AMA-NEGATIVE VS AMA-POSITIVE PRIMARY BILIARY CHOLANGITIS: ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is a chronic autoimmune liver disease characterized by the presence of antimitochondrial antibodies (AMA) in 90–95% of cases. The clinical features of AMA-negative patients remain incompletely defined. To compare the clinical characteristics of AMA-positive and AMA-negative PBC patients in a university hospital in Argentina. This retrospective study included 305 patients diagnosed with PBC, divided according to AMA status (238 AMA-positive and 67 AMA-negative). Sociodemographic, clinical, biochemical, and histological variables were analyzed, along with treatment response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)—assessed using the Paris I, Paris II, Toronto, and Rotterdam criteria—and the use of bezafibrate. No significant differences were observed in age (56.8 vs. 55 years) or sex (female: 95.5% vs. 95.4%). AMA-negative patients showed slightly lower levels of ALP, AST, GGT, and IgM, without statistical significance, except for total bilirubin (0.82 vs. 1.21 mg/dL; p = 0.004). Fatigue was less frequent in the AMA-negative group (29.9% vs. 45.8%; p = 0.0282), with no differences in pruritus or jaundice. Advanced histological stages (III–IV) were less prevalent among AMA-negative patients (17.9% vs. 36.1%; p = 0.007). Response to UDCA therapy and the use of bezafibrate were comparable between groups. In this cohort, AMA-negative patients exhibited similar sociodemographic, clinical, and biochemical characteristics to AMA-positive patients. Treatment response to UDCA and the need for bezafibrate were comparable in both groups. Higher levels of total bilirubin, greater fatigue, and a higher proportion of advanced histological stages were observed among AMA-positive patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".