ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022
Comparing the efficacy and safety of tenofovir and adefovir or combined drug treatment for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) affects a vast population globally. A variety of drugs are available for the treatment of CHB, including tenofovir (TDF) and adefovir (ADV). However, the efficacy of monotherapy drug treatment is inconclusive, the safety and efficacy of TDF remain unclear, more data are needed to be included and combined drug treatment is considered to exhibit higher efficacy. To explore this issue, we performed a current literature review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of ADV Methods: We systematically searched China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Chinese VIP, and Wanfang Data, for relevant clinical trials since July 2015, all included studies were based on PICOS principles and evaluated independently by the reviewers in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook (Rob2.0). A meta-analysis was performed by using Review Manager 5.4. Results: We included a total of 32 studies, including 31 randomized controlled trials and one retrospective study involving 2,473 patients. The results revealed a low risk of bias in included studies, that the virologic response of TDF was superior to ADV (P<0.05). And TDF was also superior to ADV in Serum creatinine levels, Immunologic function, and safety profile. However, when ADV was combined with other medications, it was superior to TDF in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level and Tbil level and adverse reactions, but on other indicators, TDF was superior to drug combination therapy. Conclusions: Results showed that TDF was superior to ADV in the parameters of ALT, hepatitis B virus (HBV)-DNA reduction, HBeAg-negative conversion rate, safety, and total bilirubin levels in patients with CHB. However, when ADV was combined with LAM or ETV, they often showed the same therapeutic effect as TDF in parameters such as ALT level and Tbil level and combined therapy can effectively reduce the occurrence of adverse reactions. In this study, because the sample source countries were limited, a greater number of global studies are needed in the future to verify the current findings.
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.