-
International Journal of Infectious... Mar 2012The aim of the current study was to compare the effectiveness of adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) monotherapy with that of combination ADV and lamivudine (LAM) therapy in the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The aim of the current study was to compare the effectiveness of adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) monotherapy with that of combination ADV and lamivudine (LAM) therapy in the treatment of LAM-resistant chronic hepatitis B (CHB).
METHODS
Publications on the effectiveness of ADV monotherapy versus the combination of ADV and LAM therapy for the treatment of LAM-resistant CHB were identified by a search (up to year 2010) of the PubMed, HealthStar, ScienceDirect, and VIP databases. Biochemical response data (alanine aminotransferase normalization rate) and virological response data (serum hepatitis B virus DNA undetectable rate) were extracted and combined to obtain an integrated result.
RESULTS
The literature search yielded 11 articles, six of which reported randomized controlled trials; the remaining five reported prospective cohort studies. The summary odds ratio (OR) values of the biochemical response at 3, 6, 12, and >12 months were 1.60 (p=0.06), 1.30 (p=0.18), 1.77 (p=0.008), and 3.35 (p<0.00001), respectively. The summary OR values of the virological response at 3, 6, 12, and >12 months were 1.46 (p=0.21), 1.68 (p=0.04), 1.16 (p=0.54), and 1.87 (p=0.01), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The effectiveness of the combination therapy was not obviously predominant over the monotherapy in short duration therapies; however, the combination therapy had a great advantage over monotherapy in both biochemical and virological response when the therapy duration was prolonged to >12 months.
Topics: Adenine; Antiviral Agents; DNA, Viral; Drug Resistance, Viral; Drug Therapy, Combination; Hepatitis B, Chronic; Humans; Lamivudine; Organophosphonates; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 22226087
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2011.11.006 -
Clinical Microbiology Reviews Oct 2003The acyclic nucleoside phosphonates HPMPC (cidofovir), PMEA (adefovir), and PMPA (tenofovir) have proved to be effective in vitro (cell culture systems) and in vivo... (Review)
Review
The acyclic nucleoside phosphonates HPMPC (cidofovir), PMEA (adefovir), and PMPA (tenofovir) have proved to be effective in vitro (cell culture systems) and in vivo (animal models and clinical studies) against a wide variety of DNA virus and retrovirus infections: cidofovir against herpesvirus (herpes simplex virus types 1 and 2 varicella-zoster virus, cytomegalovirus [CMV], Epstein-Barr virus, and human herpesviruses 6, 7, and 8), polyomavirus, papillomavirus, adenovirus, and poxvirus (variola virus, cowpox virus, vaccinia virus, molluscum contagiosum virus, and orf virus) infections; adefovir against herpesvirus, hepadnavirus (human hepatitis B virus), and retrovirus (human immunodeficiency virus types 1 [HIV-1] and 2 [HIV-2], simian immunodeficiency virus, and feline immunodeficiency virus) infections; and tenofovir against both hepadnavirus and retrovirus infections. Cidofovir (Vistide) has been officially approved for the treatment of CMV retinitis in AIDS patients, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (Viread) has been approved for the treatment of HIV infections (i.e., AIDS), and adefovir dipivoxil (Hepsera) has been approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B. Nephrotoxicity is the dose-limiting side effect for cidofovir (Vistide) when used intravenously (5 mg/kg); no toxic side effects have been described for adefovir dipivoxil and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, at the approved doses (Hepsera at 10 mg orally daily and Viread at 300 mg orally daily).
