MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404994428 · doi:10.1097/hep.0000000000001174

Hepatic real-world outcomes with obeticholic acid in primary biliary cholangitis (HEROES): A trial emulation study design

2024· article· en· W4404994428 on OpenAlexaff
M. Alan Brookhart, Tracy J. Mayne, Charles Coombs, Alexander Breskin, Erik C. Ness, Leona Bessonova, Yucheng Julia Chu, Jie Li, Michael Fried, Bettina E. Hansen, Kris V. Kowdley, D. I. Jones, George Mells, Palak Trivedi, Shaun Hiu, Dorcas Kareithi, James Wason, Rachel Smith, John D. Seeger, Gideon M. Hirschfield

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersIpsenNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchKowa CompanyLifeArcWellcome TrustIntercept PharmaceuticalsGilead SciencesUnitedHealth GroupBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsObeticholic acidUrsodeoxycholic acidMedicineClinical endpointInternal medicineGastroenterologyBile acidSurrogate endpointRandomized controlled trialAlkaline phosphatase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Primary biliary cholangitis is a rare, progressive liver disease. Obeticholic acid (OCA) received accelerated approval for treating patients with primary biliary cholangitis in whom ursodeoxycholic acid failed, based on a surrogate endpoint of reduction in ALP. Analysis of the long-term safety extension with 2 external control groups demonstrated a significant increase in event-free survival in OCA-treated patients. This fully real-world evidence study assessed the effect of OCA treatment on clinical outcomes. APPROACH AND RESULTS: This trial emulation used data from the Komodo Healthcare Map claims database linked to US national laboratory, transplant, and death databases. Patients with compensated primary biliary cholangitis and intolerance/inadequate response to ursodeoxycholic acid who initiated OCA therapy were compared with patients who were OCA-eligible but not OCA-treated. The primary endpoint was time to the first occurrence of death, liver transplant, or hospitalization for hepatic decompensation, analyzed using a propensity-score weighted Cox proportional hazards model. Baseline prognostic factors were balanced using standardized morbidity ratio weighting. For the primary analysis, 4174 patients contributed 11,246 control index dates, and 403 patients contributed OCA indexes. Weighted groups were well balanced. Median (95% CI) follow-up in the OCA and non-OCA arms was 9.3 (8.4-10.6) months and 17.5 (16.2-18.6) months (weighted population; censored at discontinuation). Eight events occurred in the OCA arm and 32 in the weighted control (HR = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.14-0.75; p < 0.001). Effects were consistent for each component of the composite endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a 63% reduced risk of hospitalization for hepatic decompensation, liver transplant, or death in OCA-treated versus non-OCA-treated individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: HEROES; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05292872.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.281 · 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.

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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatologySame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207