination of fibrosis status used in clinical trials with glecaprevir (identified by AbbVie and Enanta) and pibrentasvir (collectively known as G/P), and assesses its usefulness for determining eligibility for 8-week G/P treatment. Methods: Data were pooled from Phase 2 and Phase 3 studies. Classification of F4 fibrosis in the protocols was determined using either liver biopsy (328/2787; 12%), FibroScan (1906/2787; 68%), or the combination of FibroTest and APRI (547/2787; 20%). In part 1 of this post-hoc analysis, all 2,787 patients enrolled in these trials were included, among whom 361 (13%) had compensated cirrhosis by protocol, and the performance of APRI (ranging from 0.55 to 1.3) alone was calculated compared to the protocolspecified methods. In part 2, efficacy was assessed only among the subset of 828 patients without cirrhosis by protocol who received 8 weeks of G/P (GT 1-6 TN or TE-PRS). Efficacy was assessed as the percent of patients achieving SVR12 (HCV RNA < lower limit of quantification) by APRI ≤ each selected cut-off using an intent-to-treat population. Results: Compared to the methodology used in the trials, APRI ≤1 predicted non-cirrhosis with 82% sensitivity, 72% specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of 95% with 13% prevalence of cirrhosis in the study population (Table 1). SVR12 is reported in Table 1 for patients with APRI ≤ each cutoff that were without cirrhosis and received 8-week G/P treatment. In patients treated for 8-weeks, differences in APRI did not impact safety findings. Conclusion: APRI ≤1 has high PPV for non-cirrhosis and thus may be clinically useful to exclude cirrhosis and define eligibility for G/P for 8 weeks. However, the usefulness of APRI ≤1 may be limited in populations with higher prevalence of cirrhosis. G/P treatment in noncirrhotics was efficacious (regardless of the APRI cut-off used) among the subset treated for 8 weeks. Using APRI alone may be a way to simplify selection of patients eligible for 8-week G/P treatment without a need for other diagnostic methods to rule out cirrhosis. Further studies are necessary to confirm this finding for all patients with APRI ≤1 in patients with unknown cirrhosis status.840 Figure 1 No Caption available.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.353 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicHepatitis C virus research→French-language works237,207→