Cited by 123Drug-Induced Hepatotoxicity and ProtectionDrug-Induced Adverse ReactionsPharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions

Drug-induced liver injury: a clinical update

Open access
Ghabril, Marwan, Chalasani, Naga, Björnsson, Einar·2010·Current Opinion in Gastroenterology

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To gather new and important data published on idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury (DILI) over the past 2 years in the peer-reviewed literature. Clinical studies focusing on mechanisms of injury, clinical evaluation and prognosis will be reviewed. RECENT FINDINGS: The most common drugs leading to DILI in the United States are antibiotics, central nervous system agents, herbal/dietary supplements and immunomodulatory agents. Hepatocellular type of DILI is more common in younger patients, whereas cholestatic pattern increases with older age. Certain human leukocyte antigen genotype increases the likelihood of flucloxacillin-induced liver injury. Idiosyncratic DILI was shown to have an important dose-dependency and drugs with extensive hepatic metabolism are associated with higher frequency of DILI. Chronic DILI may occur, but development of clinically important liver injury after severe DILI is rare. N-acetylcysteine seems to be beneficial for patients with acute liver failure caused by medications or herbal agents.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/mog.0b013e3283383c7c

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Risk factors and pathogenesis of DILI are poorly understood.

    “Risk factors and pathogenesis of DILI are poorly understood.”

    From Albendazole-induced granulomatous hepatitis: a case report (2013) · cites this paper as [3]

    The Introduction says that the risk factors and pathogenesis of *idiosyncratic* DILI are poorly understood. The claim omits that qualifier and extends the statement to DILI generally; the Epidemiology section describes acetaminophen-related DILI as well known to be dose-related. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Drug-related hepatotoxicity is a cause of acute liver failure and is responsible for the elimination of new pharmacological agents during efficacy and safety studies.

    “Drug-related hepatotoxicity is a common medical problem, with implications for health systems, and is also a cause of acute liver failure and, in many cases, responsible for the elimination of new pharmacological agents during efficacy and safety studies.”

    From Albendazole-induced granulomatous hepatitis: a case report (2013) · cites this paper as [3]

  • The diagnosis of DILI is one of exclusion, because it is not easy to define a toxic etiology as the cause of liver disease due to the heterogeneity of the clinical presentation and evolution.

    “The diagnosis of DILI is one of exclusion, because it is not easy to define a toxic etiology as the cause of liver disease due to the heterogeneity of the clinical presentation and evolution.”

    From Albendazole-induced granulomatous hepatitis: a case report (2013) · cites this paper as [3]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [14]Zimmerman HJ Hepatotoxicity: the adverse effects of drugs and other chemicals on the liver 1999 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Philadelphia 2nd ed

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ghabril, M., Chalasani, N., & Björnsson, E.
Affiliations
Indiana University Indianapolis (US)
Venue
Current Opinion in Gastroenterology
Published
2010-05
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
222-226
ISSN
0267-1379 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2087256708
Cited by
123
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 11
FWCI
8.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Gastroenterology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Hirsla (Landspítali University Hospital) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K24DK069290)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Drug-Induced Hepatotoxicity and Protection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Drug-Induced Adverse Reactions
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
Keywords
drug-induced liver injury, idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury, hepatotoxicity mechanisms, antibiotics, central nervous system agents, herbal and dietary supplements, immunomodulators, flucloxacillin, HLA typing, dose-dependent liver injury, N-acetylcysteine, acute liver failure, cholestatic liver injury, prognosis
MeSH terms
Humans, Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review