Author/Authors :
Qiang Chen, En Center of Infectious Diseases - West China Hospital - Sichuan University - Chengdu - Sichuan, People’s Republic of China , You Zhou, Tao Center of Infectious Diseases - West China Hospital - Sichuan University - Chengdu - Sichuan, People’s Republic of China , Liu, Li Center of Infectious Diseases - West China Hospital - Sichuan University - Chengdu - Sichuan, People’s Republic of China , Liu, Cong Center of Infectious Diseases - West China Hospital - Sichuan University - Chengdu - Sichuan, People’s Republic of China , Lei, Ming Center of Infectious Diseases - West China Hospital - Sichuan University - Chengdu - Sichuan, People’s Republic of China , Tang, Hong Center of Infectious Diseases - West China Hospital - Sichuan University - Chengdu - Sichuan, People’s Republic of China
Abstract :
Background: The reduction of hepatitis B virus replication to minimal levels is emerging as key therapeutic
goal in chronic hepatitis B (CHB).
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacies of adefovir (ADV) and entecavir
(ETV) in CHB.
Patients and Methods: In this prospective study, 100 naïve patients were assigned to treatment with
ADV (33 HBeAg-positive and 19 HBeAg-negative patients) or ETV (32 HBeAg-positive and 16 HBeAgnegative
patients). The primary efficacy outcome was ALT normalization, reduction in HBV DNA, and
seroconversion of HBeAg. Second efficacy outcomes included resistance and safety. Comparisons of
quantitative and qualitative variables between groups were analyzed by student t-test and chi-square
test (or Fisher’s exact test), respectively.
Results: Among HBeAg-positive patients, ETV was superior to ADV with respect to mean reduction
in HBV DNA (-7.5 versus -6.3, respectively, at Month 24, p=0.003) and the percentage of those with
HBV DNA<103 copies/mL at Month 24 [96.9% (31/32) vs. 69.7% (23/33), respectively, p=0.002] and <300
copies/mL at Month 24 [84.4% (27/32) vs. 54.5% (18/33), respectively, p=0.004]. But, the rates of ALT
normalization and HBeAg seroconversion between the groups were similar [87.9% (29/33) vs. 96.9%
(31/32), respectively, p=0.355; and 24.2% (8/33) vs. 25.0% (8/32), respectively, p=0.943]. In HBeAg-negative
patients who received ETV or ADV, the reduction in HBV DNA (-6.8 versus -5.9, respectively, p=0.192),
percentage of ALT normalization [100% (16/16) vs. 78.9% (15/19), respectively, p=0.109], HBV DNA<103
copies/mL [100% (16/16) vs. 89.5% (17/19), respectively, p=0.489], and HBV DNA <300 copies/mL [100%
(16/16) vs. 84.2% (16/19), respectively, p=0.234] were similar. No ETV- or ADV-associated mutations were
observed, and both agents were well tolerated.
Keywords :
Adefovir , Entecavir , Chronic hepatitis , B Comparison