Serum miR-192-5p levels predict the efficacy of pegylated interferon therapy for chronic hepatitis B.

We examined the association between serum miRNA (-192-5p, -122-3p, -320a and -6126-5p) levels and the efficacy of pegylated interferon (Peg-IFN) monotherapy for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. We enrolled 61 CHB patients treated with Peg-IFNα-2a weekly for 48 weeks, of whom 12 had a virological response (VR) and 49 did not VR (non-VR). A VR was defined as HBV DNA < 2,000 IU/ml, hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-negative, and nucleos(t)ide analogue free at 48 weeks after the end of treatment. The non-VR group showed a significantly higher HBeAg-positivity rate, ALT, HBV DNA, and serum miR-192-5p levels at baseline (P = 0.024, P = 0.020, P = 0.007, P = 0.021, respectively). Serum miR-192-5p levels at 24-weeks after the start of treatment were also significantly higher in the non-VR than the VR group (P = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis for predicting VR showed that miR-192-5p level at baseline was an independent factor (Odds 4.5, P = 0.041). Serum miR-192-5p levels were significantly correlated with the levels of HBV DNA, hepatitis B core-related antigen, and hepatitis B surface antigen (r = 0.484, 0.384 and 0.759, respectively). The serum miR-192-5p level was useful as a biomarker for the therapeutic efficacy of Peg-IFN in CHB treatment.

Introduction

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a global public health problem, with approximately 240 million people, or 6% of the world’s population, chronically infected with HBV [1]. The prevalence of hepatitis B is highest in the Western Pacific and African regions, affecting 5% to 7% and > 8% of the adult population, respectively [2].

The long-term goal of antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) has been to eliminate hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). However, the current standard therapies using nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) or pegylated interferon (Peg-IFN) are difficult to achieve the elimination of HBsAg [3]. Nucleos(t)ide analogues have been shown to be highly safe across a wide range of patients with CHB, including decompensated cirrhosis and pregnancy [4]. However, recurrence of elevated levels of HBV DNA and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) is likely when NAs treatment is discontinued, therefore long-term administration of NAs is often required [5]. Pegylated interferon is thought to be more effective than lamivudine based on HBV DNA suppression and seroconversion of HBsAg antibody [6]. Furthermore, Peg-IFN has the advantage of maintaining a drug-free therapeutic effect without additional drug administration after treatment in CHB patients who exhibit a therapeutic response [7, 8]. However, the therapeutic effect of Peg-IFN is obtained in only 20% to 30% of patients who are hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and in 20% to 40% of HBeAg-negative patients [6]. Additionally, Peg-IFN therapy is associated with various side effects such as fever, fatigue, depression, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia [7]. The levels of ALT and HBV DNA, and HBV genotype at baseline, have been reported to significantly affect the response to Peg-IFN therapy after 24-weeks of treatment [8-10]. Along these lines, a reliable marker for the efficacy of Peg-IFN therapy in CHB is needed [11].

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are involved in various biological phenomena, such as cell development, differentiation, proliferation, apoptosis, and metabolism and also play roles in the pathogenesis of inflammation, fibrogenesis, and carcinogenesis in liver diseases [12, 13]. Several studies to date have revealed an association between serum miRNA levels and the response to IFN therapy in CHB. Brunetto et al. showed that the levels of several serum miRNAs such as miR-192-5p, miR-320a, and miR-122-3p were related to the response to IFN therapy in CHB [14]. A study by Fujita et al. revealed that higher miR-6126-5p levels in sera during Peg-IFN therapy with or without NAs for CHB predicted the reduction of HBsAg after the completion of therapy [15]. However, these studies analyzed only a relatively small numbers of patients. Therefore, the association between serum expression levels of these miRNAs and the response to IFN therapy in CHB should be validated in independent cohorts.

Herein, we aimed to validate the association between the levels of serum miR-192-5p, 320a, 122-3p, and 6126-5p with the efficacy of Peg-IFN monotherapy for CHB patients.

Materials and methods

Patients and study design

The design of this retrospective study is shown in Fig 1. We enrolled 61 CHB patients from 2012 to 2016 in 8 hospitals (Nagoya City University Hospital, Shinshu University Hospital, Hyogo College of Medicine Hospital, Osaka City University Hospital, Chiba University Hospital, St. Marianna Medical University Hospital, Hiroshima University Hospital, and Nippon Medical School Chiba Hokusoh Hospital). All patients were chronically infected with HBV and confirmed to be HBsAg-positive for at least 6 months. Patients with a history of hepatocellular carcinoma, cirrhosis, other causes of liver disease such as autoimmune hepatitis and primary biliary cirrhosis, or co-infection with hepatitis C virus or human immunodeficiency virus were excluded from this study. HBeAg was positive in 33 patients and negative in 28.

Fig 1

Study design.

* Virological response (VR) was defined as HBV DNA < 2,000 IU/mL. HBeAg-negative, nucleos(t)ide analogue free at the end of observation (48 weeks after the end of Peg-IFN therapy). Abbreviations: CHB, chronic hepatitis B; HBeAg, hepatitis B e antigen; Peg-IFN, pegylated interferon; EOT, end of treatment.

