4.2 Article

Serial HBV DNA levels in patients with persistently normal transaminase over 10 years following spontaneous HBeAg seroconversion

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIRAL HEPATITIS
卷 19, 期 2, 页码 138-146

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2893.2011.01450.x

关键词

alanine aminotransferase; chronic hepatitis B; hepatitis B surface antigen; inactive hepatitis B surface antigen carriers

资金

  1. Chang Gung Medical Research Fund [SMRPG1005, BMRPG380061]
  2. Prosperous Foundation, Taipei, Taiwan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

. Earlier studies addressing the hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA cut-off level for inactive chronic HBV infection largely involved patients with normal alanine aminotransferase (ALT) for only 12 years and based on a single time HBV DNA assay. This study was conducted to address this issue using serial HBV DNA assays in patients with persistently normal ALT (PNALT) over 10 years following spontaneous hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) seroconversion. Serial serum specimens (mean 9 samples per patient) of 62 patients with PNALT and no disease progression over 10 years (median 18.1 years) after spontaneous HBeAg seroconversion were assayed for HBV DNA. Excluding assays within 1 year after HBeAg seroconversion, 21% and 82.3% of the patients with PNALT had HBV DNA levels persistently lower than 4 log10 and 5 log10 copies/mL, respectively, and only 8% had a level =5 log10 copies/mL in at least two assays. Of the 27 patients with PNALT defined by ALT <30 U/L for male and <19 U/L for female, only 33% had serum HBV DNA level persistently <4 log10 copies/mL. There was no significant difference in the serial HBV DNA changes among patients with different gender, HBV genotype or age at HBeAg seroconversion. Liver biopsy in nine patients invariably showed minimal necroinflammation and one showed Ishak fibrosis score 4. These results suggest that 5 log10 copies/mL (20 000 IU/mL) is a more appropriate cut-off HBV DNA level for inactive chronic HBV infection in the setting of PNALT.

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

4.2
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