ArticleMedicine2016
Comparative Evaluation of Liposomal Albendazole and Tablet-Albendazole Against Hepatic Cystic Echinococcosis: A Non-Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent advances in the detection and treatment of hydatid cysts by nanomaterial-based carriers.Iranian journal of basic medical sciences · 2026Review
- Review
- Preparation and Evaluation of an Oral Administration System of Albendazole-Metal-Organic Framework Based on Dual Response to pH and Enzymes.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Efficacy and mechanism of energy metabolism dual-regulated nanoparticles (atovaquone-albendazole nanoparticles) against cystic echinococcosis.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Efficacy of novel albendazole salt formulations against secondary cystic echinococcosis in experimentally infected mice.Parasitology · 2020Article
- Comparative Evaluation ofJournal of laboratory physicians · 2020Article
- Synthesis and characterization of mesoporous SBA-15 and SBA-16 as carriers to improve albendazole dissolution rate.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2020Article
- The importance of being parasiticidal… an update on drug development for the treatment of alveolar echinococcosis.Food and waterborne parasitology · 2019Article
- Renovascular Mistaken as Essential Hypertension due to Giant Hepatic Hydatid: A Rare Treatable Entity.Case reports in medicine · 2018Article
- Article
- Current status of diagnosis and treatment of hepatic echinococcosis.World journal of hepatology · 2016Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of liposomal albendazole (L-ABZ) and tablet-albendazole (T-ABZ) for the treatment of human hepatic cystic echinococcosis (CE). Sixty patients with single cyst (CE1) or daughter cyst (CE2) were included in this study and were nonrandomly divided into the L-ABZ group (n = 30, 10 mg/kg per day, p.o., b.i.d.) and T-ABZ group (n = 30, 12-20 mg/kg per day, p.o., b.i.d.), respectively. The treatment duration lasted for 6 months, during which dynamic follow-up was carried out to evaluate the clinical efficacy through calculating the total effective rates (TERs). Measurement data and numerous data were analyzed by the chi-square test. Two-sided tests were performed for all the statistical tests. In our study, 2 patients were lost in the follow-up in the L-ABZ group. One patient was lost in the follow-up in the T-ABZ group, and 1 patient was withdrawal from the study due to receiving surgery. Significant difference was identified in the 3-month TERs of L-ABZ group and T-ABZ group (33.3% vs 76.7%, P < 0.05). Also, remarkable difference was noted in the 6-month TERs in the L-ABZ group and T-ABZ group (66.7% vs 93.3%, P = 0.01). No statistical difference was noticed in the incidence rate of adverse reactions in both groups (P > 0.05). Based on our study, both T-ABZ and L-ABZ are effective for treating human CE. The TER in the L-ABZ group is superior to that of T-ABZ.
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.