Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29607530›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2018

Drug induced liver injury with analysis of alternative causes as confounding variables.

Rolf Teschke, Gaby Danan

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Immunotherapy-induced Hepatotoxicity: A Review.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2022
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Hepatoprotective Activity of BV-7310, a Proprietary Herbal Formulation ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Rolf TeschkeDepartment of Internal Medicine II, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Klinikum Hanau, Hanau, Academic Teaching Hospital of the Medical Faculty, Goethe, University Frankfurt/ Main, Germany.
Gaby DananPharmacovigilance Consultancy, Paris, France.
Goethe University Frankfurt · DENetherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsDrug-induced liver injury (DILI) is rare compared to the worldwide frequent acute or chronic liver diseases. Therefore, patients included in series of suspected DILI are at high risk of not having DILI, whereby alternative causes may confound the DILI diagnosis. The aim of this review is to evaluate published case series of DILI for alternative causes.

methodsRelevant studies were identified using a computerized search of the Medline database for publications from 1993 through 30 October 2017. We used the following terms: drug hepatotoxicity, drug induced liver injury, hepatotoxic drugs combined with diagnosis, causality assessment and alternative causes.

resultsAlternative causes as variables confounding the DILI diagnosis emerged in 22 published DILI case series, ranging from 4 to 47%. Among 13 335 cases of suspected DILI, alternative causes were found to be more likely in 4555 patients (34.2%), suggesting that the suspected DILI was probably not DILI. Biliary diseases such as biliary obstruction, cholangitis, choledocholithiasis, primary biliary cholangitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis were among the most missed diagnoses. Alternative causes included hepatitis B, C and E, cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, ischemic hepatitis, cardiac hepatopathy, autoimmune hepatitis, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, and alcoholic liver disease.

conclusionsIn more than one-third of published global DILI case series, alternative causes as published in these reports confounded the DILI diagnosis. In the future, published DILI case series should include only patients with secured DILI diagnosis, preferentially established by prospective use of scored items provided by robust diagnostic algorithms such as the updated Roussel Uclaf causality assessment method.

Indexed as

Biliary Tract DiseasesChemical and Drug Induced Liver InjuryConfounding Factors, EpidemiologicCytomegalovirus InfectionsDiagnosis, DifferentialEpstein-Barr Virus InfectionsHumansProspective StudiesRisk Factorsalternative causescausality assessmentcompeting causesdrug-induced liver injurymissed diagnosesRoussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method

Identifiers

PMID29607530
PMCPMC6005631
OpenAlexW2796461907

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.