Trial reportHepatology international2016
Entecavir plus tenofovir combination therapy for chronic hepatitis B in patients with previous nucleos(t)ide treatment failure.
Trial report in Hepatology international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antiviral treatment for treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Dual therapy with nucleos(t)ide analogues in the prevention of hepatitis B virus recurrence after liver transplantation: Two case reports.World journal of hepatology · 2025Article
- Efficacy of different nucleoside analog rescue therapies for entecavir-resistant chronic hepatitis B patients.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- HBV replication inhibitors.Antiviral research · 2020Review
- Treatment Outcome and Renal Safety of 3-Year Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Therapy in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients with Preserved Glomerular Filtration Rate.Gut and liver · 2019Article
- Incident hepatocellular carcinoma developing during tenofovir alafenamide treatment as a rescue therapy for multi-drug resistant hepatitis B virus infection: A case report and review of the literature.World journal of clinical cases · 2018Article
- Recommendations for the treatment of hepatitis B in 2017.Clinical and experimental hepatology · 2017Review
- Early hepatitis B viral DNA clearance predicts treatment response at week 96.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Observational
- Management of Antiviral Resistance in Chronic Hepatitis B.Gut and liver · 2017Review
- Renal safety of tenofovir and/or entecavir in patients with chronic HBV monoinfection.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 11 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsIn patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) who have failed on other nucleos(t)ide analogs (NUCs), the combination of entecavir (ETV) plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), two potent agents with non-overlapping resistance profiles, may provide a single rescue regimen.
methodsIn this single-arm, open-label study, 92 CHB patients with a primary non-response, partial response, or virologic breakthrough on their current NUC were switched to ETV (1 mg) plus TDF (300 mg) and treated for 96 weeks.
resultsAt baseline, 62 % of patients were HBeAg(+) and mean HBV DNA was 4.4 log10IU/mL. Patients had received ≥1 line of prior NUC therapy, with the latest regimen consisting of monotherapy with ETV (53 %), lamivudine (LVD 22 %), TDF (12 %), adefovir (ADV 4 %), or telbivudine (2 %), or combinations of these agents (7 %); 58 % had evidence of single- or multidrug resistance mutations (LVD 52 %, ETV 26 %; ADV 7 %). Response rates for HBV DNA <50 IU/mL were 76 % (70/92) at week 48 (primary endpoint), and 85 % (78/92) at week 96, including 80 % (16/20) in prior LVD failures, 100 % (4/4) in ADV failures, 82 % (9/11) in TDF failures, and 88 % (42/48) in ETV failures. No treatment-emergent resistance to ETV or ADV was observed. ETV/TDF was well tolerated, with no significant renal or additive toxicities observed.
conclusionsIn NUC-experienced patients who have failed prior NUC therapy, ETV/TDF was well tolerated and effective, achieving virologic suppression through 96 weeks in the majority (85 %), irrespective of prior NUC exposure, without occurrence of treatment-emergent resistance to either agent.
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.