Search

Background: Despite its high potency against hepatitis B virus (HBV), entecavir (ETV) 0.5 mg daily may not be sufficient to induce complete viral suppression in some patients with very high pretreatment viremia. It is not clear whether ETV 1.0 mg daily would have additive effect in such patients., Goals: Our goal was to examine virologic outcome of ETV 1.0 mg daily in patients with partial response to ETV 0.5 mg daily., Methods: We retrospectively studied 31 consecutive treatment-naive patients who were switched to ETV 1.0 mg daily after partial response [reduction of HBV DNA ≥2 log10 IU/mL but with detectable HBV DNA levels (>100 IU/mL) after 24 weeks of therapy or longer] with ETV 0.5 mg daily from January 2005 to January 2010 at 2 clinics., Results: All patients were Asians and 90% had positive hepatitis B e antigen. Mean HBV DNA was 8.04±0.65 log10 IU/mL before therapy and 3.64±0.91 log10 IU/mL at the time of switch. Overall rate of complete viral suppression were 29% (n=9/31) after 24 weeks of ETV 1.0 mg daily and 22% (n=5/23) after 48 weeks. Complete viral suppression after 24 weeks with ETV 1.0 mg daily was significantly higher in patients with lower HBV DNA (<3 log10 IU/mL) at time of switch: 75% versus 5%, P<0.0001., Conclusions: The majority of patients with partial response to ETV 0.5 mg daily did not achieve complete viral suppression with the higher dose of ETV 1.0 mg daily except those with minimal residual viremia (HBV DNA <3 log10 IU/mL).

Goals and Background: Besides United States population born between 1945 and 1965, screening for hepatitis C virus (HCV) is not recommended for the general US population. However, HCV may be more prevalent in certain subgroups and screening may be warranted. The goal of this study was to examine the proportion of HCV in a large sample of community Asian American patients presenting for non-liver-related complaints., Study: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 1246 patients tested for hepatitis C virus antibodies (anti-HCV) referred to 2 gastroenterology clinics for non-liver-related gastrointestinal reasons between January 2001 and February 2011. We determined HCV status and patient history via electronic medical record review., Results: Of the 1246 study patients tested for anti-HCV, the majority were Asian (81.4%) and 29 Asian patients (2.9%) had positive anti-HCV. HCV proportion in the remaining 232 non-Asians (non-Hispanic whites and Hispanics) was 1.7%. Asians with positive anti-HCV were more likely to have had blood transfusions (31.0% vs. 6.6%, P<0.0001) or acupuncture (10.3% vs. 1.5%, P<0.0001). Of the 976 Asian patients with hepatitis B surface antigen testing, 38 (3.9%) also had detectable hepatitis B surface antigen., Conclusions: Among patients seen at community gastroenterology clinics for non-liver-related reasons, HCV proportion was 1.7% for non-Asians and 2.9% for Asians. Screening for HCV should be offered to high-risk patients presenting to gastroenterology clinics with unrelated gastrointestinal complaints.

Background: The primary treatment endpoint for hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive chronic hepatitis B is HBeAg seroconversion; however, data on the durability of response are inconsistent., Goals: Our goal was to investigate the rate of recurrent viremia after HBeAg seroconversion and subsequent discontinuation of therapy., Methods: We retrospectively studied 88 consecutive Asian American patients who achieved HBeAg seroconversion [loss of HBeAg and development of antibody to HBeAg (anti-HBe)] among 458 HBeAg-positive patients who received oral antiviral therapy at 3 US clinics between March 1998 and November 2010. Recurrent viremia was defined as reappearance of detectable serum hepatitis B virus DNA (>100 IU/mL) on 2 consecutive laboratory tests from previously undetectable levels., Results: Antiviral medications used at the time of HBeAg seroconversion included: lamivudine (23%), adefovir (34%), entecavir (36%), tenofovir (4%), and combination therapy (3%). Antiviral therapy was continued after HBeAg seroconversion in 49 patients (group I) and discontinued in the other 39 patients after consolidation therapy [median=12 months (range, 1 to 55 mo)] (group II). No patients in group I experienced recurrent viremia, whereas 90% in group II did. Elevated alanine aminotransferase also occurred in 38% of group II patients [median peak alanine aminotransferase 249 IU/mL (range, 93 to 1070 IU/mL)]., Conclusions: Despite consolidation therapy, almost all patients who discontinued therapy after achieving HBeAg seroconversion and complete viral suppression experienced recurrent viremia, and close to half also experienced biochemical flares. HBeAg seroconversion does not seem to be a durable treatment endpoint for many patients, and they should be monitored carefully for virologic relapse and biochemical flares if antiviral therapy is withdrawn.

