MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409289599 · doi:10.1080/17474124.2025.2491531

Natural history and long–term management of autoimmune hepatitis

2025· review· en· W4409289599 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew K. Smith, Aldo J. Montaño‐Loza

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNatural historyAutoimmune hepatitisTerm (time)ImmunologyIntensive care medicineHepatitisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a relatively infrequent and complex liver disease characterized by acute or chronic inflammation, interface hepatitis in histology examination, elevation of immunoglobulin G (IgG), production of autoantibodies, and is often responsive to immunosuppression. The incidence of AIH has been increasing worldwide, affecting people of all ages and sexes. AIH represents a diagnostic challenge because of its heterogeneous presentation and the lack of pathognomonic findings. Even when treated, AIH can remain a progressive disease. In this review, we present recent data on the natural history of AIH and the developing evidence on the management of patients with AIH. AREAS COVERED: This review outlines the clinical presentation, risk factors linked to poorer clinical outcomes, the diagnostic algorithm, and the current management strategies for individuals living with AIH. EXPERT OPINION: AIH remains a clinical challenge, and new tools for better diagnosis and stratification of risk are needed. In addition, better treatments are needed as a complete response is achieved in less than 60% of cases, and intolerance to first-line treatment is frequent. The use of biological treatment in AIH seems to improve the response rate and minimize the risk of side effects of current medication in this increasingly prevalent disease.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.305 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Gastroenterology & HepatologySame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207