Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2015
Tenofovir-based rescue therapy for chronic hepatitis B patients who had failed treatment with lamivudine, adefovir, and entecavir.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Byung Gyu, Jung Seok Won, Kim Eun Hye, Kim Jae Hee, Park Ju Hwan, Sung Shi Jung, Park Bo Ryung, Kim Min-Ho, Kim Chang Jae, Lee Byung Uk, Park Jae Ho, Jeong In Du, Bang Sung-Jo, Shin Jung Woo, Park Neung Hwa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIM: In the past decade, many chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients have undergone sequential treatment with lamivudine (LAM), adefovir (ADV), and entecavir (ETV) to manage antiviral resistance or insufficient suppression of HBV-DNA. Very limited data are available on the efficacy of tenofovir (TDF) rescue regimens in patients with multidrug resistance (MDR).
METHODS: We investigated the antiviral efficacy of TDF/LAM combination therapy versus TDF/ETV combination therapy in 52 patients who failed three previous antiviral therapies.
RESULTS: The study subjects were treated with TDF/LAM combination therapy (n = 25) or TDF/ETV combination therapy (n = 27) for more than six months. Virologic response (VR) occurred in 39 (75%) patients (19 patients belonged to the TDF/LAM group and 20 patients belonged to the TDF/ETV group). The VR rates were not different between the TDF/LAM and TDF/ETV groups (56.0% vs 51.9% at month 12, and 72.0% vs 78.8% at month 18; log rank P = 0.515). In addition, treatment efficacy of TDF/LAM combination or TDF/ETV combination was not statistically different according to types of MDR. In multivariate analysis, absolute HBV-DNA level at the start of TDF rescue treatment (P < 0.001; OR, 0.452; 95% CI, 0.306-0.666) was only significantly associated with VR.
CONCLUSIONS: TDF/ETV combination therapy was not associated with higher rate of VR compared with TDF/LAM combination therapy in MDR CHB patients. These results raise the suspicion about the superiority of the combination therapy over TDF monotherapy. The lower HBV-DNA levels at the start of TDF-based rescue therapy were associated with higher VR.
METHODS: We investigated the antiviral efficacy of TDF/LAM combination therapy versus TDF/ETV combination therapy in 52 patients who failed three previous antiviral therapies.
RESULTS: The study subjects were treated with TDF/LAM combination therapy (n = 25) or TDF/ETV combination therapy (n = 27) for more than six months. Virologic response (VR) occurred in 39 (75%) patients (19 patients belonged to the TDF/LAM group and 20 patients belonged to the TDF/ETV group). The VR rates were not different between the TDF/LAM and TDF/ETV groups (56.0% vs 51.9% at month 12, and 72.0% vs 78.8% at month 18; log rank P = 0.515). In addition, treatment efficacy of TDF/LAM combination or TDF/ETV combination was not statistically different according to types of MDR. In multivariate analysis, absolute HBV-DNA level at the start of TDF rescue treatment (P < 0.001; OR, 0.452; 95% CI, 0.306-0.666) was only significantly associated with VR.
CONCLUSIONS: TDF/ETV combination therapy was not associated with higher rate of VR compared with TDF/LAM combination therapy in MDR CHB patients. These results raise the suspicion about the superiority of the combination therapy over TDF monotherapy. The lower HBV-DNA levels at the start of TDF-based rescue therapy were associated with higher VR.