Acta gastro-enterologica Belgica · 2019
Effects of entecavir, tenofovir and telbivudine treatment on renal functions in chronic hepatitis B patients.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Kara A V, Yıldırım Y, Ozcicek F, Aldemir M N, Arslan Y, Bayan K, Çelen M K
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The aim of this study was to enlighten the controversy about the renal safety of entecavir, tenofovir, and telbivudine treatments in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients by comparing these treatments in real-world conditions.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 104 treatment-naive patients with CHB monoinfection into our study. Patients were treated with entecavir monotherapy (n=38), tenofovir monotherapy (n=35), or telbivudine monotherapy (n=31). We then compared and statistically analyzed the effects of these drugs on the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) over a 24-month follow-up period.
RESULTS: In the entecavir group, time-dependent change in eGFR was not statistically significant (p = 0.357). There was a statistically significant increase in eGFR in the telbivudine group at 12 months (p<0.001) and at 24 months (p<0.001) and, in contrast, a statistically significant decrease in the tenofovir group at 12 months (p<0.001) and at 24 months (p<0.001). There was no significant relationship between entecavir and eGFR change (p = 0.763). We found that tenofovir and telbivudine were independent predictors of eGFR change (decrease in eGFR, p<0.001 and increase in eGFR, p = 0.001, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: We recommend close follow-up of renal functions, especially for patients treated with tenofovir. Telbivudine was superior to the other drugs in terms of renal function. We conclude that an individualized therapy program considering treatment efficacy and side effects is the best option for patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 104 treatment-naive patients with CHB monoinfection into our study. Patients were treated with entecavir monotherapy (n=38), tenofovir monotherapy (n=35), or telbivudine monotherapy (n=31). We then compared and statistically analyzed the effects of these drugs on the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) over a 24-month follow-up period.
RESULTS: In the entecavir group, time-dependent change in eGFR was not statistically significant (p = 0.357). There was a statistically significant increase in eGFR in the telbivudine group at 12 months (p<0.001) and at 24 months (p<0.001) and, in contrast, a statistically significant decrease in the tenofovir group at 12 months (p<0.001) and at 24 months (p<0.001). There was no significant relationship between entecavir and eGFR change (p = 0.763). We found that tenofovir and telbivudine were independent predictors of eGFR change (decrease in eGFR, p<0.001 and increase in eGFR, p = 0.001, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: We recommend close follow-up of renal functions, especially for patients treated with tenofovir. Telbivudine was superior to the other drugs in terms of renal function. We conclude that an individualized therapy program considering treatment efficacy and side effects is the best option for patients.