| Literature DB >> 29805811 |
Phimpha Paboriboune1, Thomas Vial2, François Chassagne2, Philavanh Sitbounlang1, Sengaloun Soundala1, Stéphane Bertani2, Davone Sengmanothong1, Francois-Xavier Babin3, Nicolas Steenkeste3, Paul Dény4,5, Pascal Pineau6, Eric Deharo2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Lao PDR is one of the most highly endemic countries for hepatitis B in Asia and the second country for liver cancer incidence. Therefore, the follow-up of infected individuals through predictive serological markers is of utmost importance to monitor the progression of the pathology and take the decision on treatment.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29805811 PMCID: PMC5899863 DOI: 10.1155/2018/9462475
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Hepatol
Figure 1Number of patients followed (orange line) and number of samplings received and performed at CILM (blue line) from January 2010 to November 2016.
Figure 2Age-based distribution of patients followed at CILM according to their gender (blue: male; red: female).
Figure 3Distribution of the viral load at first sampling, according to age, in people from the “Detectable and Quantifiable” category.
Figure 4Mean viral load (blue bars) and aminotransferases (ALAT in red, ASAT in green) according to groups of age (ten years) at first sampling in the DQ category (only patients with VL and aminotransferases, excluding patients without aminotransferases).
Figure 5ASAT (a) and ALAT (b) concentrations according to 10-year classes of age of patients.
Figure 6Evolution of the number of patients treated and medicines administered to patients received at CILM between January 2010 and November 2016.
Figure 7Distribution of drugs (%) used in all therapeutic schemes (single, dual, and triple).
Figure 8Distribution of drugs (%) used in monotherapy.
Type of drugs, number, and % on total and dual treatments.
| Dual therapies | Nb | % of total treatment ( | % of dual therapy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cycloferon + Adefovir | 55 | 7.9% | 43.3% |
| Cycloferon + Lamivudine | 42 | 6.1% | 33.0% |
| Adefovir + Lamivudine | 9 | 1.3% | 7.1% |
| Cycloferon + Tenofovir | 5 | 0.7% | 4.0% |
| Tenofovir + Adefovir | 4 | 0.6% | 3.2% |
| Tenofovir + Lamivudine | 4 | 0.6% | 3.2% |
| Pegasys + Tenofovir | 3 | 0.4% | 2.4% |
| Pegasys + Adefovir | 2 | 0.3% | 1.6% |
| Entecavir + Tenofovir | 1 | 0.1% | 0.8% |
| Interferon + Cycloferon | 1 | 0.1% | 0.8% |
| Entecavir + Pegasys | 1 | 0.1% | 0.8% |
|
| |||
|
|
|
| |
Type of drugs, number, and % on total and triple treatments.
| Triple therapies | Nb | % of total treatment | % of triple therapy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cycloferon + Lamivudine + Adefovir | 29 | 4.2% | 63.0% |
| Cycloferon + Lamivudine + Pegasys | 3 | 0.4% | 6.5% |
| Adefovir + Lamivudine + Tenofovir | 2 | 0.3% | 4.3% |
| Adefovir + Tenofovir + Cycloferon | 2 | 0.3% | 4.3% |
| Lamivudine + Cycloferon + Ribavirin | 2 | 0.3% | 4.3% |
| Adefovir + Cycloferon + Entecavir | 1 | 0.1% | 2.2% |
| Adefovir + Cycloferon + Interferon | 1 | 0.1% | 2.2% |
| Adefovir + Cycloferon + Pegasys | 1 | 0.1% | 2.2% |
| Cycloferon + Interferon + Entecavir | 1 | 0.1% | 2.2% |
| Cycloferon + Lamivudine + Entecavir | 1 | 0.1% | 2.2% |
| Cycloferon + Lamivudine + Tenofovir | 1 | 0.1% | 2.2% |
| Interferon + Cycloferon + Lamivudine | 1 | 0.1% | 2.2% |
| Pegasys + Ribavirin + Tenofovir | 1 | 0.1% | 2.2% |
|
| |||
|
|
|
| |