Unlabelled: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype is an important criteria in determining duration of therapy and predictor of sustained virologic response (SVR) to pegylated interferon (PEG IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) therapy. Optimal duration of therapy for patients with HCV genotype 6 is not known. We conducted a multicenter, open-label randomized controlled trial of patients with HCV genotype 6 at five gastroenterology clinics in the western U.S. Patients were stratified by viral load and histologic stage and assigned to receive PEG IFN-α2a 180 μg subcutaneously weekly and weight-based oral RBV 800 to 1,200 mg daily for 24 or 48 weeks. Primary outcome measurement was SVR rate by intention-to-treat analysis. From February 2005 to October 2007 a total of 60 patients (age 51 ± 10 years, 47% male, log HCVRNA 6.3 ± 1.1 IU/mL) were enrolled: 27 patients to 24 weeks and 33 patients to 48 weeks of therapy. In the 24-week and 48-week groups, 96% and 97% achieved early virologic response (P = 0.90); 89% versus 94% achieved end of therapy virologic response (P = 0.48). SVR was achieved in 70% versus 79% of patients assigned to 24 weeks versus 48 weeks (P = 0.45). Rapid virologic response (RVR) was a significant predictor of SVR in the 48-week group and trending towards significance in the 24-week group: 82% and 83% of those with RVR achieved SVR versus 33% and 29% for the 24-week and 48-week groups, respectively (P = 0.07 and P = 0.02)., Conclusion: There was no significant difference in SVR rates in patients with HCV genotype 6 treated with PEG IFN-α2a and RBV for 24 versus 48 weeks.

Unlabelled: Renal dysfunction has been reported in patients treated with adefovir dipivoxil (ADV); however, its incidence and clinical importance may be underappreciated given the lack of long-term follow-up and data outside of a clinical trial setting. Our goal was to examine the severity and incidence of renal dysfunction in a real-life setting for patients treated with ADV and whose baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was >50 mL/minute. We performed a cohort study of 290 chronic hepatitis B patients: 145 patients treated with 10 mg ADV and 145 patients unexposed to ADV at two community clinics, who were matched for age (+/-10 years), sex, and baseline eGFR. The exposed and unexposed populations were well-matched with a similar mean age (46-47 years), proportion of male patients (76.5%), baseline serum creatinine (0.97-0.99 mg/dL), and baseline creatinine clearance (85.0-85.4 mL/minute). The incidence density for renal dysfunction defined by treatment termination and/or development of eGFR < or =50 mL/minute was five cases per 100 patient-years in the exposed group compared with 1.36 cases per 100 patient-years in the unexposed group (P = 0.02). The relative risk of exposed to unexposed was 3.68 (95% confidence interval 1.1-19.3). On Cox proportional hazard analysis also inclusive of sex, ADV was a significant predictor of significant renal dysfunction (hazard ratio [HR] 3.94, P = 0.03). There were also significant trends for age >50 years (HR 3.49, P = 0.087), mild renal impairment at baseline (HR 4.49, P = 0.073), and hypertension and/or diabetes mellitus (HR 2.36, P = 0.074)., Conclusion: ADV is an independent predictor for significant deterioration of renal function. Patients on ADV should be monitored, especially patients who are older, have baseline renal insufficiency, or have hypertension and/or diabetes mellitus.