IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0190581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the efficacy of switching from lamivudine plus adefovir to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate monotherapy in lamivudine-resistant stable hepatitis B patients

Author

Listed:
  • Heon Ju Lee
  • Sang Jin Kim
  • Young Oh Kweon
  • Soo Young Park
  • Jeong Heo
  • Hyun Young Woo
  • Jae Seok Hwang
  • Woo Jin Chung
  • Chang Hyeong Lee
  • Byung Seok Kim
  • Jeong Ill Suh
  • Won Young Tak
  • Byoung Kuk Jang

Abstract

Background: The efficacy of switching to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy from lamivudine (LAM) plus adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) combination therapy (stable switching) in patients with LAM-resistant chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and undetectable hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA is not clear. Methods: In this non-inferiority trial, patients with LAM-resistant CHB and undetectable serum HBV DNA ( 6 months after initiating LAM+ADV combination therapy were randomized (1:2) either to continue the combination therapy (LAM+ADV group, n = 58) or switched to TDF monotherapy (TDF group, n = 111). They were followed-up with serum biochemistry tests and HBV DNA measurement at 12-week intervals for 96 weeks. The primary endpoint of this study was the proportion of patients with viral reactivation at week 96. Results: Patients with CHB enrolled in this study (n = 169) included 74 patients with compensated liver cirrhosis. In total, 9 patients (4 in the LAM+ADV group and 5 in the TDF group) dropped-out from the study. After a mean follow-up period of 96 weeks, the proportion of HBV reactivation observed was 6.8% (4/58) in the LAM+ADV group and 4.5% (5/111) in the TDF group by using intention-to-treat analysis (difference, -2.3%; 95% CI, -9.84–5.24%). None of the subjects in either group experienced viral reactivation based on per protocol analysis. No serious adverse reactions were observed. In the subgroup analysis for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) before and after treatment, decreased eGFR was observed only in the TDF group with cirrhosis (85.22 vs. 79.83 mL/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.000) Conclusions: Stable switching to TDF monotherapy yielded non-inferior results at 96 weeks compared to the results obtained with LAM+ADV combination therapy in patients with LAM-resistant CHB and undetectable HBV DNA. However, TDF monotherapy in patients with cirrhosis requires close attention with respect to renal function. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01732367

Suggested Citation

  • Heon Ju Lee & Sang Jin Kim & Young Oh Kweon & Soo Young Park & Jeong Heo & Hyun Young Woo & Jae Seok Hwang & Woo Jin Chung & Chang Hyeong Lee & Byung Seok Kim & Jeong Ill Suh & Won Young Tak & Byoung , 2018. "Evaluating the efficacy of switching from lamivudine plus adefovir to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate monotherapy in lamivudine-resistant stable hepatitis B patients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0190581
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190581
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0190581
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0190581&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0190581?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0190581. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.