Cirrhosis as new indication for statins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the recent years, there have been an increasing number of reports on favourable effects of statins in patients with advanced chronic liver disease. These include reduction in portal pressure, improved liver sinusoidal endothelial and hepatic microvascular dysfunction, decreased fibrogenesis, protection against ischaemia/reperfusion injury, safe prolongation of ex vivo liver graft preservation, reduced sensitivity to endotoxin-mediated liver damage, protection from acute-on-chronic liver failure, prevention of liver injury following hypovolaemic shock and preventing/delaying progression of cirrhosis of any aetiology. Moreover, statins have been shown to have potential beneficial effects in the progression of other liver diseases, such as chronic sclerosing cholangitis and in preventing hepatocellular carcinoma. Because of these many theoretically favourable effects, statins have evolved from being considered a risk to kind of wonder drugs for patients with chronic liver diseases. The present article reviews the current knowledge on the potential applications of statins in chronic liver diseases, from its mechanistic background to objective evidence from clinical studies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".