Topics: Adenine; Animals; Cidofovir; Cytosine; DNA Virus Infections; DNA Viruses; Humans; Organophosphonates; Organophosphorus Compounds; Retroviridae; Retroviridae Infections; Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors; Tenofovir
PubMed: 14557287
DOI: 10.1128/CMR.16.4.569-596.2003 -
Drug Design, Development and Therapy Dec 2013The People's Republic of China has one of the highest rates of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. This review summarizes recent data from studies of entecavir, one of... (Review)
Review
The People's Republic of China has one of the highest rates of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. This review summarizes recent data from studies of entecavir, one of the recommended first-line oral therapies for treating chronic hepatitis B, in Chinese HBV-infected patients. Long-term treatment with entecavir is efficacious and well tolerated, and studies comparing entecavir with other nucleos(t)ide therapies, such as lamivudine, adefovir, and telbivudine, demonstrate superior antiviral effects for entecavir therapy and comparable safety profiles. Entecavir monotherapy and combination treatment with other nucleos(t) ide analogs has been shown to be efficacious in the treatment of lamivudine-resistant and adefovir-resistant patients with HBV infection, as well as in patients with multidrug-resistant disease. Entecavir has also been shown to be effective in patients with HBV-associated clinical morbidity, including cirrhosis and liver failure, as well as in preventing recurrence of HBV following liver transplantation and in preventing reactivation of HBV after immunosuppres-sive therapy. Although the cost of anti-HBV therapy is a particular concern in the People's Republic of China, a number of studies have recently demonstrated that entecavir (particularly long-term therapy) represents a more cost-effective treatment strategy compared with other nucleos(t)ide therapies. Further research is required to assess the effects of entecavir combination therapy on hepatitis B surface antigen clearance, and in drug-resistant patients in the People's Republic of China.
Topics: Adenine; Antiviral Agents; China; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drug Resistance, Viral; Hepatitis B, Chronic; Humans; Liver Transplantation; Organophosphonates
PubMed: 24376343
DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S41423 -
The Brazilian Journal of Infectious... 2013The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-utility study of adefovir, entecavir, interferon alpha, pegylated interferon alpha, lamivudine and tenofovir for chronic... (Review)
Review
The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-utility study of adefovir, entecavir, interferon alpha, pegylated interferon alpha, lamivudine and tenofovir for chronic hepatitis B in the context of Brazilian Public Health Care System. A systematic review was carried out for efficacy and safety. Another review was performed to collect utility data and transition probabilities between health states. A Markov model was developed in a time horizon of 40 years with annual cycles for three groups of: HBeAg positive, HBeAg negative, and all patients. These strategies were compared to a fourth group that received no treatment. Discount rates of 5% were applied and sensitivity analyses were performed. Tenofovir offered the best cost-utility ratio for the three evaluated models: U$397, U$385 and U$384 (per QALY, respectively, for HBeAg positive, negative, and all patients). All other strategies were completely dominated because they showed higher costs and lower effectiveness than tenofovir. The sequence of cost-utility in the three models was: tenofovir, entecavir, lamivudine, adefovir, telbivudine, pegylated interferon alpha, and interferon alpha. In the sensitivity analysis, adefovir showed lower cost-utility than telbivudine in some situations. The study has some limitations, primarily related to the creation of scenarios and modeling. In this study, tenofovir presented the best cost-utility ratio. The results obtained in this study will be valuable in decision-making and in the review of the clinical protocol, mainly involving the allocation of available resources for health care.
Topics: Adenine; Antiviral Agents; Brazil; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Guanine; Hepatitis B e Antigens; Hepatitis B, Chronic; Humans; Interferon-alpha; Lamivudine; Male; Markov Chains; Organophosphonates; Polyethylene Glycols; Recombinant Proteins; Tenofovir
PubMed: 23849851
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjid.2012.12.005 -
Gut and Liver Sep 2017Nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs) and interferon have been used for several decades to treat chronic hepatitis B; however, the therapeutic response remains unsatisfactory.... (Review)
Review
Nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs) and interferon have been used for several decades to treat chronic hepatitis B; however, the therapeutic response remains unsatisfactory. Although NUC therapy exhibits potent on-treatment viral suppression, frequent off-therapy virological relapses suggest an indefinite treatment course. Interferon modulates the innate and adaptive antiviral immune responses and thus increases the chance of viral eradication. Interferon therapy has the advantage of a finite duration, absence of drug resistance, and durable posttreatment responses. Therefore, the combination of NUCs and interferon can theoretically facilitate a synergistic therapeutic effect. This paper summarizes the current strategies of various combination therapies into three categories: the simultaneous "dual" strategy, sequential combination "add-on" strategy, and "switch" strategy. Generally, dual therapy exhibits greater on-treatment and off-therapy viral suppression and lower drug resistance compared with NUC monotherapy. Compared with interferon monotherapy, dual therapy has greater on-treatment viral suppression but shows no difference in off-therapy sustained virological responses. Specific add-on or switch strategies provide promising on-treatment efficacy in select patients. Pretreatment or on-treatment quantitative hepatitis B surface antigen and e antigen are predictive for the treatment efficacy of combination therapy. The optimal schedule of combination regimens and individualized therapy remain to be comprehensively evaluated.
