Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24673792›Full record

SynthesisVirology journal2014

Efficacy and resistance in de novo combination lamivudine and adefovir dipivoxil therapy versus entecavir monotherapy for the treatment-naive patients with chronic hepatitis B: a meta-analysis.

Fen Liu, Xiwei Wang, Fang Wei, Huaidong Hu, Dazhi Zhang, Peng Hu, Hong Ren

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Virology journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. TelbivudineWorld journal of hepatology · 2016
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Fen Liu
Xiwei Wang
Fang Wei
Huaidong Hu
Dazhi Zhang
Peng HuDepartment of Infectious Diseases, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China. hp_cq@163.com.
Hong Ren

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrently, there is no consensus on the efficacy and resistance of de novo combination therapy versus monotherapy for treatment naive patients of chronic hepatitis B (CHB).

objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and resistance of de novo combination of lamivudine (LAM) and adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) compared with entecavir (ETV) monotherapy for nucleos(t)ide-naive patients with CHB. STUDY

designPublications on the effectiveness and resistance of LAM plus ADV versus ETV monotherapy for nucleos(t)ide-naive patients with CHB were identified by a search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of science, OVID, and CBM (Chinese Biological Medical Literature) until May 1, 2013. Biochemical response, hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion, and viroligic response were extracted and combined to obtain an integrated result. Viral resistance and safety were reviewed.

resultsFive eligible studies (328 patients in total) were included in the analysis. LAM plus ADV combination therapy produced more rapid HBV DNA reduction rate at 12 weeks than that of ETV monotherapy. At 48 weeks, the combination group had superior viroligic response rates compared with ETV group (90.0% vs. 78.9%, P=0.01). The difference in the ALT normalization and HBeAg seroconversion rates was not found. At week 96, LAM + ADV was more effective than ETV in ALT normalization [RR = 1. 11, 95% CI (1.02, 1.21), P =0.01] and HBeAg seroconversion [RR = 2.00, 95% CI (1.26, 3.18, P=0.003)], and no significant difference was found in the virologic response (P =0.23). No viral resistance occurred in combination therapy and six patients in ETV group were experienced with viral breakthrough. Both groups were well tolerated.

conclusionThe de novo LAM plus ADV combination therapy for treatment-naïve patients with CHB was greater than ETV monotherapy in both biochemical response and HBeAg seroconversion rate up to 96 weeks. The rate of emergence of viral resistance in the combination group was less than that in the ETV monotherapy.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, ViralAdenineDrug Therapy, CombinationGuanineHepatitis B, ChronicHepatitis B Surface AntigensHepatitis B virusHumansLamivudineLiver Function TestsOrganophosphonatesTreatment Outcomeadefovir dipivoxilAdenineentecavirGuanineHepatitis B Surface AntigensLamivudineOrganophosphonates

Identifiers

PMID24673792
PMCPMC3986697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.