MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406605792 · doi:10.1055/s-0044-1801037

Insufficient control of cholestatic pruritus in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) with current therapies: baseline data from the ongoing Phase 3 GLISTEN (Global Linerixibat Itch STudy of Efficacy and safety iN PBC) trial

2025· article· en· W4406605792 on OpenAlexaff
Gideon M. Hirschfield, Christopher L. Bowlus, D. I. Jones, Andreas E. Kremer, Marlyn J. Mayo, Atsushi Tanaka, Pietro Andreoné, Jidong Jia, Qinglong Jin, Ricardo Ulises Macías‐Rodríguez, Alexander R. Cobitz, Brooke M. Currie, Ciara Gorey, Grace Kang, Ivana Lazic, D.A. Podmore, Andrea Ribeiro, Jennifer B. Shannon, Brandon Swift, Simon Hohenester, Philip J.F. Troke, Megan McLaughlin, Cynthia Levy

Bibliographic record

VenueZeitschrift für Gastroenterologie · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineBaseline (sea)Gastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cholestatic pruritus is common in PBC, negatively impacts quality of life and efficacy of current therapies is limited. Linerixibat, an oral ileal bile acid transporter inhibitor, is currently in development for the treatment of pruritus in PBC. Here, we report baseline (BL) characteristics and pruritus treatment history in GLISTEN to characterize unmet patients’ needs. Methods: GLISTEN (NCT04950127) is an ongoing Phase 3, placebo-controlled study in adults with PBC and moderate–severe pruritus. Pruritus severity is assessed using a worst itch 0–10 numerical rating scale (NRS). Participants are either treatment-naïve, have received prior therapy or continue stable concomitant therapies for pruritus. A preliminary analysis of BL characteristics is presented. Results: Data from 227 participants were included. At BL, 42% had moderate pruritus (NRS 4-6), 58% severe (NRS≥7); 51% had alkaline phosphatase levels<1.67x upper limit of normal. The most common prior therapies for pruritus were antihistamines, bile acid binding resins, rifampin, and fibrates. Where specified, main reasons for stopping these treatments included lack of efficacy (83%, 55%, 69%, and 13%, respectively) and lack of tolerability (9%, 45%, 38%, and 88%, respectively). In total, 42% of participants were receiving concomitant therapy that may reduce pruritus, including 22% receiving fibrates. Conclusion: Prior use of bile acid binding resins was low in the GLISTEN population despite its first-line position in treatment guidelines. Regardless of the use of multiple “off label” therapies, participants had evidence of ongoing moderate–severe pruritus, underscoring the unmet need for a targeted therapy for pruritus in PBC. Publication History Article published online: 20 January 2025 © 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueZeitschrift für GastroenterologieSame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207