Abstract

BackgroundCurrent treatments for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) include pegylated interferon alpha (PEG-IFN-α) which is an immune modulator, and nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) which directly inhibit HBV DNA polymerase. With the limited efficacy of PEG-IFN-α and prolonged treatment periods associated with NAs, there is an urgent need for novel therapeutic strategies, especially for patients with a poor early response to anti-viral therapy.MethodsIn this study, 178 patients with chronic hepatitis B (n = 131) and compensated (n = 47) HBV-induced cirrhosis were enrolled, 120 patients with HBeAg (+). All the patients were treated for 12 weeks with PEG-IFN-α. Among them, a total of 138 patients with a poor virological response after 12 weeks were treated for an additional 48 weeks with Peg-IFNα-2a (control) (n = 43), with Peg-IFNα-2a + entecavir (ETV) (n = 49), or Peg-IFNα-2a + adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) (n = 46), and were followed for 48 weeks after therapy. Early virological response was defined as undetectable HBV DNA after anti-viral therapy for 12 weeks. Sustained virological response (SVR) was defined as no change in therapeutic effectiveness after 6 months follow-up, and no recurrence.Therapeutic efficacy was determined by evaluating HBV DNA levels, serum and liver HBsAg levels, liver function tests and liver histology.ResultsPatients in the Peg-IFNα-2a + ETV and Peg-IFNα-2a + ADV groups showed a significantly greater decrease in HBV DNA levels over time, and a significantly higher SVR compared to patients receiving Peg-INFα-2a monotherapy (both P values <0.05). Although patients receiving combination therapy had a significantly higher change in serum HBsAg levels compared to the monotherapy group, there was no significant difference in liver HBsAg levels between the three treatment groups.ConclusionThis study demonstrated that in patients with a poor virological response after 12 weeks of treatment with Peg-IFNα-2a alone, addition of ADV or ETV significantly reduced HBV DNA levels, serum HBsAg levels, and increased SVR. Individualization of anti-viral therapy would ensure that only patients who do not respond to Peg-IFNα-2a would receive combination therapy. Our data have important implications for the treatment of CHB patients who fail to show an early response to Peg-IFNα-2a monotherapy.Trial registrationThis trial was retrospectively registered on 2012 May 24 at the China Clinical Trials Registry (ChiCTR-OCC-12002196).

Highlights

  • Current treatments for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) include pegylated interferon alpha (PEG-IFN-α) which is an immune modulator, and nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) which directly inhibit hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA polymerase

  • It was recently shown that CHB patients treated with PEG-IFN had higher rates of HBeAg seroconversion and hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) seroclearance compared to those treated with entecavir (ETV) [8], interferons have been shown to be effective only in patients with low viral loads, when the ALT levels are >2–5 ULN, or in patients infected with HBV genotype A/B

  • We aimed to investigate the influence of additional nucleoside analogues on the Sustained virological response (SVR) and the improvement of liver histology in CHB patients who had a poor virological response to Peg-INFα-2a at the end of 12 weeks of therapy

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Current treatments for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) include pegylated interferon alpha (PEG-IFN-α) which is an immune modulator, and nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) which directly inhibit HBV DNA polymerase. With the limited efficacy of PEG-IFN-α and prolonged treatment periods associated with NAs, there is an urgent need for novel therapeutic strategies, especially for patients with a poor early response to anti-viral therapy. The rate of HBV DNA loss with interferon-based therapy can range from 14%–58.6%, more than 50% of the patients show low levels of viral replication, especially those with a poor early response to Peg-IFN [9,10,11,12]. Other challenges with using interferon-based therapy include the need for parenteral administration, frequent clinical follow-ups and the side-effects

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call