Vitamin D Is Associated with Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Primary Biliary Cholangitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vitamin D (VD) deficiency has been associated with clinical outcomes in patients with chronic liver disease. This study aims to identify the prevalence of VD deficiency in patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and its association with treatment response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), cirrhosis development, and liver-related events (mortality and liver transplantation). Two hundred and fifty-five patients with PBC diagnosis were evaluated. Patients with VD levels below 50 nmol/L were defined as deficient. Treatment response to UDCA was defined according to the Toronto criteria. Independent risk factors were identified using binary logistic and Cox regression analysis. The mean level of serum VD was 77 ± 39 nmol/L, and 64 patients (25%) were VD deficient. Incomplete response to UDCA was more prevalent in VD-deficient patients compared to their counterparts (45% vs. 22%; p < 0.001). The risk of cirrhosis development (hazard ratio (HR) 1.93; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17–3.19, p = 0.01) and liver-related mortality or need for liver transplantation (HR 3.33, 95% CI, 1.57–7.07, p = 0.002) was higher in VD-deficient patients after adjusting for confounders. Vitamin D deficiency is frequent in patients with PBC and is associated with incomplete response to UDCA, cirrhosis development, and liver-related mortality or need for liver transplantation.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".