SynthesisViruses2023
Lamivudine and Entecavir for Acute Hepatitis B: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Viruses, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Insight into the Biology of Hepatitis B Virus and Recent Therapeutic Approaches.Current microbiology · 2026Review
- Mechanical mechanics-reclaiming a new battlefield for chronic liver disease.Journal of advanced research · 2026Review
- Entecavir provides favorable virological control but minimal metabolic benefit in patients with Chronic Hepatitis B and MAFLD.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Exploring theophylline-1,2,4-triazole tetheredFrontiers in chemistry · 2024Article
- Clinical significance of liver biopsy in the diagnosis of liver disease and the evaluation of the clinical efficacy of antiviral treatment for chronic hepatitis B.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute hepatitis B infection is associated with severe liver disease and chronic sequelae in some cases. The purpose of this review was to determine the efficacy of nucleoside analogues (NA) (lamivudine versus entecavir) compared to placebo or no intervention for treating acute primary HBV infection.
methodsA meta-analysis for drug intervention was performed, following a fixed-effect model. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized studies that evaluated the outcomes of NA in acute hepatitis B infection were included. The following outcomes were considered: virological cure (PCR negative), elimination of acute infection (seroconversion of HBsAg), mortality, and serious adverse events.
resultsFive trials with 627 adult participants with severe acute hepatitis B defined by biochemical and serologic parameters were included. Virological cure did not favor any intervention: OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.7 (
conclusionThere is insufficient evidence that NA obtain superior efficacy compared with placebo/standard-of-care in patients with acute viral hepatitis, based on low quality evidence.
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.