Evaluation of the United Kingdom‐primary biliary cholangitis and global primary biliary cholangitis group prognostic models for primary biliary cholangitis patients treated with ursodeoxycholic acid in the U.S. population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aim The United Kingdom‐primary biliary cholangitis (UK‐PBC) and global primary biliary cholangitis group (GLOBE) prognostic models have been recently developed to predict long‐term outcomes in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). However, these predictive scores have not yet been well evaluated in the U.S. population. Methods We retrospectively reviewed newly diagnosed PBC patients at the Cleveland Clinic between November 1998 and February 2017. Adverse events were defined as liver transplantation, liver‐related mortality, and all‐cause mortality. Transplant‐free survival (TFS) was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Predictive performances of all prognostic models were evaluated using the C‐statistic. Results We identified 352 patients who used ursodeoxycholic acid therapy. Of them, 311 (88.4%) only had PBC, while 41 (11.6%) were diagnosed with PBC‐autoimmune hepatitis overlap. A total of 22 (6%), 47 (13%), and 55 (16%) patients had adverse events within 5, 10, and 15 years after diagnosis, respectively. In patients with PBC only, the C‐statistic in predicting 15‐year adverse events was 0.75 per GLOBE compared to 0.74 per UK‐PBC ( P = 0.94), 0.73 per Rotterdam ( P = 0.44), 0.66 per Barcelona ( P = 0.004), 0.65 per Paris 1 ( P = 0.005), 0.62 per Paris 2 ( P < 0.0001), 0.60 per Toronto ( P < 0.0001), and 0.60 per Mayo ( P < 0.0001) scores. Median follow‐up was 9.2 years. Ten‐year TFS for patients who had optimal versus suboptimal treatment response was 92 versus 74% per Paris 1 ( P < 0.0001), 95 versus 79% per Paris 2 ( P = 0.0002), 93 versus 65% per Barcelona ( P < 0.0001), and 96 versus 68% per Rotterdam ( P < 0.0001) risk scores, respectively. Conclusion In our cohort of PBC patients, the UK‐PBC and GLOBE scores were both accurate and reasonably valid prognostic models in the U.S. population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".