MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401511405 · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2024-iddf.189

IDDF2024-ABS-0205 Impact of long-term treatment with continuous tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) or after switch from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) incidence in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB)

2024· article· en· W4401511405 on OpenAlexaff
Young‐Suk Lim, Grace Wong, Sang Hoon Ahn, Wai Kay Seto, Kosh Agarwal, Harry L.A. Janssen, Calvin Q. Pan, Wan‐Long Chuang, Scott Fung, S. Shalimar, Maurizia Rossana Brunetto, Aric J. Hui, Ting‐Tsung Chang, Seng Gee Lim, Frida Abramov, John F. Flaherty, Hongyuan Wang, Leland J. Yee, Jia‐Horng Kao, Patrick Marcellin, Edward Gane, Marı́a Buti

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis B Virus Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Liver CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTenofovir alafenamideHepatocellular carcinomaMedicineGastroenterologyInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)CirrhosisHepatitis BTenofovirImmunologyViral loadHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background In an integrated analysis of 2 global Phase 3 studies, we evaluated HCC incidence and risk at 8 years in patients treated with TAF and those treated initially with TDF and then switched to TAF for up to 6 years (y). Methods In 2 studies, HBeAg-positive (n=859) and -negative (n=439) patients with HBV DNA ≥20,000 IU/mL and ALT >60 U/L (males) or >38 U/L (females) were randomized to TAF or TDF in a double-blind (DB) phase for up to 3 y, followed by open-label (OL) TAF through Y8. HCC was assessed by local standards of care and by hepatic ultrasonography. Three validated models (REACH-B, aMAP, and mPAGE-B) were utilized to assess HCC risk by initial treatment assignment and collectively. Using the REACH-B model, standard incidence ratios (SIRs) for HCC were calculated. Results Through Y8, HCC was diagnosed in 21/1298 patients (1.6%; TAF 1.4%; TDF→TAF 2.1%; P=0.33)— 11 in DB/10 in OL phase. Eight of 21 HCC cases were in cirrhotic patients. The median time to HCC onset was 729 days (TAF 1291, TDF→TAF 460 days). Advanced age, male, and cirrhosis were more common in HCC vs non-HCC patients (P<0.05). Proportionately, more HCC patients were HBV genotype C (76% vs 47%) and had BL HBV DNA between 6 to ≤ 8 log10IU/mL (57% vs 38%). With treatment over 8y, by REACH-B, HCC incidence was significantly reduced (21 observed vs 74.6 predicted; SIR [95% CI] 0.28; P<0.0001; figure 1). Of patients predicted to be low risk for HCC at BL, nearly all remained low risk at Y8 by aMAP (98%) and mPAGE-B (97%), and substantial proportions estimated to be medium or high risk at BL shifted to lower risk at Y8 (aMAP: 45% and 72%; mPAGE-B: 27% and 51%, respectively). Conclusions CHB patients treated with TAF alone or switched from TDF to TAF for up to 8 y showed a reduced observed vs predicted risk for HCC development.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHepatitis B Virus StudiesFrench-language works237,207