ReviewCurrent opinion in HIV and AIDS2011
Assessment of liver disease (noninvasive methods).
Review in Current opinion in HIV and AIDS, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis Index Predicts Hepatic Fibrosis Superior to FIB4 and APRI in HIV/HCV Infected Patients.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021Article
- Article
- Advanced liver fibrosis and care continuum in emergency department patients with chronic hepatitis C.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2019Article
- The risk of hepatocellular carcinoma among individuals with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome in the United States.Cancer · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe purpose of this review is to highlight new findings published in 2010-2011 related to noninvasive fibrosis assessment in HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) co-infected patients. Overall, in 2010-2011, 15 studies were published, of which two were excluded because they were published in languages other than English. RECENT
findingsEleven studies focused on serum marker panels. Studies sought to validate established panels in HIV/HCV co-infected patients often by comparing multiple serum marker panels in the same population; establish new marker panels using combinations of markers used in previously validated panels; and develop new marker panels using novel methodology. Overall, all panels performed within similar ranges of diagnostic accuracy as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) but the FibroMeter panel and its derivations achieved the highest performance. Four studies focused on transient elastography. Two studies confirmed its accuracy for identifying fibrosis and cirrhosis and two studies confirmed that misclassification rates are higher in the presence of elevated triglycerides and steatosis. SUMMARY: Overall, performance of transient elastography appeared superior to the majority of serum marker panels for the detection of significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in HIV/HCV co-infected patients. Challenges of widespread application of transient elastography remain high misclassification in some subgroups, lack of standardized cut-points and lack of widespread availability. Panels that were newly developed in 2010-2011 specifically for HIV/HCV appeared to perform better than existing panels such as APRI and FIB-4; however, additional external validation will be needed to confirm their accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.