The Guidelines for Hepatitis B Treatment by the Japanese Society of Hepatology recommend to treat CHB patients with ALT ≥ 31 U/L and HBV DNA ≥ 2,000 IU/mL [16]. In addition, referring to several predictive factors of response to IFN therapy in CHB, such as HBeAg status, HBV DNA, and ALT levels, the attending physicians introduced Peg-IFN therapy to the subjects in this study. None of the patients received NAs within 48 weeks prior to Peg-IFN treatment. Patients were treated with Peg-IFNα-2a weekly for 48 weeks and were observed for 48 weeks after the end of treatment (EOT) with monitoring at monthly intervals. At each follow-up, data for biochemical markers, virological markers, blood counts, and clinical status were recorded. Following data collection, the patients were divided into virological response (VR) and non-VR groups. The VR was defined as ALT < 31U/L, HBV DNA < 2,000 IU/mL, HBeAg-negative, and no need for administration of NAs until the end of the observation period (48 weeks after the EOT). Serum samples were collected at baseline and 24-weeks during the treatment.

Written informed consent was obtained from all individual participants. The study protocol conformed to the ethics guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the institutional ethics review committee of Nagoya City University Hospital (60-08-0024).

We collected serum from 61 patients who received Peg-IFN monotherapy for untreated CHB. Patients were treated with Peg-IFNα-2a weekly for 48 weeks and observed up to 48 weeks after therapy. Serum samples were collected at baseline and 24-weeks during the treatment. The VR was defined as ALT < 31U/L, HBV DNA < 2,000 IU/mL, HBeAg-negative, and NAs free at 48 weeks after the EOT. There were 12 VR cases and 49 non-VR cases in this study, and comparisons were made between the VR group and the non-VR group.

Laboratory tests and serological and virological assays

Hematologic and blood chemistry tests were carried out using standard assays. Serum HBV DNA levels were measured using COBAS TaqMan HBV 2.0 (Roche Diagnostics K. K., Tokyo, Japan [lower limit of detection, 20 IU/mL]) [17]. Positive results (signals) below the quantitative HBV DNA concentrations were referred to as “detected”, which was defined as < 1.3 log IU/mL, and negative signals, as “not detected”. HBeAg was determined using an HISCL HBeAg kit (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) and HBsAg was determined using an HISCL HBsAg (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) (detection range, 30 to 2,500,000 mIU/mL). Hepatitis B core-related antigen (HBcrAg) was determined by Lumipulse HBcrAg assay (Fujirebio.K.K., Tokyo, Japan) (detection range, 3.0 to 6.7 log U/mL). The genotypes of HBV were determined serologically by enzyme immunoassay using commercial kits, HBV GENOTYPE EIA (Institutes of Immunology Co., LTD, Tokyo, Japan).

Sampling serum and isolation of RNA

We followed the protocols of sampling serum and isolation of RNA as we described previously [18]. Peripheral blood was collected from each participant at baseline and during 24-week treatment and was centrifuged at 1,500 g for 5 minutes at room temperature. After serum separation, the samples were stored at -80°C until use. Total RNAs including miRNAs in serum were purified with miRNeasy Serum/Plasma kits (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) following the manufacturer’s instructions. Specifically, we extracted total RNA from 200 μL of serum from each subject, to which 5.6 × 108 copies of Caenorhabditis elegans cel-miR-39-3p (cel-miR-39-3p) were added as spike-in RNA for later normalization; then total RNA was eluted from each column with 30 μL of nuclease-free water. The concentration of total RNA was quantified using a NanoDrop 2000c spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA).

Measurement of serum miRNAs

The levels of miRNA levels were determined using by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) with Step One Plus (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA) and TaqMan MicroRNA Assay: hsa-miR-192-5p (assay ID 000491), has-miR-122-3p (assay ID 002130), has-miR-320a (assay ID 002277), hsa-miR-6126-5p (assay ID 475618), and cel-miR-39-3p (assay ID 000200) (Thermo Fisher Scientific). One microliter of total RNA extracted from serum were subjected to reverse transcription with a TaqMan MicroRNA Reverse Transcription Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and the respective TaqMan MicroRNA Assay reagents for the target molecules, in a total volume of 15 μL, followed by qRT-PCR in a total volume of 20 μL, according to the manufacturer’s protocol. Amplification was carried out as follows: 95°C for 10 min, 45 cycles at 95°C for 15 s and 60°C for 60 s. All reactions were carried out in duplicate. Cycle threshold (Ct) values were calculated using Step One Software v2.3 (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Expression levels of miRNAs were normalized to those of the spike-in cel-miR-39-3p. The expression levels were determined by the 2-ΔCt method, in which ΔCt was calculated as: ΔCt = Ct (miRNA (miR-192-5p, miR-122-3p, miR-320a and miR-6126-5p)–Ct (cel-miR-39-3p)).

Statistical analysis

Categorical variables were compared between groups by chi-square test, and non-categorical variables were analyzed by Mann–Whitney U test. Changes in serum miRNA levels from baseline to 24-weeks were compared by two-way analysis of variance. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were carried out and the AUC was calculated to evaluate the feasibility of using the miRNA levels as markers for discriminating VR. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine whether several covariates were independently associated with VR. A P value < 0.05 was considered significant in all tests was set as the target variables in the multiple regression formula for in multivariate analysis. Correlation coefficients were calculated using Pearson’s correlation test. Statistical analyses were performed using BellCurve Excel statistics (SSRI Inc., Tokyo, Japan).

Results

Comparison of clinical characteristics at baseline according to the efficacy of Peg-IFN therapy

The clinical characteristics between the VR and the non-VR groups at baseline are shown in Table 1. At the end of the observation period, 12 patients had a VR and 49 had non-VR. Compared with the VR group, the non-VR group had a significantly higher HBeAg-positive rate and levels of ALT, HBV DNA, and serum miR-192-5p at baseline (P = 0.024, P = 0.020, P = 0.007, P = 0.021, respectively). It has been reported that HBeAg-negative patients at baseline were successfully treated with Peg-IFN compared to HBeAg-positive patients at baseline [19, 20]. Therefore, we also compared clinical characteristics between the VR and non-VR groups among HBeAg-negative patients, which showed that there was no significant difference in ALT and HBV DNA levels, while miR-192-5p levels tended to be higher in the non-VR group (S1 Table). Since most patients had HBV genotype C in this study, there was no significant difference of HBV genotypes between the VR and non-VR groups.

