Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(6)
The median follow-up periods were 11.5 years (maximum, 21.7 years) and 16.1 years (maximum, 21.7 years) for the hepatitis C and general resident groups, respectively.
Liver disease-related death accounted for 43.8% and 1.5% of deaths in the hepatitis C and general resident groups (p < 0.0001).
The causes of death of the 400 and 482 patients in the hepatitis C and general resident groups who died during the follow-up period were analyzed.
The 10- and 20-year survival rates of the hepatitis C and general resident groups were 65.4% and 87.8%, and 40.8% and 62.5%, respectively (p < 0.001; hazard risk ratio, 0.444; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.389 0.507).
At the first visit, LC was observed in 177 (22.3%) and 8 cases (0.4%) in the hepatitis C and general resident groups, respectively; HCC was present at the first visit in 45 (5.7%) and 2 cases (0.1%), respectively.
The cumulative survival rate of the hepatitis C patients without IFN (n = 328) was significantly lower than the gender- and age-matched general resident group (n = 656) (p < 0.0001) but there was no significant difference between the IFN-treated (n = 154) and general resident groups (n = 308).
Similar(54)
The cumulative survival rates in Groups A, A1, A2, and B in the hepatitis C group were compared to their corresponding groups in the general resident group.
In the hepatitis C group, the proportion of liver disease-related death was markedly higher, and the survival rate lower, than the general resident group.
IFN treatment was introduced during the follow-up in 165 cases (20.8%) in the hepatitis C group and in no cases in the general resident group.
In cases with non-SVR, despite the slightly lower survival rates in the general resident group, the prognosis in the hepatitis C group was not significantly different.
There were 167 liver disease-related deaths and 223 deaths from other causes in the hepatitis C group, and 7 and 451, respectively, in the general resident group.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com