4.3 Article

Decline of Serum HBV DNA and No Change Apportioned by the Same Hepatic Parenchyma Cell Volume from Hepatic Fibrosis Stage 1 to Stage 4 during the Natural History of Chronic Hepatitis B

Journal

INTERVIROLOGY
Volume 51, Issue 4, Pages 235-240

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000156482

Keywords

Natural history of chronic hepatitis B; HBV DNA dynamics; Hepatic fibrosis stage; Hepatic parenchyma cell volume

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

During the initial phase of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, serum HBV DNA levels are high. Contrarily, fibrosis, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma have been found in patients with lower serum HBV DNA levels. The aim of this study is to clarify HBV DNA level dynamics of serum apportioned by the same hepatic parenchyma cell volume (HPCV) in hepatic fibrosis stages 1-4 during the natural history of chronic hepatitis B. Serum HBV DNA levels were evaluated by real-time polymerase chain reaction. Further, serum HBV DNA levels were apportioned by and compared with the same HPCV in hepatic fibrosis stages 1-4, respectively. Serum HBV DNA levels were 8.91 x 10(6) +/- 4.37 x 10(1), 8.13 x 10(6) +/- 7.41 x 10(1), 9.55 x 10(5) +/- 1.02 x 10(2), and 4.07 x 10(5) +/- 7.24 x 10(1) copies/ml, respectively; there were differences among hepatic fibrosis stages 1-4 (p < 0.021-0.000). However, serum HBV DNA levels apportioned by the same volume of hepatic parenchyma cells in hepatic fibrosis stages 1-4 were 3.47 x 10(10) +/- 8.71 x 10(2), 1.02 x 10(11) +/- 9.55 x 10(2), 1.41 x 10(10) +/- 2.57 x 10(3), and 3.72 x 10(10) +/- 3.02 x 10(3) with HPCV proportions 65.9, 62.7, 58.9, and 53.3%, respectively; there were no differences among hepatic fibrosis stages 1-4 (p > 0.203-0.967). Following the progression of hepatic fibrosis from stage 1 to 4, ongoing decline of HPCV is responsible for a declining trend of serum HBV DNA levels. Copyright (C) 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available