ReviewJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology2024
Virological markers for clinical trials in chronic viral hepatitis.
Review in JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Group-based trajectory modeling for declines in hepatitis B surface antigen over time accurately identifies chronic hepatitis B patients achieving functional cure: a single-center cohort study in China.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Real-world effectiveness of pangenotypic direct-acting antivirals in chronic hepatitis C: A retrospective cohort study.Medicine · 2026Article
- From Diagnosis to Durability: A Review of the European Bulevirtide Experience and Practical Learnings for CHD Management.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2026Review
- Hepatitis D Virus: Enigmas and Gaps of Knowledge.Viruses · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic hepatitis virus infections remain a major public health problem, despite significant therapeutic advances over the past two decades. Considerable progress has been made in the treatment of chronic viral hepatitis, but continued efforts are needed to develop and bring to market new drugs to fill the gaps in the current therapeutic armamentarium. Thus, clinical trials to assess the safety and efficacy of these new therapeutic approaches, including the selection of reliable and objective treatment endpoints, are still needed. Virological biomarkers play an important role in the diagnosis, monitoring, and evaluation of antiviral treatment efficacy. They are often used as primary or secondary endpoints in the evaluation of new treatments for chronic viral hepatitis. However, these markers are not all equally informative. The aim of this review article is to provide a comprehensive overview of the available virological tests for chronic viral hepatitis due to hepatitis B, D, C and E viruses, the information they provide and lack, the specific challenges associated with each, and their use in clinical trials of new treatments.
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.