4.6 Article

Two cases of development of entecavir resistance during entecavir treatment for nucleoside-naive chronic hepatitis B

期刊

HEPATOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
卷 3, 期 2, 页码 403-410

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12072-008-9108-8

关键词

Entecavir; HBV; Chronic hepatitis B; Drug resistance; Nucleoside-naive

资金

  1. Bristol-Myers Squibb

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Entecavir (ETV) is a potent nucleoside analogue against hepatitis B virus (HBV), and emergence of drug resistance is rare in nucleoside-naive patients because development of ETV resistance (ETVr) requires at least three amino acid substitutions in HBV reverse transcriptase. We observed two cases of genotypic ETVr with viral rebound and biochemical breakthrough during ETV treatment of nucleoside-naive patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Case 1: A 44-year-old HBeAg-positive man received ETV 0.1 mg/day for 52 weeks and 0.5 mg/day for 96 weeks consecutively. HBV DNA was 10.0 log(10) copies/ml at baseline, declined to a nadir of 3.1 at week 100, and rebounded to 4.5 at week 124 and 6.7 at week 148. Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level increased to 112 IU/l at week 148. Switching to a lamivudine (LVD)/adefovir-dipivoxil combination was effective in decreasing HBV DNA. Case 2: A 47-year-old HBeAg-positive man received ETV 0.5 mg/day for 188 weeks. HBV DNA was 8.2 log(10) copies/ml at baseline, declined to a nadir of 2.9 at week 124, and then rebounded to 4.7 at week 148 and 6.4 at week 160. ALT level increased to 72 IU/l at week 172. The ETVr-related substitution (S202G), along with LVD-resistance-related substitutions (L180M and M204V), was detected by sequence analysis at week 124 in both case 1 and case 2. ETVr emerged in two Japanese nucleoside-naive CHB patients after prolonged therapy and incomplete suppression and in one patient after < 0.5 mg of dosing. ETV patients with detectable HBV DNA or breakthrough after extended therapy should be evaluated for compliance to therapy and potential emergence of resistance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据