A cholestatic pattern predicts major liver‐related outcomes in patients with non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: NAFLD patients usually have an increase in AST/ALT levels, but cholestasis can also be observed. We aimed to assess in subjects with NAFLD the impact of the (cholestatic) C pattern on the likelihood of developing major liver-related outcomes (MALO). METHODS: Five hundred and eighty-two consecutive patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD or a clinical diagnosis of NAFLD-related compensated cirrhosis were classified as hepatocellular (H), C and mixed (M) patterns, by using the formula (ALT/ALT Upper Limit of Normal-ULN)/(ALP/ALP ULN). MALO were recorded during follow-up. An external cohort of 1281 biopsy-proven NAFLD patients was enrolled as validation set. RESULTS: H, M and C patterns were found in 153 (26.3%), 272 (46.7%) and 157 (27%) patients respectively. During a median follow-up of 78 months, only 1 (0.6%) patient with H pattern experienced MALO, whilst 15 (5.5%) and 38 (24.2%) patients in M and C groups had MALO. At multivariate Cox regression analysis, age >55 years (HR 2.55, 95% CI 1.17-5.54; p = .01), platelets <150 000/mmc (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.06-0.32; p < .001), albumin <4 g/L(HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.35-1.08; p = .09), C versus M pattern (HR 7.86, 95% CI 1.03-60.1; p = .04), C versus H pattern(HR 12.1, 95% CI 1.61-90.9; p = .01) and fibrosis F3-F4(HR 35.8, 95% CI 4.65-275.2; p < .001) were independent risk factors for MALO occurrence. C versus M pattern(HR 14.3, 95% CI 1.90-105.6; p = .008) and C versus H pattern (HR 15.6, 95% CI 2.10-115.1; p = .0068) were confirmed independently associated with MALO occurrence in the validation set. The immunohistochemical analysis found a significantly higher prevalence of moderate-high-grade ductular metaplasia combined with low-grade ductular proliferation in C pattern when compared with the biochemical H pattern. Gene expression analysis showed a lower expression of NR1H3, RXRα and VCAM1 in patients with the C pattern. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a cholestatic pattern in patients with NAFLD predicts a higher risk of MALO independently from other features of liver disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".