Alcohol‐related liver disease phenotype impacts survival after an acute variceal bleeding episode
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Alcohol-related hepatitis (AH) encompasses a high mortality. AH might be a concomitant event in patients with acute variceal bleeding (AVB). The current study aimed to assess the prevalence of AH in patients with AVB and to compare the clinical outcomes of AH patients to other alcohol-related liver disease (ALD) phenotypes and viral cirrhosis. METHODS: Multicentre, observational study including 916 patients with AVB falling under the next categories: AH (n = 99), ALD cirrhosis actively drinking (d-ALD) (n = 285), ALD cirrhosis abstinent from alcohol (a-ALD) (n = 227) and viral cirrhosis (n = 305). We used a Cox proportional hazards model to calculate adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of death adjusted by MELD. RESULTS: The prevalence of AH was 16% considering only ALD patients. AH patients exhibited more complications. Forty-two days transplant-free survival was worse among AH, but statistical differences were only observed between AH and d-ALD groups (84 vs. 93%; p = 0.005), when adjusted by MELD no differences were observed between AH and the other groups. At one-year, survival of AH patients (72.7%) was similar to the other groups; when adjusted by MELD mortality HR was better in AH compared to a-ALD (0.48; 0.29-0.8, p = 0.004). Finally, active drinkers who remained abstinent presented better survival, independently of having AH. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to expected, AH patients with AVB present no worse one-year survival than other patients with different alcohol-related phenotypes or viral cirrhosis. Abstinence influences long-term survival and could explain these counterintuitive results.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".