ArticleHepatology international2013
A comparison of clevudine and entecavir for treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B: results after 2 years of treatment.
Article in Hepatology international, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adverse events of nucleos(t)ide analogues for chronic hepatitis B: a systematic review.Journal of gastroenterology · 2020Pooled it
- Efficacy of switching from adefovir to tenofovir in chronic hepatitis B patients who exhibit suboptimal responses to adefovir-based combination rescue therapy due to resistance to nucleoside analogues (SATIS study).Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2016Trial
- Clevudine Induced Mitochondrial Myopathy.Journal of Korean medical science · 2017Article
- Molecular diagnosis and treatment of drug-resistant hepatitis B virus.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Review
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
backgroundThis study was undertaken to compare the efficacy, safety, and resistance profile of clevudine (CLV) and entecavir (ETV) following a 2-year treatment period.
methodsOne hundred and eight Korean patients from the prior 48-week study were followed with continuous therapy for up to 2 years and monitored for hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA levels, HBeAg seroconversion, serum ALT, emergence of drug-resistant mutant HBV, and drug-related adverse events.
resultsA complete virological response during the 2-year treatment period occurred in 68.0 % in the CLV group and in 84.5 % in the ETV group (p = 0.043). The cumulative percentage of patients with sustained virological responses at 2 years was 54.0 and 77.6 % in the CLV and ETV group, respectively (p = 0.010). Virological breakthrough occurred in 12 patients in the CLV group; however, there were none in the ETV group (p < 0.001). HBeAg seroconversion rates were not different between the two groups. In patients who maintained sustained virological responses at 2 years, the mean reduction in HBsAg titer was -0.24 and -0.06 log IU/ml in the CLV and ETV group, respectively (p > 0.05). Clinical myopathy occurred in seven patients in the CLV group; however, this was not observed in the ETV group (p = 0.004).
conclusionsETV was associated with a significantly higher virological response rate than CLV at 2 years. ETV was superior to CLV in terms of the drug resistance profile and the development of clinical myopathy. Further studies to see whether the unique characteristic of CLV to reduce HBsAg titer is associated with the removal of ccc-DNA from hepatocytes and the remission of the disease are needed.
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.