Topics: Adenine; Antiviral Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Hepatitis B, Chronic; Humans; Interferon-alpha; Lamivudine; Nucleic Acid Synthesis Inhibitors; Organophosphonates; Telbivudine; Tenofovir; Thymidine; Treatment Outcome; Viral Load
PubMed: 28494575
DOI: 10.5009/gnl16215 -
Journal of Korean Medical Science Aug 2004During the past decade, major breakthroughs have been achieved in treatment of chronic hepatitis B. Currently, three therapeutic agents are approved for chronic... (Review)
Review
During the past decade, major breakthroughs have been achieved in treatment of chronic hepatitis B. Currently, three therapeutic agents are approved for chronic hepatitis B: interferon-alpha, lamivudine and adefovir dipivoxil. In patients with HBeAgpositive chronic hepatitis B, all of these drugs achieve HBeAg loss (24-33%) and anti-HBe seroconversion (12-30%) rates that are superior to those observed in untreated controls. Interferon-alpha has several drawbacks, such as the parenteral administration and the development of frequent and potentially serious side effects. Lamivudine is a safe drug with rare and generally mild side effects. Lamivudine induces an initial virological remission in 70-90% of patients, but only 30-40% of patients remain in remission after the third year due to progressively increasing viral resistance. The main advantage of adefovir dipivoxil is the rare emergence of resistance, which has been identified in less than 2% of patients at 2 yr of treatment. Adefovir is also effective against lamivudine-resistant strains. This review will focus on the natural history and recently gained knowledge on the treatment of chronic hepatitis B.
Topics: Adenine; Antiviral Agents; Hepatitis B; Humans; Interferon-alpha; Lamivudine; Organophosphonates; Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors
PubMed: 15308835
DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2004.19.4.489 -
Mathematical Biosciences and... Oct 2019To compare the 2-year efficacy and safety of combination therapy with entecavir (ETV) and adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) to that of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
Compare with safety and efficacy of entecavir and adefovir dipivoxil combination therapy and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate monotherapy for chronic hepatitis B patient with adefovir-resistant.
To compare the 2-year efficacy and safety of combination therapy with entecavir (ETV) and adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) to that of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy in treatment of patients with adefovir drug-resistant chronic hepatitis B. HBeAg-positive CHB patients (n = 100) with adefovir-resistance (rtA181T/V and/or rtN236T) were enrolled. Patients were treated with either ETV 0.5 mg plus ADV 10 mg per day (n = 52) or TDF 300 mg per day (n = 48) for 48 weeks. Tests for liver and kidney function, Serum Phosphorus, HBV serum markers, HBV DNA load and ultrasonography of liver were performed every 3 months. Student's t-test and χ test were used to compare the efficacy, side effects in the two groups. Fifty-two patients in ETV + ADV group and forty-eight patients in TDF group were followed-up for 96 weeks. HBV DNA undetectable rate were 76.9% versus 81.3% (P = 0.631) at week 48, and 92.3% versus 95.8% (P = 0.679) at week 96 in ETV + ADV combination therapy and TDF monotherapy group respectively. Serum ALT normalized rate were 84.6% versus 87.5% (P = 0.777) at week 48, and 92.3% versus 95.8% (P = 0.679) at week 96 in ETV+ADV combination therapy and TDF monotherapy group respectively. But the level of serum Phosphorus was significantly lower in ETV + ADV combination therapy group compare with TDF monotherapy group (1.13 ±0.15 versus 1.22 ±0.16, P = 0.004) at week 96. Both ETV + ADV combination therapy and TDF monotherapy provided effective treatments in chronic hepatitis B with adefovir-resistant. However, it was associated with poor serological responses up to week 96. The long term treatment of hepatitis B with ETV (0.5 mg/day) combination of ADV (10 mg/day) can potentially cause hypophosphatemia and renal impairment, so regular monitoring of serum phosphate, serum creatinine and evaluation of eGFR is needed.
