4.6 Article

De novo combination of lamivudine and adefovir versus entecavir monotherapy for the treatment of na⟨ve HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B patients

Journal

HEPATOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
Volume 5, Issue 2, Pages 671-676

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12072-010-9243-x

Keywords

Chronic hepatitis B; HBeAg-negative; Lamivudine; Adefovir dipivoxil; Combination treatment; Entecavir; Monotherapy

Funding

  1. National Key Technologies Research and Development Program of China [2008ZX10002-006, 2008ZX10005-008]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [2007CB512902, 2006CB504302]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Either combination treatment or monotherapy using agents with a high genetic barrier are recommended for hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-negative chronic hepatitis B (CHB). The aim of this study was to compare effect of na < ve HBeAg-negative CHB patients with either de novo combination of lamivudine (LAM) and adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) or entecavir (ETV) monotherapy. HBeAg-negative CHB patients (n = 71) with ALT levels between 2 and 10 times the upper normal limit and HBV DNA levels > 10(4) copies/mL were enrolled. Patients were treated with either LAM 100 mg plus ADV 10 mg per day (n = 31) or ETV 0.5 mg per day (n = 40) for 48 weeks. The average reduction in HBV DNA level compared with baseline were 5.16 +/- A 1.69 log in the LAM + ADV group and 5.36 +/- A 1.70 log in the ETV group by week 48 (P = 0.624). The virological response (VR) rates were 80.65 and 77.5%, the biochemical response (BR) rates were 93.55 and 90.00% at week 48 in the LAM + ADV and ETV groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in the VR and BR between the two groups. During the 48-week treatment period, virological breakthrough and serious side effects were not noted in any patient. Both LAM + ADV combination therapy and ETV monotherapy are effective in na < ve HBeAg-negative CHB patients, but further studies are needed to obtain long-term results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available