SynthesisMedicine2019
Efficacy and safety of direct-acting antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis C genotype 6: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A province-by-province cost-effectiveness analysis and budget impact analysis of one-time birth cohort screening of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in Canada.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Comparison of Simple RNA Extraction Methods for Molecular Diagnosis of Hepatitis C Virus in Plasma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Real-world effectiveness of direct-acting antivirals in people living with human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C virus genotype 6 infections.World journal of gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Impact of hepatitis C remission on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: primary care outpatient experience.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2021Article
- Article
- HCV Replicon Systems: Workhorses of Drug Discovery and Resistance.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBecause of the heterogeneity of hepatitis C virus (HCV) distribution of different genotypes, large-scale clinical trials on direct-acting antiviral (DAA) mainly included patients with genotype 1 and genotype 3 infection. Data on the efficacy of direct-acting antiviral agents in patients with chronic genotype 6 HCV infection are limited.
methodsThe PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Libraries were searched comprehensively. All published clinical trials assessing the efficacy of DAA therapy for patients with chronic genotype 6 HCV infection were included. Sustained virological response (SVR) and rapid virological response (RVR) were pooled. Additional meta-analyses were also performed to compare the efficacy of DAA therapy in HCV-6 versus HCV-1 or HCV-3 patients.
resultsSeventeen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled SVR of all single arms was 95% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90-0.97]. The pooled RVR of all single arms was 97% (95% CI: 0.95-0.99). The SVR and RVR were both similar between HCV-6 and HCV-1 or HCV-3. Adverse events were common but rarely caused treatment interruption.
conclusionBased on the available data, our results indicate that DAA treatment is effective and safe for patients with genotype 6 HCV infection, and the efficacy was similar compared to patients with genotype 1 HCV or genotype 3 HCV infection.
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.