BACKGROUND/AIMS: The incidence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) chronic hepatitis B (CHB) during sequential lamivudine (LAM) and adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) treatment is increasing. We investigated the antiviral efficacies of various rescue regimens in patients who failed sequential LAM-ADV treatment. METHODS: Forty-eight patients (83.3% of whom were HBeAg-positive) who failed sequential LAM-ADV treatment were treated with one of the following regimens: entecavir (ETV) (1 mg) monotherapy (n=16), LAM+ADV combination therapy (n=20), or ETV (1 mg)+ADV combination therapy (n=12). All patients had confirmed genotypic resistance to both LAM and ADV and were evaluated every 12 weeks. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics and treatment duration did not differ significantly among the study groups. During the treatment period (median duration: 100 weeks), the decline of serum HBV DNA from baseline tended to be greatest in the ETV+ADV group at all-time points (week 48: -2.55 log(10) IU/mL, week 96: -4.27 log(10) IU/mL), but the difference was not statistically significant. The ETV+ADV group also tended to have higher virologic response rates at 96 weeks compared to the ETV monotherapy or LAM+ADV groups (40.0% vs. 20.0% or 20.0%, P=0.656), and less virologic breakthrough was observed compared to the ETV monotherapy or LAM+ADV groups (8.3% vs. 37.5% or 30.0%; P=0.219), but again, the differences were not statistically significant. HBeAg loss occurred in one patient in the ETV+ADV group, in two in the ETV monotherapy group, and in none of the LAM+ADV group. The safety profiles were similar in each arm. CONCLUSIONS: There was a nonsignificant tendency toward better antiviral efficacy with ETV+ADV combination therapy compared to LAM+ADV combination therapy and ETV monotherapy for MDR CHB in Korea, where tenofovir is not yet available.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The incidence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) chronic hepatitis B (CHB) during sequential lamivudine (LAM) and adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) treatment is increasing. We investigated the antiviral efficacies of various rescue regimens in patients who failed sequential LAM-ADV treatment. METHODS: Forty-eight patients (83.3% of whom were HBeAg-positive) who failed sequential LAM-ADV treatment were treated with one of the following regimens: entecavir (ETV) (1 mg) monotherapy (n=16), LAM+ADV combination therapy (n=20), or ETV (1 mg)+ADV combination therapy (n=12). All patients had confirmed genotypic resistance to both LAM and ADV and were evaluated every 12 weeks. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics and treatment duration did not differ significantly among the study groups. During the treatment period (median duration: 100 weeks), the decline of serum HBV DNA from baseline tended to be greatest in the ETV+ADV group at all-time points (week 48: -2.55 log(10) IU/mL, week 96: -4.27 log(10) IU/mL), but the difference was not statistically significant. The ETV+ADV group also tended to have higher virologic response rates at 96 weeks compared to the ETV monotherapy or LAM+ADV groups (40.0% vs. 20.0% or 20.0%, P=0.656), and less virologic breakthrough was observed compared to the ETV monotherapy or LAM+ADV groups (8.3% vs. 37.5% or 30.0%; P=0.219), but again, the differences were not statistically significant. HBeAg loss occurred in one patient in the ETV+ADV group, in two in the ETV monotherapy group, and in none of the LAM+ADV group. The safety profiles were similar in each arm. CONCLUSIONS: There was a nonsignificant tendency toward better antiviral efficacy with ETV+ADV combination therapy compared to LAM+ADV combination therapy and ETV monotherapy for MDR CHB in Korea, where tenofovir is not yet available.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adefovir; Entecavir; Hepatitis B; Hepatitis B virus; Multidrug resistance
Authors: S J Patterson; J George; S I Strasser; A U Lee; W Sievert; A J Nicoll; P V Desmond; S K Roberts; S Locarnini; S Bowden; P W Angus Journal: Gut Date: 2010-10-29 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Han Jak Ryu; Jung Min Lee; Sang Hoon Ahn; Do Young Kim; Myoung Ha Lee; Kwang-Hyub Han; Chae Yoon Chon; Jun Yong Park Journal: J Med Virol Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 2.327
Authors: Kyung Ho Han; Sun Pyo Hong; Seo Hee Choi; Soo-Kyung Shin; Sung Won Cho; Sang Hoon Ahn; Ji-Sook Hahn; Soo-Ok Kim Journal: Antivir Ther Date: 2011
Authors: Young Eun Chon; Seung Up Kim; Chun Kyon Lee; Jeong Heo; Ja Kyung Kim; Ki Tae Yoon; Mong Cho; Kwan Sik Lee; Dong Hwan Kim; Eun Hee Choi; Jun Yong Park; Do Young Kim; Chae Yoon Chon; Kwang-Hyub Han; Sang Hoon Ahn Journal: Antivir Ther Date: 2011
Authors: Sang Hoon Ahn; Henry L Y Chan; Pei-Jer Chen; Jun Cheng; Mahesh K Goenka; Jinlin Hou; Seng Gee Lim; Masao Omata; Teerha Piratvisuth; Qing Xie; Hyung Joon Yim; Man-Fung Yuen Journal: Hepatol Int Date: 2010-02-20 Impact factor: 6.047
Authors: Robert Perrillo; Hie-Won Hann; David Mutimer; Bernard Willems; Nancy Leung; William M Lee; Alison Moorat; Stephen Gardner; Mary Woessner; Eric Bourne; Carol L Brosgart; Eugene Schiff Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Sung Soo Ahn; Young Eun Chon; Beom Kyung Kim; Seung Up Kim; Do Young Kim; Sang Hoon Ahn; Kwang-Hyub Han; Jun Yong Park Journal: Clin Mol Hepatol Date: 2014-09-25
Authors: Yang Wang; Shuang Liu; Y U Chen; Sujun Zheng; L I Zhou; Fengmin Lu; Zhongping Duan Journal: Exp Ther Med Date: 2016-04-06 Impact factor: 2.447