Topics: Adenine; Adult; Antiviral Agents; Case-Control Studies; Creatinine; DNA, Viral; Drug Resistance, Viral; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Guanine; Hepatitis B; Hepatitis B virus; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mutation; Organophosphonates; Phosphates; Phosphorous Acids; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Viral Load; Young Adult
PubMed: 31731368
DOI: 10.3934/mbe.2020032 -
Health Technology Assessment... May 2010This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for the... (Review)
Review
This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B, in accordance with the licensed indication, based upon the evidence submission from Gilead to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal process. The submitted clinical evidence included two international randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tenofovir with adefovir, and a mixed treatment comparison (MTC) using Bayesian methodology to compare tenofovir with other nucleos(t)ide analogues using direct and indirect RCT evidence. There were no statistically significant differences between tenofovir and adefovir in overall adverse events although, in hepatitis B 'e' antigen (HBeAg)-positive patients, there was a higher incidence of mild nausea in the tenofovir treatment group. The primary outcome, 'complete response', was a composite end point defined as histology response and hepatitis B virus DNA below 400 copies/ml. For both HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative patients, a significantly greater proportion had a complete response after 48 weeks with tenofovir than with adefovir. There was no statistically significant difference in histological response in either group of patients compared with adefovir. The MTC could only generate results for HBeAg positive nucleos(t)ide naive patients as there was insufficient evidence for other subgroups. The probability of achieving undetectable HBV DNA with tenofovir was found to be significantly higher than that for all other treatments considered in the analysis at the 0.05 level. The analysis demonstrated that there is a 98% probability that tenofovir is the most potent nucleos(t)ide in terms of this outcome. The manufacturer's submission concluded that tenofovir is a cost-effective option as first-line treatment. For HBeAg-positive patients, tenofovir followed by lamivudine has an incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) of 9940 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, compared with lamivudine followed by tenofovir. A more appropriate treatment strategy of tenofovir followed by tenofovir plus lamivudine has an ICER of 13,619 pounds per QALY gained, compared with lamivudine followed by tenofovir. For HBeAg-negative patients, tenofovir followed by lamivudine has an ICER of 9811 pounds per QALY gained, compared with best supportive care. A more clinically appropriate treatment strategy of tenofovir followed by tenofovir plus lamivudine has an ICER of 13,854 pounds per QALY gained, compared with tenofovir followed by lamivudine. The ERG uncovered a number of errors in the submission and these ICERs approximately doubled when the analysis was corrected and reran. The guidance issued by NICE on 22 July 2009 states that tenofovir disoproxil, within its marketing authorization is recommended as an option for the treatment of people with chronic HBe-Ag-positive or HBe-Ag-negative hepatitis B in whom antiviral treatment is indicated.
Topics: Adenine; Alanine Transaminase; Antiviral Agents; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Disease Progression; Hepatitis B e Antigens; Hepatitis B, Chronic; Humans; Lamivudine; Models, Economic; Organophosphonates; Quality of Life; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors; Tenofovir; Treatment Outcome; United Kingdom
PubMed: 20507800
DOI: 10.3310/hta14Suppl1/04 -
Oncology Letters Jan 2017The aim of the present study was to identify monitoring and prevention measures as well as predictive factors for early detection of renal toxicity associated with...
