ArticleHepatic medicine : evidence and research2010
A meta-analysis that compares the use of either peginterferon-α2a or peginterferon-α2b plus ribavirin for HCV infection.
Article in Hepatic medicine : evidence and research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Infectious Disease Transmission in Solid Organ Transplantation: Donor Evaluation, Recipient Risk, and Outcomes of Transmission.Transplantation direct · 2019Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with peginterferon-alfa-2a versus peginterferon-alfa-2b for patients with chronic hepatitis C under the public payer perspective in Brazil.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTwo kinds of peginterferons, peginterferon-α2a (PEG-IFN-α2a) and peginterferon-α2b (PEG-IFN-α2b), are used in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. However, it is unclear which is better in terms of virological responses and patient compliance. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess which peginterferon was better when used with ribavirin.
methodsRelevant clinical trials were identified through the PubMed and EMBASE databases. Primary outcomes included early virological response (EVR), end of treatment response (ETR) and sustained virological response (SVR). Secondary outcomes included biochemical and histological responses and the discontinuation of treatment after adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed using fixed-effect or random-effect methods, depending on absence or presence of significant heterogeneity. Analyses were performed with Review Manager Version 4.2.2.
resultsSeven clinical trials were included that involved 3,526 patients in total; six were randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and one was nonrandomized. PEG-IFN-α2a plus ribavirin was better than PEG-IFN-α2b plus ribavirin with regards to ETR (relative risk [RR] = 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14-1.28). This advantage was less obvious for EVR (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.06-1.19) and SVR (RR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.02-1.18). Patients who received PEG-IFN-α2a were less likely to discontinue treatment for safety reasons (RR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.52-1.38).
conclusionWe demonstrated that PEG-IFN-α2a was a better choice than PEG-IFN-α2b in terms of virological responses.
Indexed as
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.