MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

S1549 Baseline Characteristics and Risk Profiles of 1111 Patients with Primary Biliary Cholangitis (PBC) in Need of Second-Line Therapy

2023· article· en· W4387749839 on OpenAlexaff
Gideon M. Hirschfield, Kris V. Kowdley, Andreas E. Kremer, John M. Vierling, Christopher L. Bowlus, Cynthia Levy, Marlyn J. Mayo, Daria B. Crittenden, Mary Standen, Ke Yang, Yun‐Jung Choi, Charles A. McWherter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsToronto Liver Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineGastroenterologyBilirubinCohortAlkaline phosphatasePopulationUrsodeoxycholic acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Ursodexoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the first-line treatment for primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). Up to 40% of patients receiving UDCA have an alkaline phosphatase (ALP) ≥ 1.67×ULN and are usually considered for second-line therapy to prevent progression. Cohort studies confirm that targeting normal ALP and bilirubin are better treatment goals. We examined patients who screen failed due to elevated ALP < 1.67xULN to further characterize this population, including presence of additional risk factors for progression. Methods: In 4 clinical trials with seladelpar from 2015 – 2022, 1111 patients with PBC were screened at 197 clinical sites in 27 countries after treatment with UDCA for ≥12 months, or intolerance to UDCA. ALP levels of ≥ 1.67×ULN were required for enrollment. We compared the baseline characteristics and risk profiles of patients enrolled (ALP ≥ 1.67×ULN) to those who screen failed due to ALP³ ULN, but < 1.67×ULN. We stratified using proportions with Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) values ≥ 10.0 or bilirubin levels > 0.6×ULN. The relationship of ELF and liver stiffness assessed with FibroScan® was confirmed when available. Results: The 1111 screened patients were predominantly female (94%) with a mean (SD) age of 57±9.5 years. Studies enrolled 54% of screened patients (n=603) (EN cohort) with a duration of PBC of 8±6.5 years and on a UDCA dose of 15±3.9 mg/kg/day (92% were on UDCA). Overall, 26% of patients (n=284) screen failed due to ALP > ULN, but < 1.67×ULN (SF Cohort). The most common reasons for screen failure in the remaining 20% of patients were ALT and AST >3xULN, ALP< 1xULN, and EGFR < 60. Meaningful differences in baseline values in the EN and SF cohorts were in ALP, GGT and ALT. Higher-risk bilirubin levels were present in 51.1% and 42.0% of EN and SF cohorts, respectively. Elevated risk based on ELF was identified in 43.2% of the EN and 27.2% of the SF cohorts. Liver stiffness was assessed in 66% of EN patients, and a mean liver stiffness of 9.7 kPa correlated with ELF (r = 0.50, P < 0.001). Conclusion: We found that in this large international cohort of UDCA treated PBC patients, clinical risk factors for disease progression were common in patients achieving ALP levels > ULN, but < 1.67×ULN. Consideration should be given to including this population in clinical research of second-line therapies with a goal of normalization of ALP (Figure 1).Figure 1.: Baseline characteristics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of GastroenterologySame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207