MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risk of <i>De Novo</i> Hepatocellular Carcinoma Following Use of Direct Acting Antiviral Medications for Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C

2019· article· en· W2970093192 on OpenAlex
Samuel O. Antwi, Holly K. Van Houten, Lindsey R. Sangaralingham, Tushar Patel

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Prevention Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
FundersNational Cancer InstituteMayo Clinic
KeywordsHepatocellular carcinomaMedicineChronic hepatitisAntiviral treatmentHepatitis CVirologyInternal medicineGastroenterologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Direct-acting antivirals (DAA) are now the mainstay of treatment for patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV); however, there is some controversy over whether use of DAAs for HCV, as compared with IFN-based regimens, leads to an increased risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development. We investigated the association between use of DAAs and subsequent development of HCC in longitudinal data from patients with HCV from diverse backgrounds (various ages, ethnicities, and geographic regions) across the United States. The design was a retrospective study performed using medical and pharmacy claims from OptumLabs. HCV treatment exposure was categorized as DAA-only, DAA + IFN, any-DAA, or IFN-only. To account for confounding by indication, inverse probability of treatment weighting was performed. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We identified 5,781 patients with HCV with no history of HCC at baseline. Compared with IFN-only regimen, no significant increase in HCC risk was found for use of DAA-only (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 0.73-3.23), DAA + IFN (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.51-2.06), or any-DAA (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.65-1.65). When stratified by sustained virological response (SVR), we noted a higher HCC risk for DAA-only among patients who achieved SVR post-treatment (HR, 7.53; 95% CI, 1.48-38.34), but the CIs were wide, which might be due to the small sample size of the subgroups. Among those who did not achieve SVR, no association was found for use of DAA-only (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.19-1.91). These findings do not provide compelling evidence for the conception that use of DAAs for HCV is associated with increased risk of HCC development.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.319 · 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