Table 1

Clinical characteristics of chronic Hepatitis B patients and comparison between VR group and non-VR group at baseline.

Factor	Total (n = 61)	VR group (n = 12)	non-VR group (n = 49)	P-value
Age, years	35 (31–42)	42 (31–46)	35 (31–39)	0.154
Male, n (%)	35 (57)	5 (42)	30 (61)	0.367
HBV genotype A/B/C	4 / 6 / 51	2 / 1 / 9	2 / 5 / 42	0.287
AST (U/L)	47 (28–102)	38 (22–69)	49 (31–103)	0.178
ALT (U/L)	79 (38–171)	32 (26–94)	85 (40–182)	0.020
Platelet counts (×109/L)	198 (166–224)	215 (182–220)	197 (166–226)	0.508
FIB-4 index (C.O.I)	1.13 (0.76–1.41)	1.24 (1.09–1.33)	1.00 (0.72–1.48)	0.330
HBeAg-positive, n (%)	33 (54)	3 (25)	30 (61)	0.024
HBV DNA (log IU/mL)	6.2 (4.7–8.0)	4.3 (3.5–6.2)	7.1 (5.0–8.2)	0.007
HBsAg (IU/mL)	7,989 (2,290–15,940)	3,444 (1,665–9,912)	10,470 (2,868–23,493)	0.066
HBcrAg (log U/mL)	5.7 (4.0–6.9)	4.2 (2.9–6.8)	6.0 (4.4–6.9)	0.114
miR-192-5p	0.032 (0.016–0.086)	0.016 (0.007–0.032)	0.048 (0.020–0.123)	0.021
miR-320a	0.229 (0.148–0.296)	0.185 (0.128–0.209)	0.249 (0.156–0.309)	0.066
miR-122-3p	0.002 (< 0.001–0.007)	0.003 (< 0.001–0.007)	0.002 (0.001–0.006)	0.899
miR-6126-5p	0.112 (0.053–0.205)	0.057 (0.036–0.182)	0.119 (0.067–0.205)	0.101

Data from all patients were expressed as numbers for categorical data and medians (first–third quartiles) for noncategorical data.

Categorical variables were compared between groups by the chi-square test, and noncategorical variables were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test.

Abbreviations: VR, virological response; HBV, hepatitis B virus; AST, aspartate transaminase; ALT, alanine transaminase; FIB-4, fibrosis-4; HBsAg, hepatitis B surface antigen; HBcrAg, hepatitis B core-related antigen.

Predictive factors for the efficacy of Peg-IFN therapy during the treatment

The clinical characteristics of the VR and non-VR groups at 24-weeks during the treatment are shown in Table 2. The proportion of HBeAg-positive patients and the levels of HBV DNA and serum miR-192-5p were significantly higher in the non-VR versus the VR group (P = 0.020, P < 0.001, P = 0.011, respectively).

Table 2

Comparison of clinical data between VR and non-VR groups at 24-weeks during Peg-IFN therapy.

Factor	Total (n = 61)	VR group (n = 12)	non-VR group (n = 49)	P-value
AST (IU/L)	34 (27–50)	32 (22–43)	36 (27–51)	0.419
ALT (IU/L)	43 (27–64)	32 (20–45)	45 (29–67)	0.152
HBV DNA (log IU/mL)	2.9 (< 1.3–5.0)	< 1.3 (ND–1.3)	3.7 (1.6–5.9)	< 0.001
HBsAg (IU/mL)	2,800 (957–8,490)	1,668 (60–3,035)	3,392 (1,019–9,977)	0.072
HBeAg-positive, n (%)	30 (49)	2 (17)	28 (57)	0.020
HBcrAg (log U/mL)	5.4 (3.3–6.6)	3.8 (3.2–5.1)	6.0 (3.5–6.7)	0.064
miR-192-5p	0.024 (0.011–0.045)	0.012 (0.005–0.025)	0.027 (0.013–0.061)	0.011
miR-320a	0.198 (0.118–0.267)	0.123 (0.090–0.216)	0.210 (0.140–0.269)	0.093
miR-122-3p	0.001 (< 0.001–0.004)	0.001 (< 0.001–0.001)	0.001 (< 0.001–0.005)	0.121
miR-6126-5p	0.056 (0.034–0.102)	0.045 (0.018–0.092)	0.061 (0.034–0.104)	0.420

Data from all patients were expressed as numbers for categorical data and medians (first–third quartiles) for noncategorical data.

Categorical variables were compared between groups by the chi-square test, and noncategorical variables were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Positive result (signal) below the quantitative HBV DNA concentrations was described as “<1.3”, and negative signal was described as “ND”.

Abbreviations: Peg-IFN, pegylated interferon; ND, not detected.

Transition of serum miR-192-5p levels from baseline to 24-weeks during the treatment

The transition of miR-192-5p levels from baseline to 24-weeks during the treatment is shown in S1 Fig. The levels of serum miR-192-5p were lower at baseline and 24-weeks in the VR group than the non-VR group.

Cutoff values of variables for predicting virological response to Peg-IFN therapy

The ROC curves were created using factors that showed significant differences in the comparison between the two groups at baseline and 24-weeks, and the cutoff value and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated (Fig 2). The cutoff values for miR-192-5p at baseline and 24-weeks were 0.0159 and 0.0158, respectively. And that for HBV DNA at baseline was 4.74 log IU/ml. The AUCs for miR-192-5p levels at baseline and 24-weeks, and HBV DNA levels at baseline were 0.72, 0.74, and 0.75, respectively, indicating that they were equivalent in predicting the response to Peg-IFN therapy (Table 3).

