ReviewInnere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany)2024
[Primary biliary cholangitis-response criteria of first-line treatment and perspectives of second-line therapy].
Review in Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is a chronic cholestatic liver disease that can progress to liver cirrhosis if left untreated. Early diagnosis, initiation of therapy and, if necessary, adjustment of treatment are essential to prevent disease progression. The timing and thresholds for assessing adequate treatment response are inconsistently defined in the literature and can pose a challenge in clinical practice.
objectiveIn addition to providing a concise overview of the guideline-based diagnostic work-up and first-line therapy, this study offers practical guidance for the evaluation of treatment response and options for second-line treatment in PBC. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis article is based on the current European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) clinical practice guidelines for the management of PBC from 2017 as well as a literature review of studies from 2017 to 2023, focusing on defining treatment response, assessing disease progression risk, and the approved and investigational agents for second-line therapy.
resultsThere are varying definitions for a sufficient response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). Therapeutic goals are tailored to the individual risk of disease progression. The lowest risk appears to be associated with normalization of alkaline phosphatase (AP) and serum bilirubin below 0.6 the upper limit of normal. Established second-line therapies include obeticholic acid and bezafibrate (off-label use), while other peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) agonists and combination therapies are under clinical investigation. DISCUSSION: Early evaluation of treatment response to UDCA is mandatory. In the case of insufficient treatment response, second-line therapy should be initiated according to the individual's risk profile.
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.