4.6 Review

Chronic hepatitis B virus infection is associated with a poorer prognosis in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a meta-analysis and systemic review

Journal

JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 10, Issue 15, Pages 3450-3458

Publisher

IVYSPRING INT PUBL
DOI: 10.7150/jca.31033

Keywords

Hepatitis B virus; Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma; Prognosis; Clinical outcome; Systematic review

Categories

Funding

  1. Chinese National Key Project Specialized for Infectious Diseases [2018ZX10301208-001-003]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81370046]
  3. Fok Ying Tung Education Foundation of the Chinese Ministry of Education [142016]
  4. Outstanding Talent Plan (2015) of Fudan University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Accumulating evidence from clinical trials indicates chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is associated with the incidence of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and may be associated with the prognosis of DLBCL, though this suggestion remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to assess whether HBV infection is associated with prognosis and response to chemotherapy in DLBCL. After a strict literature search strategy, a total of 809 HBV surface antigen (HBsAg) seropositive patients with DLBCL and 2849 HBsAg seronegative patients with DLBCL from twelve trials were included. DLBCL patients with chronic HBV infection had significantly poorer 2- and 5-year overall survival (OS) (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.23-1.92, P<0.001 and 1.79, 1.48-2.17, P<0.001) and 2- and 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.14-1.81, P=0.002 and HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.02-1.75, P=0.03). HBsAg-seronegative patients also had a lower complete response (CR) rate (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34-0.68, P<0.001), higher progressive disease (PD) rate (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.34-3.24, P=0.001), and more advanced clinical features. This meta-analysis indicates HBV infection leads to a poorer prognosis and poorer response to standard chemotherapy.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available