ArticleHepatology international2011
A comparison of 48-week treatment efficacy between clevudine and entecavir in treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B.
Article in Hepatology international, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adverse events of nucleos(t)ide analogues for chronic hepatitis B: a systematic review.Journal of gastroenterology · 2020Pooled it
- Concomitant food intake does not affect the efficacy of entecavir in chronic hepatitis B patients with virological response: a randomized, multicenter, noninferiority trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2018Trial
- Tenofovir rescue therapy for chronic hepatitis B patients after multiple treatment failures.World journal of gastroenterology · 2012Trial
- Adverse effects of oral antiviral therapy in chronic hepatitis B.World journal of hepatology · 2017Review
- Long-term efficacy of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate therapy after multiple nucleos(t)ide analogue failure in chronic hepatitis B patients.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2015Article
- Emerging antivirals for the treatment of hepatitis B.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Review
- Therapeutic advances in the management of chronic hepatitis B infection.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2013Article
- Virological Response and Muscular Adverse Events during Long-Term Clevudine Therapy in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients.Hepatitis monthly · 2013Article
- A comparison of clevudine and entecavir for treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B: results after 2 years of treatment.Hepatology international · 2013Article
- Two cases of telbivudine-induced myopathy in siblings with chronic hepatitis B.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2013Article
- Long-term treatment outcomes of clevudine in antiviral-naive patients with chronic hepatitis B.World journal of gastroenterology · 2012Article
- Long-term treatment efficacy and safety of clevudine therapy in naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B.Gut and liver · 2012Article
- Molecular and clinical aspects of hepatitis D virus infections.World journal of virology · 2012Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeClevudine and entecavir are currently available in Korea as antiviral drugs against chronic hepatitis B (CHB). We aimed to compare the efficacy of clevudine and entecavir therapy.
methodsTreatment-naïve CHB patients who received 30 mg of clevudine or 0.5 mg of entecavir a day were analyzed. Mean reduction of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA levels, complete virological response (cVR, undetectable HBV DNA by real-time PCR), biochemical response (recovery to normal ALT level), and hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) seroconversion rate at the 48th week of treatment were assessed.
resultsA number of 59 patients in clevudine group and 61 patients in entecavir group were included. Mean HBV DNA reductions from baseline were similar in the clevudine and entecavir groups, -6.4 versus -6.8 log(10) copies/mL in HBeAg-positive (p = 0.417) and -6.9 versus -7.0 log(10) copies/mL in HBeAg-negative patients (p = 0.640). The proportion of patients who achieved cVR was not different between the two groups, 53 versus 55% in HBeAg-positive (p = 1.000) and 100 versus 95% in HBeAg-negative patients (p = 0.452). Biochemical response rates and HBeAg seroconversion rates were also similar in both the groups. Two (3.4%) patients in clevudine group showed virologic breakthrough with rtM204I mutation using direct sequencing analysis. Clinical myopathy occurred in two (3.4%) patients in clevudine group.
conclusionMean reduction of viral loads was similar between clevudine and entecavir groups during 48 weeks. However, virologic breakthrough and significant myopathy were noted only in clevudine-treated patients. Therefore, more attention should be paid to patients receiving clevudine.
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.