BACKGROUND: The response rate to antiviral therapy varies greatly among individuals, and its prediction is still very challenging. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the usefulness of serum hepatitis B virus large surface protein (LHBs) levels compared with HBsAg in prediction of the antiviral treatment effect. STUDY DESIGN: Quantification of LHBs, HBsAg and HBV DNA was carried out at baseline and during antiviral therapy (weeks 4, 12, 24, 36 and 48) in HBeAg-positive patients treated with peginterferon alfa-2a (n = 21) or entecavir (n = 41). RESULTS: The serum LHBs concentration was correlated positively with HBV DNA and HBsAg (r = 0.635 and 0.588, respectively). LHBs and HBV DNA levels decreased significantly in a biphasic manner and HBsAg level tended to decrease slowly in both treatment groups. In peginterferon alfa-2a group, the cutoff of 88.46 ng/ml in serum LHBs at week 4 gave the best AUC ( = 0.96) with positive and negative predictive values of 88.9% and 100%, in association with virological response (VR). Serum LHBs level at week 4 also showed an association with VR in entecavir group (AUC 0.78). The predictive model incorporating LHBs, HBsAg and HBV DNA could discriminate VR at baseline (AUC 0.79) and showed an association with serological response (SR) at week 12 (AUC 0.80) in peginterferon alfa-2a group. CONCLUSIONS: On-treatment quantification of serum LHBs may be a more useful parameter for predicting VR in patients on peginterferon alfa-2a than those on entecavir. Combining LHBs, HBsAg and HBV DNA can predict VR and SR more effectively and earlier.
BACKGROUND: The response rate to antiviral therapy varies greatly among individuals, and its prediction is still very challenging. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the usefulness of serum hepatitis B virus large surface protein (LHBs) levels compared with HBsAg in prediction of the antiviral treatment effect. STUDY DESIGN: Quantification of LHBs, HBsAg and HBV DNA was carried out at baseline and during antiviral therapy (weeks 4, 12, 24, 36 and 48) in HBeAg-positive patients treated with peginterferon alfa-2a (n = 21) or entecavir (n = 41). RESULTS: The serum LHBs concentration was correlated positively with HBV DNA and HBsAg (r = 0.635 and 0.588, respectively). LHBs and HBV DNA levels decreased significantly in a biphasic manner and HBsAg level tended to decrease slowly in both treatment groups. In peginterferon alfa-2a group, the cutoff of 88.46 ng/ml in serum LHBs at week 4 gave the best AUC ( = 0.96) with positive and negative predictive values of 88.9% and 100%, in association with virological response (VR). Serum LHBs level at week 4 also showed an association with VR in entecavir group (AUC 0.78). The predictive model incorporating LHBs, HBsAg and HBV DNA could discriminate VR at baseline (AUC 0.79) and showed an association with serological response (SR) at week 12 (AUC 0.80) in peginterferon alfa-2a group. CONCLUSIONS: On-treatment quantification of serum LHBs may be a more useful parameter for predicting VR in patients on peginterferon alfa-2a than those on entecavir. Combining LHBs, HBsAg and HBV DNA can predict VR and SR more effectively and earlier.