Fig 2

ROC curves for HBV DNA and miR-192-5p.

The ROC curves were created using, miR-192-5p at baseline and 24-weeks, and HBV DNA at baseline as factors. Cutoff values were calculated from the point on the ROC curve closest to the top left of HBV DNA at baseline, miR-192-5p at baseline and 24-weeks. Abbreviations: TPF, true positive fraction; FPF, false positive fraction.

Table 3

Area under the curve and cut-off values for predicting virological response to Peg-IFN therapy.

		95%CI
Factor	Area under the curve	lower	higher	P-value	cutoff value
HBV DNA at baseline	0.75	0.58	0.92	0.004	4.74
miR-192 at baseline	0.72	0.56	0.88	0.007	0.0159
miR-192 at 24-weeks	0.74	0.59	0.89	0.002	0.0158

Area under the curve was calculated from the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve as shown in Fig 2.

The cutoff values were calculated from the point on the ROC curve closest to top left of HBV DNA at baseline and miR-192-5p levels at baseline and 24-weeks during Peg-IFN therapy.

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval.

Prediction of VR to Peg-IFN therapy using miR-192-5p and HBV DNA levels

We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) for predicting VR, using the above-mentioned cutoff values for miR-192-5p levels at baseline and 24-weeks (Table 4). The PPVs were 44% and 38%, and the NPVs were 89% and 90%, using the cutoff values for miR-192-5p levels at baseline and 24-weeks respectively, indicating that they were equivalent in predicting the response to IFN therapy. The PPV and NPV using the cutoff value for HBV DNA levels at baseline were 43% and 87%, respectively. Furthermore, combination of miR-192-5p < 0.0159 and HBV DNA < 4.74 at baseline could improve the PPV (71%), specificity (96%), and accuracy (85%). When we stratified the patients according to the cut-off values of serum HBV DNA and miR-192-5p levels at baseline, the VR rates were 57% in patients with HBV DNA < 4.74 and miR-192-5p < 0.0159; 29% in those with HBV DNA < 4.74 and miR-192-5p ≥ 0.0159; 22% in those with HBV DNA ≥ 4.74 and miR-192-5p < 0.0159; 11% in those with HBV DNA ≥ 4.74 and miR-192-5p ≥ 0.0159, respectively (S2 Fig). These data indicate that combining data of serum HBV DNA and miR-192-5p levels could improve the ability to predict the response to Peg-IFN therapy for CHB.

Table 4

Prediction of virological response to Peg-IFN therapy.

	PPV	NPV	sensitivity	specificity	accuracy
miR-192-5p < 0.0159 at baseline	7 / 16 (44%)	40 / 45 (89%)	7 / 12 (58%)	40 / 49 (82%)	47 / 61 (77%)
miR-192-5p < 0.0158 at 24-weeks	8 / 21 (38%)	36 / 40 (90%)	8 / 12 (67%)	36 / 49 (73%)	44 / 61 (72%)
HBV DNA < 4.74 at baseline	6 / 14 (43%)	41 / 47 (87%)	6 / 12 (50%)	41 / 49 (84%)	47 / 61 (77%)
HBV DNA < 4.74 and miR-192-5p < 0.0159 at baseline	5 / 7 (71%)	47 / 54 (87%)	5 / 12 (42%)	47 / 49 (96%)	51 / 61 (85%)

The cut-off values of HBV DNA level at baseline and the miR-192 levels at baseline and 24-weeks during the Peg-IFN therapy for predicting virological response were determined by the ROC analyses.

Abbreviations: PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.

Multivariate logistic regression analysis for predicting virological response to Peg-IFN therapy

Next, we conducted multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine predictive factors for discriminating VR. Based on previous findings regarding predictive factors for the response to IFN therapy in CHB patients as described in the introduction [9, 10], and our results as shown in Tables 1–4, we included the following variables as covariates: HBeAg, HBV DNA level < 4.74 log IU/ml and miR-192-5p level < 0.0159 at baseline. In this study, unexpectedly, ALT levels at baseline were higher in the non-VR group than the VR group due to the small number of cases (Table 1), although several high quality studies showed that higher ALT level was a predictor of the good response to Peg-IFN therapy in CHB patients with or without HBeAg [8-10]. Therefore, considering sampling errors due to the small number of cases, we did not include ALT as a covariate in the analysis. As a result, miR-192-5p level < 0.0159 at baseline was identified an independent predictive factor of VR (odds ratio = 4.5; P = 0.041) (Table 5).

Table 5

Multivariate logistic regression analysis of factors at baseline associated with virological response to Peg-IFN therapy.

			95% CI
Factor	P-value	Odds	Lower	Upper
HBeAg-negative	0.198	2.9	0.57	14.61
HBV DNA < 4.74*	0.310	2.3	0.46	11.12
miR-192-5p < 0.0159*	0.041	4.5	1.06	19.20

* The cut-off values of HBV DNA and miR-192 levels at baseline for predicting virological response was determined by the ROC analysis.

Relationship of miR-192-5p expression levels in serum with clinical parameters

We examined the correlations between serum miR-192-5p levels and other clinical parameters, which showed significant correlations with the levels of HBV DNA, HBcrAg, and especially HBsAg, at baseline and 24-weeks, whereas there was no correlation with the levels of AST, ALT, and platelet counts (Table 6). In addition, serum miR-192-5p levels at baseline were significantly higher in HBeAg-positive versus than HBeAg-negative patients (0.063 vs. 0.022, P = 0.0058), but there was no difference at 24-weeks between the two groups.

