Genotype B and Younger Patient Age Associated with Better Response to Low-Dose Therapy: A Trial with Pegylated/Nonpegylated Interferon- -2b for Hepatitis B e Antigen--Positive Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B in China

Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, Shanghai, Shanghai Shi, China
Clinical Infectious Diseases (Impact Factor: 8.89). 03/2007; 44(4):541-8. DOI: 10.1086/511042
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Cost and clinically significant adverse effects are the major limiting factors of interferon (IFN) use in therapy for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. A clinical trial was conducted in China to study the efficiency and clinical relevance of low-dose regimen of IFN treatment for chronic HBV infection and to reveal factors predicting sustained combined response.
During a randomized, open-label control study, hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive patients with chronic HBV infection (n=230) were assigned to receive pegylated IFN- alpha -2b (1.0 micro g/kg) (n=115) or IFN- alpha -2b (3 MIU; n=115) for a 24-week period. Sustained combined response was assessed 24 weeks after the completion of treatment.
The greater rate of HBeAg loss in the pegylated IFN-group (23%) was the only statistically significant difference between the 2 treatment arms observed at the end of follow-up. The results of the multivariate statistical analysis revealed that HBV genotype B and patient age (< or =25 years) were 2 independent factors associated with sustained combined response. A total of 40% of patients with HBV genotype B aged < or =25-years achieved sustained combined response. Only 4 (1.7%) of 230 patients discontinued therapy because of clinically significant adverse effects.
The choice of low-dose IFN regimen might be a relevant clinical option to reduce the cost and adverse effects of therapy for younger patients with chronic HBV infection and genotype B infection in countries where it is prevalent.

Download full-text


Available from: Fuat Kurbanov, Sep 25, 2015
159 Reads
  • Source
    • "Studies in Thailand reported the different natural course and severity of CHB between untreated genotype B and C patients[17]. Moreover, genotype B had better response to interferon than genotype C according to previous studies[18–20]. In other word, the interferon therapy cannot change the more severe natural course of genotype C infection. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hepatitis B genotypes influence the course and severity of the disease. To compare the treatment outcome of chronic hepatitis B genotype B and C patients after treating with nucleos(t)ide analogues for six months. Forty chronic hepatitis B patients attending the liver clinic of Hospital for Tropical diseases, Bangkok, were studied in retrospective cohort design. Six genotype B patients (15%) and thirty-four genotype C patients (85%) were treated. Serum hepatitis B viral load, serum alanine amino transferase level, HBeAg status and alpha-feto protein level were measured at the time of starting nucleos(t) analogues therapy, and six months later. Besides, achievement of undetectable viral load was assessed in patients with normal serum alanine amino transferase compared to patients with high serum alanine amino transferase level. After six months of nucleos (t) analogues treatment, achievement of undetectable hepatitis B viral load was higher in genotype B patients (66.7%) than in genotype C patients (42.4%) (Relative Risk=1.57, 0.79-3.14). Biochemical remission, HBeAg seroconversion and tumor marker levels between the two groups were not significantly different. Moreover, achievement of undetectable hepatitis B viral load was significantly higher in normal alanine amino transferase level (75%) than in patients with high serum alanine amino transferase level (33.3%) on nucleos(t)ide analogue treatment (Relative Risk=2.25, 1.20- 4.20). Chronic hepatitis B treatment outcome between genotype B and C were not significantly different. Patients with normalized serum alanine amino transferase level tend to achieve undetectable viral load after nucleoside analogues treatment.
    North American Journal of Medical Sciences 08/2010; 2(8):365-70. DOI:10.4297/najms.2010.2365
  • Source
    • "Lamivudine (814) 48 weeks HBeAg seroconversion Loss of HBeAg and appearance of anti-HBe antibody A: 19 (34%) B: 64 (28%) C: 122 (25%) D: 7 (19%) NO (p = 0.37 * ) HbeAg-Positive Chronic Hepatitis B Study Group (Lau, 2005) Peginterferon Alfa-2a [29] Pegylated IFN-a-2a/ none (271) 48 weeks HBeAg seroconversion Loss of HBeAg and appearance of anti-HBe antibody A: 12 (52%) B: 23 (30%) C: 50 (31%) D: 2 (22%) NO (p = 0.18 * ) HbeAg-Positive Chronic Hepatitis B Study Group (Lau, 2005) Peginterferon Alfa-2a [29] Pegylated IFN-a-2a/ +Lamivudine/none (271) 48 weeks HBeAg seroconversion Loss of HBeAg and appearance of anti-HBe antibody A: 4 (22%) B: 24 (29%) C: 43 (28%) D: 2 (18%) NO (p = 0.84 * ) HbeAg-Positive Chronic Hepatitis B Study Group (Lau, 2005) – (Zhao, 2007) a [31] "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recently released clinical practice guidelines and consensus conference statements point to the importance of hepatitis B virus (HBV) genotyping in therapeutic algorithms for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B. This information usually comes from post hoc analyses of clinical trials which were not designed to study associations with the HBV genotype. We have performed a literature search through to April 2009 and have selected randomized clinical trials of currently approved anti-HBV drugs providing information on HBV genotypes and (i) baseline characteristics of study subjects, (ii) any response to antiviral therapy, (iii) interaction between HBV genotypes and the type of therapy. There were several intrinsic features and weaknesses in the majority of clinical trials conducted so far which make it difficult to reach firm conclusions about the role of HBV genotypes in response to antiviral therapy. Indeed, most trials were necessarily multicenter in order to reach a sufficient statistical power, but pooling together patients of different ethnicities may have revealed false-positive associations between response to antiviral therapy and HBV genotype. Moreover, endpoint definitions, especially for the composite ones, varied substantially among studies, leading to lack of homogeneity. Finally, possible interactions between the type of therapy and the HBV genotype were only seldom analysed. The present review highlights several caveats regarding current indications proposed by the major clinical practice guidelines and consensus conference statements published thus far and emphasise the need for further long term studies in the field.
    Journal of Hepatology 03/2010; 52(3):441-9. DOI:10.1016/j.jhep.2009.12.014 · 11.34 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Large volume of new data on the natural history and treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection have become available since 2008. These include further studies in asymptomatic subjects with chronic HBV infection and community-based cohorts, the role of HBV genotype/naturally occurring HBV mutations, the application of non-invasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis and quantitation of HBV surface antigen and new drug or new strategies towards more effective therapy. To update HBV management guidelines, relevant new data were reviewed and assessed by experts from the region, and the significance of the reported findings was discussed and debated. The earlier “Asian-Pacific consensus statement on the management of chronic hepatitis B” was revised accordingly. The key terms used in the statement were also defined. The new guidelines include general management, indications for fibrosis assessment, time to start or stop drug therapy, choice of drug to initiate therapy, when and how to monitor the patients during and after stopping drug therapy. Recommendations on the therapy of patients in special circumstances, including women in childbearing age, patients with antiviral drug resistance, concurrent viral infection, hepatic decompensation, patients receiving immune suppression or chemotherapy and patients in the setting of liver transplantation and hepatocellular carcinoma, are also included.
    Hepatology International 06/2012; 6(3). DOI:10.1007/s12072-012-9365-4 · 1.78 Impact Factor
Show more