ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2013
Disease progression in chronic hepatitis C patients with normal alanine aminotransferase levels.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review: identifying patients with chronic hepatitis C in need of early treatment and intensive monitoring--predictors and predictive models of disease progression.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2014Pooled it
- KASL clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatitis C.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2014Guideline
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate whether the disease progression of chronic hepatitis C patients with normal alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels differs by ALT levels.
methodsA total of 232 chronic hepatitis C patients with normal ALT (< 40 IU/L) were analyzed. The patients were divided into "high-normal" and "low-normal"ALT groups after determining the best predictive cutoff level associated with disease progression for each gender. The incidence of disease progression, as defined by the occurrence of an increase of ≥ 2 points in the Child-Pugh score, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, bleeding gastric or esophageal varices, hepatic encephalopathy, the development of hepatocellular carcinoma, or death related to liver disease, were compared between the two groups.
resultsBaseline serum ALT levels were associated with disease progression for both genders. The best predictive cutoff baseline serum ALT level for disease progression was 26 IU/L in males and 23 IU/L in females. The mean annual disease progression rate was 1.2% and 3.9% for male patients with baseline ALT levels ≤ 25 IU/L (low-normal) and > 26 IU/L (high-normal), respectively (P = 0.043), and it was 1.4% and 4.8% for female patients with baseline ALT levels ≤ 22 IU/L (low-normal) and > 23 IU/L (high-normal), respectively (P = 0.023). ALT levels fluctuated during the follow-up period. During the follow-up, more patients with "high-normal" ALT levels at baseline experienced ALT elevation (> 41 IU/L) than did patients with "low-normal" ALT levels at baseline (47.7% vs 27.9%, P = 0.002). The 5 year cumulative incidence of disease progression was significantly lower in patients with persistently "low-normal" ALT levels than "high-normal" ALT levels or those who exhibited an ALT elevation > 41 U/L during the follow-up period (0%, 8.3% and 34.3%, P < 0.001).
conclusionA "high normal" ALT level in chronic hepatitis C patients was associated with disease progression, suggesting that the currently accepted normal threshold of serum ALT should be lowered.
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.