切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版) ›› 2016, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (04) : 385 -391. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-1358.2016.04.001

临床论著

替诺福韦酯对照阿德福韦酯初治的中国慢性乙型肝炎患者48周的随机、双盲、对照研究
杨松1, 邢卉春1, 于岩岩2, 曹建彪3, 陈良4, 陆伟5, 李旭6, 陈新月7, 杨永平8, 汪茂荣9, 申保生10, 成军1,()   
  1. 1. 100015 北京,首都医科大学附属北京地坛医院肝病中心
    2. 100034 北京,北京大学第一医院感染疾病科
    3. 100700 北京,陆军总医院全军肝病治疗中心
    4. 201508 上海,复旦大学附属公共卫生临床中心肝炎一科
    5. 300192 天津,天津市第二人民医院天津市肝病医学研究所
    6. 230022 合肥市,安徽医科大学第一附属医院感染科
    7. 100069 北京,首都医科大学附属北京佑安医院肝病综合科
    8. 100853 北京,中国人民解放军第三〇二医院肝脏肿瘤诊疗与研究中心
    9. 210002 南京市,解放军第81医院全军肝病中心
    10. 453100 新乡市,新乡医学院第一附属医院感染疾病科
  • 收稿日期:2016-02-27 出版日期:2016-08-15
  • 通信作者: 成军
  • 基金资助:
    北京市卫生系统高层次卫生技术人才培养计划(No. 2015-3-108); 北京市医院管理局临床医学发展专项经费资助(No. ZY201402); 首都卫生发展科研专项项目(No.首发2014-2-2172)

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate vs. adefovir dipivoxil in Chinese treatment naive patients with chronic hepatitis B for 48 weeks: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled study

Song Yang1, Huichun Xing1, Yanyan Yu2, Jianbiao Cao3, Liang Chen4, Wei Lu5, Xu Li6, Xinyue Chen7, Yongping Yang8, Maorong Wang9, Baosheng Shen10, Jun Cheng1,()   

  1. 1. Center of Liver Diseases, Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100015, China
    2. Department of Infectious Diseases, Peking University The First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China
    3. Therapy Center for Liver Diseases, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100700, China
    4. First Department of Hepatitis, Public Health Clinical Center of Fudan University, Shanghai 201508, China
    5. Institute of Liver Diseases, Tianjin Second People’s Hospital, Tianjin 300192, China
    6. Department of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230022, China
    7. Department of Liver Disease, Beijing Youan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100069, China
    8. Liver Tumor Diagnosis, Treatment and Research Center, 302 Hospital of PLA, Beijing 100039, China
    9. Center for Liver Diseases, The 81st Hospital of PLA, Nanjing 210002, China
    10. Department of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, Xinxiang 453100, China
  • Received:2016-02-27 Published:2016-08-15
  • Corresponding author: Jun Cheng
引用本文:

杨松, 邢卉春, 于岩岩, 曹建彪, 陈良, 陆伟, 李旭, 陈新月, 杨永平, 汪茂荣, 申保生, 成军. 替诺福韦酯对照阿德福韦酯初治的中国慢性乙型肝炎患者48周的随机、双盲、对照研究[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2016, 10(04): 385-391.

Song Yang, Huichun Xing, Yanyan Yu, Jianbiao Cao, Liang Chen, Wei Lu, Xu Li, Xinyue Chen, Yongping Yang, Maorong Wang, Baosheng Shen, Jun Cheng. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate vs. adefovir dipivoxil in Chinese treatment naive patients with chronic hepatitis B for 48 weeks: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled study[J]. Chinese Journal of Experimental and Clinical Infectious Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2016, 10(04): 385-391.

目的

明确国产替诺福韦酯治疗中国慢性乙型肝炎患者的疗效与安全性。

方法

本研究采取多中心、随机、双盲、阳性对照的研究设计,选择阿德福韦酯为对照。研究的主要疗效指标为治疗48周HBV DNA< 20 IU/ml患者比率;另外,评价患者治疗48周HBV DNA下降水平、ALT复常率、HBsAg阴转及血清学转换率以及HBeAg阳性患者HBeAg阴转及血清学转换率。并评价替诺福韦酯与阿德福韦酯治疗组患者的不良事件的发生等情况。

结果

共入组患者267例,其中替诺福韦酯治疗组(TDF组)141例,阿德福韦酯治疗组(ADV组)139例。两组患者基线人口学指标与临床指标差异均无统计学意义(P均> 0.05)。HBeAg阳性患者中,TDF组患者HBV DNA < 20 IU/ml患者比率显著高于ADV组患者(55.3% vs. 20.0%;χ2= 20.750,P < 0.001);同样在HBeAg阳性患者中,TDF组患者HBV DNA < 20 IU/ml患者比率显著高于ADV组患者(86.2%% vs. 62.7%%;χ2= 20.750,P = 0.003)。ALT复常率在HBeAg阳性(84.5% vs. 80.5%;χ2= 0.406,P = 0.524)与阴性CHB患者(84.2% vs. 80.7%;χ2= 0.243,P = 0.622)组中差异均无统计学意义。HBeAg阳性组患者TDF组与ADV组的HBeAg阴转率(5.6% vs. 12.8%;χ2= 2.335,P = 0.126)和HBsAg阴转率(1.4% vs. 3.8%;χ2= 0.182,P = 0.670)差异均无统计学意义。HBeAg阴性组患者无HBsAg阴转病例。TDF组与ADV组患者不良事件和不良反应发生率差异均无统计学意义(P均> 0.05)。

结论

国产TDF制剂治疗中国HBeAg阳性和阴性的CHB患者抑制HBV效果优于ADV且安全耐受性良好,可作为我国CHB患者的抗病毒治疗首选方案之一。

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) vs. adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) for Chinese patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB).

