Trial reportInternational journal of molecular sciences2016
A Protease Inhibitor with Induction Therapy with Natural Interferon-β in Patients with HCV Genotype 1b Infection.
Trial report in International journal of molecular sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The restoration of innate immune responses has potential as a novel therapeutic strategy for chronic hepatitis C (CHC). We compared the efficacy and safety of induction therapy (IT) with natural interferon-β (n-IFN-β) followed by pegylated-IFN-α/ribavirin (PR) alone (group A, n = 30) and IT with a protease inhibitor (PI) (simeprevir or vaniprevir)/PR (group B, n = 13) in CHC patients with genotype 1b and high viral loads. During IT with nIFN-β, virologic response rates in group A and group B were 10% and 8% (p = 0.6792) at week 4, 30% and 16% (p = 0.6989) at week 12 and 47% and 20% (p = 0.0887) at week 24 respectively. During and after the treatment with PR alone or PI/PR, virologic response rates in groups A and B were 50% and 82% (p = 0.01535) at week 4, 53% and 91% (p = 0.006745) at week 8, 57% and 91% (p = 0.001126) at week 12, 57% and 100% (p < 0.001845) at the end of the treatment and 57% and 80% (p < 0.005166) after treatment cessation. IT with PI/PR linked to the restoration of innate immune response was tolerated well, overcame virological breakthrough, enhanced early virologic responses, and resulted in a sustained virologic response in difficult-to-treat CHC patients. IT with PI/PR is beneficial for treating difficult-to-treat CHC patients.
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.