Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25598786›Full record

ArticleHepatitis monthly2014

Entecavir versus Lamivudine therapy for patients with chronic hepatitis B-associated liver failure: a meta-analysis.

Xiaoguo Zhang, Yong An, Xuemei Jiang, Minling Xu, Linlin Xu, Shijun Chen, Yaguang Xi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hepatitis monthly, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Guideline of Prevention and Treatment for Chronic Hepatitis B (2015 Update).Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2017
    Article
  5. Article
  6. [The guideline of prevention and treatment for chronic hepatitis B: a 2015 update].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2015
    Article
  7. 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.

Xiaoguo ZhangDivision of Liver Disease, Jinan Infectious Disease Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Yong AnDivision of Liver Disease, Qianfoshan Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Xuemei JiangDivision of Liver Disease, Jinan Infectious Disease Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Minling XuDivision of Liver Disease, Jinan Infectious Disease Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Linlin XuDivision of Liver Disease, Jinan Infectious Disease Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Shijun ChenDivision of Liver Disease, Jinan Infectious Disease Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Yaguang XiMitchell Cancer Institute, University of South Alabama, Mobile, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNucleoside analogues are recommended as antiviral treatments for patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV)-associated liver failure. Clinical data comparing entecavir (ETV) and lamivudine (LAM) are inconsistent in this setting.

objectivesTo compare the efficacy and safety of ETV and LAM in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB)-associated liver failure. PATIENTS AND

methodsA literature search was performed on articles published until January 2014 on therapy with ETV and LAM for patients with CHB-associated liver failure. Risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) were used to measure the effects. Survival rate was the primary efficacy measure, while total bilirubin (TBIL), prothrombin activity (PTA) changes and HBV DNA negative change rates were secondary efficacy measures. A quantitative meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy of the two drugs. Safety of ETV and LAM was observed.

resultsFour randomized controlled trials and nine retrospective cohort studies comprising a total of 1549 patients were selected. Overall analysis revealed comparable survival rates between patients received ETV and those received LAM (4 weeks: RR = 1.03, 95%CI [0.89, 1.18], P = 0.73; 8 weeks: RR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.85, 1.14], P = 0.84; 12 weeks: RR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.90, 1.08], P = 0.70; 24 weeks: RR = 1.02, 95% CI [0.94, 1.10], P = 0.66). After 24 weeks of treatment, patients treated with ETV had a significantly lower TBIL levels (MD = -37.34, 95% CI [-63.57, -11.11], P = 0.005), higher PTA levels (MD = 11.10, 95% CI [2.47, 19.73], P = 0.01) and higher HBV DNA negative rates (RR = 2.76, 95% CI [1.69, 4.51], P < 0.0001) than those treated with LAM. In addition, no drug related adverse effects were observed in the two treatment groups.

conclusionsETV and LAM treatments had similar effects to improve 24 weeks survival rate of patients with CHB-associated liver failure, but ETV was associated with greater clinical improvement. Both drugs were tolerated well during the treatment. It is suggested to perform further studies to verify the results.

Indexed as

EntecavirHepatitis BLAMLamivudineLiver Failure

Identifiers

PMID25598786
PMCPMC4286714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.