Cargando…

Comparison of tenofovir plus lamivudine versus tenofovir monotherapy in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) exhibits similar antiviral efficacy against treatment-naïve and lamivudine (LAM)-resistant chronic hepatitis B (CHB). However, there are few clinical reports on the antiviral effects of TDF–LAM combination therapy compared to TDF monotherapy in pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, Chan Ho, Jung, Seok Won, Shin, Jung Woo, Bae, Mi Ae, Lee, Yoon Im, Park, Yong Tae, Chung, Hwa Sik, Park, Neung Hwa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Association for the Study of the Liver 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4825170/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27044766
http://dx.doi.org/10.3350/cmh.2016.22.1.152
_version_ 1782426174473895936
author Park, Chan Ho
Jung, Seok Won
Shin, Jung Woo
Bae, Mi Ae
Lee, Yoon Im
Park, Yong Tae
Chung, Hwa Sik
Park, Neung Hwa
author_facet Park, Chan Ho
Jung, Seok Won
Shin, Jung Woo
Bae, Mi Ae
Lee, Yoon Im
Park, Yong Tae
Chung, Hwa Sik
Park, Neung Hwa
author_sort Park, Chan Ho
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND/AIMS: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) exhibits similar antiviral efficacy against treatment-naïve and lamivudine (LAM)-resistant chronic hepatitis B (CHB). However, there are few clinical reports on the antiviral effects of TDF–LAM combination therapy compared to TDF monotherapy in patients with LAM-resistant CHB. METHODS: We investigated the antiviral efficacy of TDF monotherapy vs. TDF–LAM combination therapy in 103 patients with LAM-resistant CHB. RESULTS: The study subjects were treated with TDF alone (n=40) or TDF–LAM combination therapy (n=63) for ≥6 months. The patients had previously been treated with TDF-based rescue therapy for a median of 30.0 months (range, 8–36 months). A virologic response (VR) was achieved in 99 patients (96.1%): 95.0% (38/40) of patients in the TDF monotherapy group and 96.8% (61/63) of patients in the TDF–LAM combination therapy group. The VR rates were not significantly different between the TDF monotherapy and TDF–LAM combination therapy groups (88.9 vs. 87.3% at month 12, and 94.4 vs. 93.7% at month 24, log-rank p=0.652). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that none of the pretreatment factors were significantly associated with VR. CONCLUSIONS: TDF monotherapy was as effective as TDF–LAM combination therapy for maintaining viral suppression in the vast majority of patients with LAM-resistant CHB, which suggests that TDF add-on therapy with LAM is unnecessary.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4825170
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher The Korean Association for the Study of the Liver
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48251702016-04-11 Comparison of tenofovir plus lamivudine versus tenofovir monotherapy in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B Park, Chan Ho Jung, Seok Won Shin, Jung Woo Bae, Mi Ae Lee, Yoon Im Park, Yong Tae Chung, Hwa Sik Park, Neung Hwa Clin Mol Hepatol Original Article BACKGROUND/AIMS: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) exhibits similar antiviral efficacy against treatment-naïve and lamivudine (LAM)-resistant chronic hepatitis B (CHB). However, there are few clinical reports on the antiviral effects of TDF–LAM combination therapy compared to TDF monotherapy in patients with LAM-resistant CHB. METHODS: We investigated the antiviral efficacy of TDF monotherapy vs. TDF–LAM combination therapy in 103 patients with LAM-resistant CHB. RESULTS: The study subjects were treated with TDF alone (n=40) or TDF–LAM combination therapy (n=63) for ≥6 months. The patients had previously been treated with TDF-based rescue therapy for a median of 30.0 months (range, 8–36 months). A virologic response (VR) was achieved in 99 patients (96.1%): 95.0% (38/40) of patients in the TDF monotherapy group and 96.8% (61/63) of patients in the TDF–LAM combination therapy group. The VR rates were not significantly different between the TDF monotherapy and TDF–LAM combination therapy groups (88.9 vs. 87.3% at month 12, and 94.4 vs. 93.7% at month 24, log-rank p=0.652). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that none of the pretreatment factors were significantly associated with VR. CONCLUSIONS: TDF monotherapy was as effective as TDF–LAM combination therapy for maintaining viral suppression in the vast majority of patients with LAM-resistant CHB, which suggests that TDF add-on therapy with LAM is unnecessary. The Korean Association for the Study of the Liver 2016-03 2016-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4825170/ /pubmed/27044766 http://dx.doi.org/10.3350/cmh.2016.22.1.152 Text en Copyright © 2016 by The Korean Association for the Study of the Liver This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Park, Chan Ho
Jung, Seok Won
Shin, Jung Woo
Bae, Mi Ae
Lee, Yoon Im
Park, Yong Tae
Chung, Hwa Sik
Park, Neung Hwa
Comparison of tenofovir plus lamivudine versus tenofovir monotherapy in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B
title Comparison of tenofovir plus lamivudine versus tenofovir monotherapy in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B
title_full Comparison of tenofovir plus lamivudine versus tenofovir monotherapy in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B
title_fullStr Comparison of tenofovir plus lamivudine versus tenofovir monotherapy in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of tenofovir plus lamivudine versus tenofovir monotherapy in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B
title_short Comparison of tenofovir plus lamivudine versus tenofovir monotherapy in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B
title_sort comparison of tenofovir plus lamivudine versus tenofovir monotherapy in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis b
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4825170/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27044766
http://dx.doi.org/10.3350/cmh.2016.22.1.152
work_keys_str_mv AT parkchanho comparisonoftenofovirpluslamivudineversustenofovirmonotherapyinpatientswithlamivudineresistantchronichepatitisb
AT jungseokwon comparisonoftenofovirpluslamivudineversustenofovirmonotherapyinpatientswithlamivudineresistantchronichepatitisb
AT shinjungwoo comparisonoftenofovirpluslamivudineversustenofovirmonotherapyinpatientswithlamivudineresistantchronichepatitisb
AT baemiae comparisonoftenofovirpluslamivudineversustenofovirmonotherapyinpatientswithlamivudineresistantchronichepatitisb
AT leeyoonim comparisonoftenofovirpluslamivudineversustenofovirmonotherapyinpatientswithlamivudineresistantchronichepatitisb
AT parkyongtae comparisonoftenofovirpluslamivudineversustenofovirmonotherapyinpatientswithlamivudineresistantchronichepatitisb
AT chunghwasik comparisonoftenofovirpluslamivudineversustenofovirmonotherapyinpatientswithlamivudineresistantchronichepatitisb
AT parkneunghwa comparisonoftenofovirpluslamivudineversustenofovirmonotherapyinpatientswithlamivudineresistantchronichepatitisb