Methods

In this randomized, double-blind, controlled study, patients with CHB received TDF or ADV (ratio for 1︰1) once daily for 48 weeks were assigned, randomly. The primary efficacy end point was plasma HBV DNA level < 20 IU/ml at week 48. The levels of HBV DNA decrease, ratios of ALT normalization, HBsAg loss and seroconversion and HBeAg loss and seroconversion, while the adverse events and adverse effects were also compared between patients in TDF group and ADV group.

Results

Total of 267 patients were enrolled, among whom, there were 141 patients in TDF group and 139 patients in ADV group. The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups (P all > 0.05). At week 48, virological responses occurred in more HBeAg positive patients with TDF treatment than patients with ADV treatment (55.3% vs. 20.0%; χ2= 20.750, P < 0.001) and in more HBeAg negative patients with TDF treatment than patients receiving ADV treatment (86.2% vs. 62.7%; χ2= 20.750, P = 0.003). There were no significant difference in ratio of ALT normalization in both HBeAg positive (84.5% vs. 80.5%; χ2= 0.406, P = 0.524) and negative groups (84.2% vs. 80.7%; χ2= 0.243, P = 0.622). In HBeAg positive group, there were no significant difference in ratio of HBeAg loss (5.6% vs. 12.8%; χ2= 2.335, P = 0.126) and HBsAg loss (1.4% vs. 3.8%; χ2= 0.182, P = 0.670). No case in HBeAg negative group lost HBsAg after 48 weeks therapy. Safety profiles including incidence of adverse events and adverse effects were compared between TDF and ADV groups with no significant difference (P all > 0.05).

Conclusions

Among Chinese CHB patients with HBeAg positive and negative, TDF had superior antiviral efficacy with a similar safety profile compared with ADV through 48 weeks.

