Mechanism of action and therapeutic benefit of rifaximin in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: a narrative review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common functional gastrointestinal disorder with a multifactorial pathophysiology. The gut microbiota differs between patients with IBS and healthy individuals. After a bout of acute gastroenteritis, postinfection IBS may result in up to approximately 10% of those affected. Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) is more common in patients with IBS than in healthy individuals, and eradication of SIBO with systemic antibiotics has decreased symptoms of IBS in some patients with IBS and SIBO. The nonsystemic (i.e. low oral bioavailability) antibiotic rifaximin is indicated in the United States and Canada for the treatment of adults with IBS with diarrhea (IBS-D). The efficacy and safety of 2-week single and repeat courses of rifaximin have been demonstrated in randomized, placebo-controlled studies of adults with IBS. Rifaximin is widely thought to exert its beneficial clinical effects in IBS-D through manipulation of the gut microbiota. However, current studies indicate that rifaximin induces only modest effects on the gut microbiota of patients with IBS-D, suggesting that the efficacy of rifaximin may involve other mechanisms. Indeed, preclinical data reveal a potential role for rifaximin in the modulation of inflammatory cytokines and intestinal permeability, but these two findings have not yet been examined in the context of clinical studies. The mechanism of action of rifaximin in IBS is likely multifactorial, and further study is needed.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it