The aim of the present study was to identify monitoring and prevention measures as well as predictive factors for early detection of renal toxicity associated with long-term administration of adefovir dipivoxil in order to avoid progression to Fanconi syndrome. Clinical data of 28 patients with Fanconi syndrome caused by long-term administration of adefovir dipivoxil for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection were collected pre-and post-administration for analysis. Patients presented with fatigue, progressive systemic pain in multiple bones and joints, as well as difficulty in walking and pathological fractures in a number of severe cases. Laboratory examinations revealed hypophosphatemia, elevated serum cystatin C (Cys-C), elevated serum creatinine (SCr), reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR), positive urinary protein, erythrocytes and glucose, as well as osteoporosis. In consequence, adefovir dipivoxil administration was stopped, and patients received concentrated divitamins, sodium phosphate syrup and calcitriol. Symptoms and abnormalities in laboratory examinations were significantly improved in all patients after 2-6 months. Therefore, serum phosphate, SCr, routine urine parameters, Cys-C and GFR should be monitored regularly in chronic HBV patients treated with adefovir dipivoxil. The following factors were identified as predictive of kidney damage and Fanconi syndrome: Age ≥40 years, living in rural areas, previous renal toxicity, estimated GFR (eGFR) <90 ml/min/1.73 m, hypertension, diabetes, cirrhosis and duration of adefovir dipivoxil treatment exceeding 24 months. The present results indicate that timely termination of adefovir dipivoxil treatment and replacement with other antiviral agents is critical once renal impairment appears, and that it is necessary to change to other antiviral agents and prolong the interval of administration according to the eGFR level.
PubMed: 28123560
DOI: 10.3892/ol.2016.5393 -
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and... Apr 2016Entecavir-resistance mutations are commonly induced by entecavir treatment in chronic hepatitis B patients. However, entecavir+adefovir dipivoxil+lamivudine...
BACKGROUND
Entecavir-resistance mutations are commonly induced by entecavir treatment in chronic hepatitis B patients. However, entecavir+adefovir dipivoxil+lamivudine triple-resistance mutations induced by sequential or combination treatment with lamivudine and adefovir dipivoxil have never been reported.
RESULTS
We retrospectively reviewed 1200 patients who had been tested for anti-HBV drug resistance at Beijing Ditan Hospital of Capital Medical University, and five patients showing multidrug resistance to lamivudine and adefovir dipivoxil were enrolled. Stored serum samples were used for genetic analysis, which yielded a total of 135 clones. Entecavir+adefovir dipivoxil+lamivudine triple-resistance mutations were identified in 60 % (3/5) entecavir-naïve patients who received sequential therapy with adefovir dipivoxil and lamivudine. Specifically, we found one rtM204I+rtL180 M+rtM250 V+rtA181 V clone among 23 clones from patient 1 (4.35 %), one rtM204 V+vrtL180 M +rtM250 V+rtA181 V clone among 24 clones from patient 2 (4.17 %), and 2 clones harboring rtM204 V+rtL180 M+rtM250 V+rtA181 V and rtM204 V+rtL180 M+rtI169 V+rtA181 V among 20 clones from patient 3 (10.0 %). The other 2 patients showed multidrug resistance after lamivudine/telbivudine and adefovir dipivoxil combination therapy, but no entecavir-resistance mutations were found in these two patients.
CONCLUSION
De novo entecavir+adefovir dipivoxil+lamivudine triple-resistance mutations can be induced by sequential therapy with adefovir dipivoxil and lamivudine in patients who never take entecavir. These results provide important information for sequential therapy with adefovir dipivoxil and lamivudine and the use of entecavir as a rescue therapy for these patients with multidrug resistance.
Topics: Adenine; Adult; Antiviral Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Guanine; Hepatitis B virus; Hepatitis B, Chronic; Humans; Lamivudine; Male; Middle Aged; Mutation; Organophosphonates; Retrospective Studies; Viral Proteins
PubMed: 27079793
DOI: 10.1186/s12941-016-0138-0