Table 6

Correlations of miR-192-5p expression levels in serum with other clinical parameters.

	miR-192-5p levels
	r*		P-value
Factor	baseline	24-weeks	baseline	24-weeks
AST	-0.055	-0.080	0.700	0.568
ALT	0.082	0.092	0.566	0.513
PLT	-0.096	N.A.	0.467	N.A.
HBV DNA	0.484	0.655	< 0.001	< 0.001
HBsAg	0.759	0.730	< 0.001	< 0.001
HBcrAg	0.384	0.551	0.005	< 0.001

* The correlation coefficient (r) is calculated using the Pearson correlation test.

Abbreviations: PLT, platelet counts; N.A., not available.

Discussion

The present study validated that serum miR-192-5p levels were associated with response to IFN therapy in CHB patients, whereas serum miR-320a, miR-122-3p, and miR-6129-5p levels were not validated. Multivariate analysis showed that a lower miR-192-5p level at baseline was an independent predictor of VR. To date, several factors have been reported to be associated with VR in the treatment of CHB, for instance patients with HBeAg-negative CHB who show decreased HBcrAg levels during treatment with Peg-IFN combination therapy with or without NAs were more likely to succeed with anti-viral treatment [21, 22]. Another study in HBeAg-negative CHB patients mostly with genotype D, showed that no reduction in HBsAg levels and a lack of decrease in HBV DNA levels below 1.2 log10 IU/ml during 12-week treatment has a NPV of nearly 100% of untreated persistent VR, and this was therefore recommended as a stopping rule for early discontinuation of ineffective Peg-IFN [20]. In addition, several studies have indicated that serum HBV DNA level is a useful and reliable marker to predict the efficacy of Peg-IFN therapy for CHB [9, 10]. The present study showed that the AUC value of serum HBV DNA levels at baseline for predicting VR was the best. Therefore, we think that serum miR-192-5p level cannot replace HBV DNA, but improve to predict the response to Peg-IFN therapy for CHB. Actually, combining data of serum miR-192-5p and HBV DNA levels at baseline could improve the ability to predict the response to Peg-IFN therapy (Table 4 and S2 Fig).

MicroRNA-192-5p is associated with hypertension, diabetes, and various cancers, such as lung, gastric, pancreatic, and liver cancer, and its potential as a disease marker has been suggested [23-28]. It has been reported that miR-192-5p is abundantly expressed in hepatic tissues [29], as well as in serum and urine, and their exosome [30]. Several studies on liver diseases have identified serum miR-192-5p level as a potential early biomarker for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) [31], and it was revealed that miR-192-5p plays an important role in the pathophysiology of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and liver injury [32]. As for HBV-related diseases, the replication of HBV was shown to be correlated with the in vitro expression of miR-192-5p in a HepG2 cell model system, and overexpression of miR-192-5p by mimics reduces the protein level of pro-apoptotic BIM (Bcl-2-like protein 11) [33]. In addition, miR-192-5p was shown to be overexpressed in both the sera and HBsAg particles of CHB patients [14]. Subsequent research revealed that miR-192-5p is present in hepatoma-derived extracellular vesicles and abundantly expressed in HBeAg-positive patients compared with HBeAg-negative patients [34]. Our study showed a strong correlation between HBsAg and miR-192-5p levels in serum (Table 6), and miR-192-5p levels were higher in HBeAg-positive patients than in HBeAg-negative patients, while the VR rate tended to be lower in HBeAg-positive versus HBeAg-negative patients (3/33 vs. 9/28, P = 0.053) (S2 Table). Thus, HBV replication might influence serum miR-192-5p levels, which accounts for serum miR-192-5p levels being associated with the response to IFN therapy. However, serum miR-192-5p level at baseline was an independent predictor for VR in our study; therefore, there might be a further mechanism by which miR-192-5p influences or predicts IFN efficacy. Intriguingly, previous studies demonstrated induction of miR-192 by IFN-α in Huh7.5 cells and downregulation upon hepatitis C virus infection [35], indicating that miR-192-5p upregulation in serum could be an independent variable for non-response to Peg-IFN and ribavirin treatment in chronic hepatitis C [36]. Additionally, miR-192-5p was increased in serum exosome from NAFLD patients, and hepatocyte-derived exosomal miR-192-5p promoted the polarization of inflammatory macrophage which induced immune response and inflammation [37]. These findings led us to speculate that miR-192-5p might be associated with antiviral immunity. Meanwhile, the mechanism that miR-192-5p is secreted in peripheral blood from HCC cells has not been elucidated. Further studies are necessary to elucidate the mechanism of secretion and functional roles of miR-192-5p in CHB and other liver diseases.

There were several limitations to this study. First, ALT levels were low in the VR cases, although previous studies have reported that ALT levels were high in responders to IFN therapy for CHB [8–10, 38]. In the non-VR group, higher HBV DNA levels and HBeAg-positive rate, which were considered to be predictors for non-response to IFN therapy in CHB, were associated with active hepatic inflammation, namely higher ALT levels. Second, we examined only a small number of patients, especially in the VR group. This resulted from difficulty in collecting VR cases, because few CHB patients being treated with Peg-IFN and the low VR rate. Third, the majority of the patients had HBV genotype B or C. Fourth, we carried out elastography or liver biopsy in less than half of the subjects, therefore, we have the date on hepatic fibrosis grade using FIB-4 index at baseline only. FIB-4 index is calculated using age, AST, ALT and PLT levels. Since IFN therapy affects AST, ALT and platelet levels, FIB-4 index might not be appropriate to evaluate the changes of hepatic fibrosis grade during and after IFN therapy. Therefore, we could not evaluate the efficacy in hepatic fibrosis grade after the initiation of Peg-IFN therapy. Future study is needed to evaluate serum miR-192-5p level as a marker for the response to Peg-IFN therapy in a large group of CHB patients with various HBV genotypes, who should be divided by HBeAg status.

