MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237318842 · doi:10.1002/hep.26857

HBV Virology and Diagnostics

2013· article· en· W4237318842 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis B Virus Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity Health Network
FundersGilead Sciences
KeywordsVirologyMedicineSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Internal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ters. The diagnosis of CHB infection was made on the basis of biochemical, serological and histological data, when available. Seventy and six percent of the patients were nucleos(t)ide nave. Virological response was defined as undetectable serum HBV DNA level (<200 copy/ml) by COBAS Taqman (Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany). Safety issue was analyzed based on renal function. Results: Median age was 47.0 years. At baseline, 32% of the patients were HBeAg positive, 38% had cirrhosis, 201 patients were treated with ETV and 310 were treated with TDF based on the discretion of investigators. There were no significant differences in terms of the baseline characteristics observed between two treatment groups except initial higher serum AST (p=0.001), GGT (p=0.007) and HBV DNA levels (p=0.001) in ETV treatment group. Overall virological response rates in ETV and TDF treatment groups were 60% vs 58% (p>0.05), 81% vs 70% (p=0.017), 84% vs 77% (p>0.05) and 86% vs 84% (p>0.05) at 24, 48, 72 and 96 weeks, respectively. In NUC-nave group, response rates were 59% vs 59% (p>0.05), 81% vs 72% (p=0.042), 84% vs 78% (p>0.05) and 86% vs 85% (p>0.05) at 24, 48, 72 and 96 weeks, respectively. With logistic regression analysis, after adjusted age and gender, ETV treatment (p=0.039, OR: 1.72) and HBeAg negativity (p=<0.001, OR: 3.69) were predictive factors for undetectable HBV DNA at week 48. Primary non response (< 1 log10 decrease) at week 24 was observed in 2% (2 ETV, 7 TDF) and partial virological response at week 48 in 25% of the patients (19% ETV vs 29% TDF, p=0.011). HBeAg loss was achieved in 23 of HBeAg positive patients. The cumulative probability of HBeAg loss was 10.9% and 20.4% at weeks 48 and 96, respectively. HBsAg loss was achieved in 2 patients. Hepatocellular carcinoma developed in 10 cirrhotic patients. Both treatments were well tolerated, no serious adverse event was observed. From baseline to the end of the 96 weeks, no significant difference in terms of the serum creatinine levels was observed between two treatment groups (median 0.87 mg/dL vs 0.87 mg/dL in ETV group and 0.82 mg/dL vs 0.84 mg/dL in TDF group (p>0.05). Conclusions: This study confirms that ETV and TDF suppressed HBV viral replication in CHB patients with/without cirrhosis in clinical practice. Both drugs are safe and tolerable in such patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatologySame topicHepatitis B Virus StudiesFrench-language works237,207