4.8 Article

Hepatitis B virus quasispecies susceptibility to entecavir confirms the relationship between genotypic resistance and patient virologic response

期刊

JOURNAL OF HEPATOLOGY
卷 48, 期 6, 页码 895-902

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2007.12.024

关键词

hepatitis B virus; entecavir; baraclude; resistance; reverse transcriptase

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Aims: The efficacy of anti-viral therapy for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) is lost upon the emergence of resistant virus. Using >500 patient HBV isolates from several entecavir clinical trials, we show that phenotypic susceptibility correlates with genotypic resistance and patient virologic responses. Methods: The full-length HBV or reverse transcriptase gene was amplified from patient sera, sequenced, and cloned into an HBV expression vector. Entecavir susceptibilities of individual virus clones and patient quasispecies populations were analyzed in conjunction with the sequenced resistance genotype and the patient's virologic response. Results: Entecavir susceptibility decreased similar to 8-fold for isolates with various constellations of lamivudine resistance substitutions. The spectrum of additional substitutions that emerged during therapy at residues rtT184, rtS202, or rtM250 displayed varying levels of entecavir susceptibility according to the specific resistance substitutions and the proportion of resistant variants in the quasispecies. Phenotypic analyses of samples associated with virologic breakthrough confirmed the role of these residue changes in entecavir resistance. Additional longitudinal phenotypic analyses showed that decreased susceptibility correlated with both genotypic resistance and increased circulating HBV DNA. Conclusions: HBV phenotypic analysis provides additional insight as part of a resistance monitoring program that includes genotypic analysis and quantification of circulating virus. (c) 2008 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据