In conclusion, serum miR-192-5p levels might be a predictive biomarker for the response to Peg-IFN therapy in CHB patients. Our results and previous findings let us speculate that miR-192-5p might be associate with HBV replication and antiviral immunity. Further studies are necessary to elucidate the functional roles of miR-192-5p in CHB.

Transition of serum miR-192-5p levels from baseline to 24-weeks during the treatment in VR, non-VR and all patients.

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

Virological response rates stratified by the cut-off values of serum HBV DNA and miR-192-5p levels at baseline.

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

Comparison of clinical characteristics of HBeAg-negative patients between VR and non-VR groups.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Comparison of clinical characteristics of patients between HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

24 Nov 2021

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Wenyu Lin, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: 1. HBV-DNA is a reliable and convenient biomarker for virological response. Therefore, miR-192-5p level, a not routine biomarker, is useless to virological response.

2. The levels of serum ALT and HBV DNA as well as liver fibrosis are important predictors of long-term outcome that inform decisions for treatment initiation as well as treatment response. Additionally, staging of liver disease severity using liver biopsy or noninvasive tests such as elastography are important in guiding surveillance and assisting with treatment decisions. Therefore, authors should better consider those factors changes during the antiviral treatment to indicate the efficacy of pegylated interferon therapy, not only virological response.

Reviewer #2: Nagura Y, et al. reported the association between serum miRNA levels (especially miRNA-192-5p) and the efficacy of Peg-IFN monotherapy for chronic hepatitis B patients. These data are very interesting and might be new important knowledge, however there were some concerns as reviewer describes below.

Major points:

1. In Table1, AST or ALT levels of your patients are relatively low, how did you think about treatment indication of Peg-IFN therapy?

2. The outcome in this study was determined by virological response which was defined as HBV DNA < 2000 IU/mL, HBeAg-negative, and no need for administration of NAs.

This reviewer think normalization of transaminase should be included in treatment response.

3. Authors described the cutoff values for miR-192-5p levels at baseline and 24-week were same (0.016). Is this result means that miR-192-5p levels did not changed before and after Peg-IFN therapy in each patient? Was the response of miR-192-5p levels between before and 24-week after Peg-IFN therapy factor of treatment response?

4.The ALT level is significantly different between VR and non-VR group in Table1. You should include the input covariates in multivariate analysis in Table 5.

5. The HBsAg level seems to be different between VR and non-VR group although there is not significant different. Is the Mann-Whitney U test eligible method to this factor?

6. In discussion section reference 29 is not reported about serum miR-192-5p. You should change this paper to original report about miR-192-5p for detecting in hepatocellular carcinoma. In past reports miR-192-5p is "upregulated" in hepatocellular carcinoma or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, however about response of Peg-IFN therapy miR-192-5p is "lower" in virological-response group in this study. Please discuss about this phenomenon.

Minor points:

1. You should describe the definition of outcome in this study in the method section not in the result section.

2. Please show clarify miR-192-5p is measured at what time point (baseline, 24 weeks or EOT) in each description.

3. In the section “Correlations of miR-192-50 expression levels in serum with clinical parameters”, the result of HBeAg-positive or negative is not eligible in this title.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

31 Dec 2021

Reviewer #1

Comment 1:

HBV-DNA is a reliable and convenient biomarker for virological response. Therefore, miR-192-5p level, a not routine biomarker, is useless to virological response.

Response:

As the reviewer pointed out, HBV DNA is a useful and convenient marker, but measuring serum miRNA is not convenient for predicting response to IFN in CHB patients. Although the abilities of predicting VR using the cutoff values for miR-192-5p and HBV DNA levels at baseline were almost equivalent, combination of miR-192-5p < 0.016 and HBV DNA < 4.74 at baseline could improve the PPV (71%) and specificity (96%) as shown in the revised Table 4. Thus, serum miR-192-5p is useful for predicting the response to IFN therapy for CHB. We added the PPV, NPV, sensitivity and specificity by the combination of HBV DNA and miR-192-5p in Table 4 and the description in the text in page 14, line 303-304 and in page 18, line 373-375.

Table 4. Prediction of virological response to Peg-IFN therapy.

PPV NPV sensitivity specificity

miR-192-5p < 0.0159 at baseline 7 / 16 (44%) 40 / 45 (89%) 7 / 12 (58%) 40 / 49 (82%)

miR-192-5p < 0.0158 at 24-weeks 8 / 21 (38%) 36 / 40 (90%) 8 / 12 (67%) 36 / 49 (73%)

HBV DNA < 4.74 at baseline 6 / 14 (43%) 41 / 47 (87%) 6 / 12 (50%) 41 / 49 (84%)

HBV DNA < 4.74 and miR-192-5p < 0.0159 at baseline 5 / 7(71%) 47 / 54 (87%) 5 / 12 (42%) 47 / 49 (96%)

Comment 2:

The levels of serum ALT and HBV DNA as well as liver fibrosis are important predictors of long-term outcome that inform decisions for treatment initiation as well as treatment response. Additionally, staging of liver disease severity using liver biopsy or noninvasive tests such as elastography are important in guiding surveillance and assisting with treatment decisions. Therefore, authors should better consider those factors changes during the antiviral treatment to indicate the efficacy of pegylated interferon therapy, not only virological response.