图1 患者入组流程图
表1 患者基线人口学指标与临床指标比较(FAS集分析)
图2 HBeAg阳性患者治疗48周两组HBV DNA动态下降情况
表2 治疗48周两组患者疗效指标(FAS集分析)
图3 HBeAg阴性患者治疗48周两组HBV DNA动态下降情况
图4 HBeAg阳性患者治疗48周两组ALT动态下降情况
图5 HBeAg阴性患者治疗48周两组ALT动态下降情况
1
中华医学会肝病学分会,中华医学会感染病学分会. 慢性乙型肝炎防治指南(2015更新版)[J/CD]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志:电子版,2015,9(5):570-589..
2
Sarin SK, Kumar M, Lau GK, et al. Asian-Pacific clinical practice guidelines on the management of hepatitis B: a 2015 update[J]. Hepatol Int,2016,10(1):1-98.
3
Marcellin P, Heathcote EJ, Buti M, et al. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus adefovir dipivoxil for chronic hepatitis B[J]. N Engl J Med,2008,359(23):2442-2455.
4
Hou JL, Gao ZL, Xie Q, et al. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate vs adefovir dipivoxil in Chinese patients with chronic hepatitis B after 48 weeks: a randomized controlled trial[J]. J Viral Hepat,2015,22(2):85-93.
5
Yang J, Chen J, Ye P, et al. HBsAg as an important predictor of HBeAg seroconversion following antiviral treatment for HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B patients[J]. J Transl Med,2014,12:183.
6
Boyd A, Maylin S, Gozlan J, et al. Use of hepatitis B surface and "e" antigen quantification during extensive treatment with tenofovir in patients co-infected with HIV-HBV[J]. Liver Int,2015,35(3):795-804.
7
Buti M, Tsai N, Petersen J, et al. Seven-year efficacy and safety of treatment with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for chronic hepatitis B virus infection[J]. Dig Dis Sci,2015,60(5):1457-1464.
8
Villet S, Pichoud C, Billioud G, et al. Impact of hepatitis B virus rtA181V/T mutants on hepatitis B treatment failure[J]. J Hepatol,2008,48(5):747-755.
9
Murakami E, Tsuge M, Hiraga N, et al. Effect of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on drug-resistant HBV clones[J]. J Infect,2016,72(1):91-102.
10
Qin B, Budeus B, Cao L, et al. The amino acid substitutions rtP177G and rtF249A in the reverse transcriptase domain of hepatitis B virus polymerase reduce the susceptibility to tenofovir[J]. Antiviral Res,2013,97(2):93-100.
11
Svarovskaia ES, Curtis M, Zhu Y, et al. Hepatitis B virus wild-type and rtN236T populations show similar early HBV DNA decline in adefovir refractory patients on a tenofovir-based regimen[J]. J Viral Hepat,2013,20(2):131-140.
12
Berg T, Marcellin P, Zoulim F, et al. Tenofovir is effective alone or with emtricitabine in adefovir-treated patients with chronic-hepatitis B virus infection[J]. Gastroenterology,2010,139(4):1207-1217.
13
Kim JH, Ahn SH, Ko SY, et al. The efficacy of tenofovir-based therapy in patients showing suboptimal response to entecavir-adefovir combination therapy[J]. Clin Mol Hepatol,2016,22(2):241-249.
14
Kim JH, Jung SW, Byun SS, et al. Efficacy and safety of tenofovir in nucleos(t)ide-naïve patients with genotype C chronic hepatitis B in real-life practice[J]. Int J Clin Pharm,2015,37(6):1228-1234.
15
Bunchorntavakul C, Taweewattanakitbavorn V, Atsawarungruangkit A. Bone mineral density and renal function in chronic hepatitis B patients receiving nucleotide versus nucleoside analogs: a pilot prospective study[J]. J Med Assoc Thai,2016,99(Suppl 2):S1-S8.
16
Carnovali M, Banfi G, Mora S, et al. Tenofovir and bone: age-dependent effects in a zebrafish animal model[J]. Antivir Ther,2016. [Epub ahead of prin]
17
Shin JH, Kwon HJ, Jang HR, et al. Risk factors for renal functional decline in chronic hepatitis B patients receiving oral antiviral agents[J]. Medicine (Baltimore),2016,95(1):e2400.
18
Marcellin P, Buti M, Krastev Z, et al. Kinetics of hepatitis B surface antigen loss in patients with HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B treated with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate[J]. J Hepatol,2014,61(6):1228-1237.
19
Marcellin P, Ahn SH, Ma X, et al. Combination of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and Peginterferon α-2a increases loss of hepatitis B surface antigen in patients with chronic hepatitis B[J]. Gastroenterology,2016,150(1):134-144.
20
Atay K, Hatemi, Canbakan B,et al. Five-year results of oral antiviral therapy in HBeAg-negative chronic Hepatitis B[J]. Turk J Gastroenterol,2016,27(3):279-283.
[1] 高建松, 陈晓晓, 冯婷, 包剑锋, 魏淑芳, 潘林. 基于超声瞬时弹性成像的多参数决策树模型评估慢性乙型肝炎患者肝纤维化等级[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 923-929.
[2] 韩春茂. 解决慢性创面患者医疗服务最后一公里[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(05): 460-460.
[3] 王鹏, 肖厚安, 贾赤宇. 不同因素调控巨噬细胞极化在慢性难愈性创面中的研究进展[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(05): 454-459.
[4] 李兆明, 章颖, 刘先进. 血小板计数、红细胞分布宽度对急性戊型肝炎肝衰竭患者预后的预测价值[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 307-314.
[5] 张小曼, 马筱秋, 许正锯, 张纯瑜, 何彩婷. 乙型肝炎病毒逆转录酶区耐药突变对血清乙型肝炎病毒表面抗原水平的影响[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 324-332.
[6] 张潇尹, 于洋. 牙龈卟啉单胞菌介导慢性肾病发生发展的研究进展[J]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 328-334.
[7] 吴方园, 孙霞, 林昌锋, 张震生. HBV相关肝硬化合并急性上消化道出血的危险因素分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 45-47.
[8] 范铁艳, 李君, 陈虹. 肝移植术后新发戊型病毒性肝炎的诊治经验[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 293-296.
[9] 周川鹏, 杨浩, 魏微阳, 王奇, 黄亚强. 微创与标准通道经皮肾镜治疗肾结石合并肾功能不全的对比研究[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 470-475.
[10] 陈淑钿, 梁韵, 廖媛, 王杨. 补体C3在HBV相关慢加急性肝衰竭患者预后评估中的价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 562-566.
[11] 何吉鑫, 杨燕妮, 王继伟, 李建国, 谢铭. 肠道菌群及肠道代谢产物参与慢性便秘发生机制的研究进展[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 495-499.
[12] 易成, 韦伟, 赵宇亮. 急性肾脏病的概念沿革[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(08): 906-910.
[13] 周婷, 孙培培, 张二明, 安欣华, 向平超. 北京市石景山区40岁及以上居民慢性阻塞性肺疾病诊断现状调查[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(07): 790-797.
[14] 孔凡彪, 杨建荣. 肝脏基础疾病与结直肠癌肝转移之间关系的研究进展[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(07): 818-822.
[15] 孙培培, 张二明, 时延伟, 赵春燕, 宋萍萍, 张硕, 张克, 周玉娇, 赵璨, 闫维, 吴蓉菊, 宋丽萍, 郭伟安, 马石头, 安欣华, 包曹歆, 向平超. 北京市石景山区40岁及以上居民慢性阻塞性肺疾病患病情况及相关危险因素分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 711-719.
阅读次数
全文


摘要