ArticleHepatitis monthly2011
A comparison of treatment with adefovir and entecavir for chronic hepatitis B in China: The 2-year results of a prospective study: Adefovir versus Entercavir for Chronic Hepatitis B.
Article in Hepatitis monthly, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis for Assessing Adverse Effects of Anti-hepatitis B Drugs.Clinical drug investigation · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for treatment of chronic hepatitis B in China.Hepatology international · 2016Article
- Cost-effectiveness comparison of lamivudine plus adefovir combination treatment and nucleos(t)ide analog monotherapies in Chinese chronic hepatitis B patients.Drug design, development and therapy · 2016Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of antiviral therapies for hepatitis B e antigen-positive chronic hepatitis B patients in China.Clinical drug investigation · 2015Article
- Optimization therapy for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Review
- Clinical utility of entecavir for chronic hepatitis B in Chinese patients.Drug design, development and therapy · 2013Review
- Prolonged Combination Therapy is More Effective than Monotherapy in Management of Chronic Hepatitis B Patients With Sustained Virological Response: An Experience From a 'Real-World' Clinical Setting.Iranian Red Crescent medical journal · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe reduction of hepatitis B virus replication to minimal levels is emerging as key therapeutic goal in chronic hepatitis B (CHB).
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacies of adefovir (ADV) and entecavir (ETV) in CHB. PATIENTS AND
methodsIn this prospective study, 100 naïve patients were assigned to treatment with ADV (33 HBeAg-positive and 19 HBeAg-negative patients) or ETV (32 HBeAg-positive and 16 HBeAg-negative patients). The primary efficacy outcome was ALT normalization, reduction in HBV DNA, and seroconversion of HBeAg. Second efficacy outcomes included resistance and safety. Comparisons of quantitative and qualitative variables between groups were analyzed by student t-test and chi-square test (or Fisher's exact test), respectively.
resultsAmong HBeAg-positive patients, ETV was superior to ADV with respect to mean reduction in HBV DNA (-7.5 versus -6.3, respectively, at Month 24, p = 0.003) and the percentage of those with HBV DNA < 103 copies/mL at Month 24 [96.9% (31/32) vs. 69.7% (23/33), respectively, p = 0.002] and < 300 copies/mL at Month 24 [84.4% (27/32) vs. 54.5% (18/33), respectively, p = 0.004]. But, the rates of ALT normalization and HBeAg seroconversion between the groups were similar [87.9% (29/33) vs. 96.9% (31/32), respectively, p=0.355; and 24.2% (8/33) vs. 25.0% (8/32), respectively, p = 0.943]. In HBeAg-negative patients who received ETV or ADV, the reduction in HBV DNA (-6.8 versus -5.9, respectively, p = 0.192), percentage of ALT normalization [100% (16/16) vs. 78.9% (15/19), respectively, p=0.109], HBV DNA < 103 copies/mL [100% (16/16) vs. 89.5% (17/19), respectively, p = 0.489], and HBV DNA < 300 copies/mL [100% (16/16) vs. 84.2% (16/19), respectively, p = 0.234] were similar. No ETV- or ADV-associated mutations were observed, and both agents were well tolerated.
conclusionsETV and ADV are effective therapies for CHB. In HBeAg-positive patients, the efficacy of ETV is significantly superior to that of ADV, and in HBeAg-negative patients, the agents effect similar biochemical and virological responses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22087113PMC3206656W1518965266What 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.