Response:

Thank you for your important comment. Unfortunately, we carried out elastography or liver biopsy in less than half of the subjects, therefore, we have the date on hepatic fibrosis grade using FIB-4 index at baseline only (Table 1), which showed that those levels at baseline were not significantly different between VR and non-VR. As well known, the FIB-4 index is calculated using age, AST, ALT and PLT levels. Since IFN therapy affects AST, ALT and PLT levels, FIB-4 index might not be appropriate to evaluate the changes of hepatic fibrosis during and after IFN therapy in CHB. Therefore, we could not evaluate the efficacy in hepatic fibrosis grade after the initiation of IFN therapy. We added the description as a limitation in the discussion section, in page 20, line 418-424.

Reviewer #2

Major comment 1:

In Table1, AST or ALT levels of your patients are relatively low, how did you think about treatment indication of Peg-IFN therapy?

Response:

The Guidelines for Hepatitis B Treatment by the Japanese Society of Hepatology recommends to treat CHB patients with ALT ≥ 31 U/L and HBV DNA ≥ 2,000 IU/mL (1). In addition, referring to several predictive factors of response to IFN therapy in CHB, such as HBeAg status, HBV DNA, and ALT levels, the attending physicians introduced Peg-IFN therapy in the subjects in this study. In some patients, ALT levels were not met the above criteria at baseline, but their ALT levels were met it by multiple blood tests before IFN therapy. We added this description in page 5-6, line 119-123.

Major comment 2：

The outcome in this study was determined by virological response which was defined as HBV DNA < 2000 IU/mL, HBeAg-negative, and no need for administration of NAs.

This reviewer think normalization of transaminase should be included in treatment response.

Response:

Thank you for your important suggestion. We defined a virological response as “ALT < 31U/L, HBV DNA < 2,000 IU/mL, HBeAg-negative, and no need for administration of NAs until the end of the observation period”. We revised the description in page 6, line 129-131.

Major comment 3：

Authors described the cutoff values for miR-192-5p levels at baseline and 24-week were same (0.016). Is this result means that miR-192-5p levels did not changed before and after Peg-IFN therapy in each patient? Was the response of miR-192-5p levels between before and 24-week after Peg-IFN therapy factor of treatment response?

Response:

The cutoff values of miR-192-5p at baseline and 24 weeks were 0.0159 and 0.0158, respectively. We revised these data of the cut-off values in the text and Table 3-5.

In addition, we showed the changes of miR-192-5p levels from baseline to 24-weeks in VR and non-VR groups as below. The miR-192-5p levels were lower at baseline and 24 weeks in the VR group than the non-VR group. We add these data in the text in page 13, line 270-272 and the supplementary file.

Major comment 4：

The ALT level is significantly different between VR and non-VR group in Table1. You should include the input covariates in multivariate analysis in Table 5.

Response:

Based on previous findings regarding predictive factors of the response to IFN therapy in CHB patients as described in the introduction (2) (3) (4), and our results as shown in Tables 1-4, we selected covariates in the multivariate logistic regression analysis. In this study, ALT levels at baseline were higher in the non-VR group than the VR group (Table 1). But, several high quality studies showed that higher ALT level was a predictor of the good response to Peg-IFN treatment in CHB patients with or without HBeAg (2) (3) (4). Therefore, we did not include ALT as a covariate in the analysis. We added the descriptions in page 15-16, line 323-325, and described regarding higher ALT levels in the non-VR group as a limitation in the discussion in page 19-20, line 410-415.

Major comment 5：

The HBsAg level seems to be different between VR and non-VR group although there is not significant different. Is the Mann-Whitney U test eligible method to this factor?

Response:

Since almost all parameters including HBsAg in Table 1 and 2 were not normally distributed, the Mann-Whitney U test, which is a nonparametric test, was appropriate to compare these parameters between the VR and non-VR groups.

Major comment 6：

In discussion section reference 29 is not reported about serum miR-192-5p. You should change this paper to original report about miR-192-5p for detecting in hepatocellular carcinoma. In past reports miR-192-5p is "upregulated" in hepatocellular carcinoma or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, however about response of Peg-IFN therapy miR-192-5p is "lower" in virological-response group in this study. Please discuss about this phenomenon.

Response:

Thank you for your comments. We cited the original report by Zhou J, Plasma microRNA panel to diagnose hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(36):4781-8 (5) in page 18, line 381. As we described in the discussion, HBV replication might influence serum miR-192-5p levels, which accounts for serum miR-192-5p levels being associated with the response to IFN therapy. The mechanism that miR-192-5p is secreted in peripheral blood from HCC cells has not been elucidated. Meanwhile, miR-192-5p was increased in serum exosome in NAFLD patients, and hepatocyte-derived exosomal miR-192-5p promoted the polarization of inflammatory macrophage which induce immune response and inflammation (6). Therefore, we speculate that miR-192-5p might be associated with antiviral immunity. We revised the discussion in page 19, line 402-409.

Minor comment 1:

You should describe the definition of outcome in this study in the method section not in the result section.

Response:

Thank you for your comment. We described the definition of outcome in the Method section in page 6, line 129-132.

Minor comment 2:

Please show clarify miR-192-5p is measured at what time point (baseline, 24 weeks or EOT) in each description.

Response:

Thank you for your comment. We used the serum samples at baseline and 24-weeks during the IFN-therapy. We revised the description regarding sample collection in the legend of Figure 1, and added it in the text in page 6, line 141-142. And we added the time point of measuring miR-192-5p in each description.

Minor comment 3:

In the section “Correlations of miR-192-5p expression levels in serum with clinical parameters”, the result of HBeAg-positive or negative is not eligible in this title.

