MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206581129 · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2021.12.041

Systematic review of response criteria and endpoints in autoimmune hepatitis by the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group

2022· review· en· W4206581129 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Pape, Romée J.A.L.M. Snijders, Tom J.G. Gevers, Oliver Chazouilleres, George Ν. Dalekos, Gideon M. Hirschfield, Marco Lenzi, Michael Trauner, Michael P. Manns, John M. Vierling, Aldo J. Montaño‐Loza, Ansgar W. Lohse, Christoph Schramm, Joost P.H. Drenth, Michael A. Heneghan, Piero Luigi Almasio, Fernando Álvarez, Raúl J. Andrade, Çiğdem Arıkan, David N. Assis, Edouard Bardou‐Jacquet, Maaike Biewenga, Eduardo Luiz Rachid Cançado, Nora Cazzagon, Olivier Chazouillères, Guido Colloredo, Miriam Cuarterolo, Dominique Debray, Mercedes Robles‐Díaz, Jessica Dyson, Cumali Efe, Bastian Engel, S. Ferri, R Fontana, Nikolaos Gatselis, Alessio Gerussi, Emina Halilbasic, Neil Halliday, Bart van Hoek, Marianne Hørby Jørgensen, G. Indolfini, Raffaele Iorio, Soo Jeong, D. Jones, Déirdre Kelly, Nanda Kerkar, Florence Lacaille, Craig Lammert, B. Leggett, C Levy, Rodrigo Liberal, Ana Lleò, Susana López, Eléonora De Martin, Valérie A. McLin, Giorgina Mieli‐Vergani, Piotr Milkiewicz, Nitesh Mohan, Luigi Muratori, Gabriella Nebbia, C. van Nieuwkerk, Ye Htun Oo, Alberto Ortega, Albert Parés, Tudor Lucian Pop, Daniel S. Pratt, Tuğrul Pürnak, Giusy Ranucci, Simon Rushbrook, Albert Friedrich Stättermayer, Mark G. Swain, Atsushi Tanaka, Richard Taubert, Débora Raquel Benedita Terrabuio, Pamela L. Valentino, F. van den Brand, A. Villamil, Staffan Wåhlin, Henriette Ytting, Kalliopi Zachou, Mikio Zeniya

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hepatology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalAlberta Hospital EdmontonUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersAcademy of Medical SciencesNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsAutoimmune hepatitisMedicineHepatitisDiscontinuationAdverse effectInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) has been well characterised and codified through the development of diagnostic criteria. These criteria have been adapted and simplified and are widely used in clinical practice. However, there is a need to update and precisely define the criteria for both treatment response and treatment. METHODS: A systematic review was performed and a modified Delphi consensus process was used to identify and redefine the response criteria in autoimmune hepatitis. RESULTS: The consensus process initiated by the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group proposes that the term 'complete biochemical response' defined as 'normalization of serum transaminases and IgG below the upper limit of normal' be adopted to include a time point at 6 months after initiation of treatment. An insufficient response by 6 months was a failure to meet the above definition. Non-response was defined as '<50% decrease of serum transaminases within 4 weeks after initiation of treatment'. Remission is defined as liver histology with a Hepatitis Activity Index <4/18. Intolerance to treatment was agreed to stand for 'any adverse event possibly related to treatment leading to potential drug discontinuation'. CONCLUSIONS: These definitions provide a simple and reproducible framework to define treatment response and non-response, irrespective of the therapeutic intervention. A consensus on endpoints is urgently required to set a global standard for the reporting of study results and to enable inter-study comparisons. Future prospective database studies are needed to validate these endpoints. LAY SUMMARY: Consensus among international experts on response criteria and endpoints in autoimmune hepatitis is lacking. A consensus on endpoints is urgently required to set a global standard for the reporting of study results and to enable the comparison of results between clinical trials. Therefore, the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group (IAIHG) herein presents a statement on 5 agreed response criteria and endpoints: complete biochemical response, insufficient response, non-response, remission, and intolerance to treatment, which can be used to guide future reporting.

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)0.081
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.208
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0810.208
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.015
Bibliometrics0.0190.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations173
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HepatologySame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207