Response:

Thank for your comment. We changed the title “Correlations of miR-192-5p expression levels in serum with HBeAg-positive or negative” To “Relationship of miR-192-5p expression levels in serum with other clinical parameters” in page 16, line 338.

Other revision

In Table 5, we corrected the factors: “HBeAg-positive” to “HBe-negative”; “HBV DNA ≥ 4.74” to “HBV DNA < 4.74”; “miR-192-5p ≥ 0.0159” to “miR-192-5p < 0.0159” to be easy to understand. As a result, the odds of these factors were changed, but their P-values were not changed.

References:

1. Drafting Committee for Hepatitis Management Guidelines tJSoH. Japan Society of Hepatology Guidelines for the Management of Hepatitis B Virus Infection: 2019 update. Hepatol Res. 2020;50(8):892-923.

2. Piratvisuth T, Lau G, Chao YC, Jin R, Chutaputti A, Zhang QB, et al. Sustained response to peginterferon alfa-2a (40 kD) with or without lamivudine in Asian patients with HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B. Hepatol Int. 2008;2(1):102-10.

3. Buster EH, Hansen BE, Lau GK, Piratvisuth T, Zeuzem S, Steyerberg EW, et al. Factors that predict response of patients with hepatitis B e antigen-positive chronic hepatitis B to peginterferon-alfa. Gastroenterology. 2009;137(6):2002-9.

4. Bonino F, Marcellin P, Lau GK, Hadziyannis S, Jin R, Piratvisuth T, et al. Predicting response to peginterferon alpha-2a, lamivudine and the two combined for HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B. Gut. 2007;56(5):699-705.

5. Zhou J, Yu L, Gao X, Hu J, Wang J, Dai Z, et al. Plasma microRNA panel to diagnose hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(36):4781-8.

6. Liu XL, Pan Q, Cao HX, Xin FZ, Zhao ZH, Yang RX, et al. Lipotoxic Hepatocyte-Derived Exosomal MicroRNA 192-5p Activates Macrophages Through Rictor/Akt/Forkhead Box Transcription Factor O1 Signaling in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. Hepatology. 2020;72(2):454-69.

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

17 Jan 2022

19 Jan 2022

Reviewer #1

Comment 1:

HBV-DNA is a routine biomarker to evaluate the efficacy of Peg-IFN for CHB. For this reason, even if authors clear that serum miR-192-5p is a biomarker is meaningless. The author should clear whether the serum miR-192-5p can replace HBV-DNA or help HBV-DNA to improve the prediction ability for the efficacy of Peg-IFN. Therefore, authors should add fresh evidence to illustrate serum miR-192-5p is better than HBV-DNA in predicting for the efficacy of Peg-IFN, or combine miR-192-5p and HBV-DNA could improve the prediction ability than single HBV-DNA, not for miR-192-5p.

Response:

Thank you for the important comment. As the reviewer pointed out, HBV DNA is a useful and reliable marker to predict the efficacy of Peg-IFN therapy for CHB. Actually, the present study showed that the AUC value of HBV DNA at baseline was the best. Therefore, serum miR-192-5p level cannot replace HBV DNA, but improve to predict the response to Peg-IFN therapy for CHB. As the reviewer suggested in the comment 3, we added data of accuracy using the cut-off values of HBV DNA and miR-192-5p levels in Table 4, which indicate the combination of HBV DNA and miR-192-5p levels improved accuracy as well as PPV and specificity. In addition, when we stratified the patients according to the cut-off values of serum HBV DNA and miR-192-5p levels at baseline, the VR rates were 57% in patients with HBV DNA < 4.74 and miR-192-5p < 0.0159; 29% in those with HBV DNA < 4.74 and miR-192-5p ≥ 0.0159; 22% in those with HBV DNA ≥ 4.74 and miR-192-5p < 0.0159; 11% in those with HBV DNA ≥ 4.74 and miR-192-5p ≥ 0.0159, respectively (S2 Fig). These data indicate that combining data of serum HBV DNA and miR-192-5p levels could improve the ability to predict the response to Peg-IFN therapy for CHB. We add these description in the text, in page 14-15, line 304-308, and in page 18, line 371-378.

Comment 2:

The area under the curve of HBV-DNA at base is 0.75, which is more than miR-192 at base (0.72) and miR-192 at 24-weeks (0.74). Those data are not indicative that miR-192-5p is a better biomarker than HBV-DNA for predicting VR. So, what is the significance purpose of this study?

Response:

As we described in the above response, serum miR-192-5p level could improve the ability to predict the response to Peg-IFN therapy for CHB. Furthermore, our results and previous findings let us speculate that miR-192-5p might be associate with HBV replication and antiviral immunity as we described in the discussion, in page 19, line 405-431. We added the significance of our study in the conclusion, in page 20, line 451-454. .

Comment 3:

In addition to the area under the curve, accuracy is another important index to evaluate diagnostic ability. Authors should add the accuracy of serum miR-192-5p and/or HBV-DNA for predicting VR.

Response:

Thank you for the suggestive comment. As we described in the response to the comment 1, we added the data of the accuracy of serum miR-192-5p and/or HBV-DNA for predicting VR in Table 4.

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

28 Jan 2022

Serum miR-192-5p Levels Predict the Efficacy of Pegylated Interferon Therapy for Chronic Hepatitis B

PONE-D-21-35260R2

Dear Dr. Tanaka,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Wenyu Lin, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

The authors have adequately addressed reviewer comments. The manuscript is suitable to publish in Plos One.

Reviewers' comments:

3 Feb 2022

PONE-D-21-35260R2

Serum miR-192-5p Levels Predict the Efficacy of Pegylated Interferon Therapy for Chronic Hepatitis B

Dear Dr. Tanaka:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Wenyu Lin

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE