4.5 Article

Clinical impacts of hazardous alcohol use and obesity on the outcome of entecavir therapy in treatment-naive patients with chronic hepatitis B infection

期刊

CLINICAL AND MOLECULAR HEPATOLOGY
卷 18, 期 2, 页码 195-202

出版社

KOREAN ASSOC STUDY LIVER
DOI: 10.3350/cmh.2012.18.2.195

关键词

Alcohol; Entecavir; Hepatitis B; Obesity; Treatment efficacy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical impacts of obesity and hazardous alcohol use on the outcome of entecavir (ETV) therapy in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. Methods: The medical records of 88 treatment-naive patients who were diagnosed with CHB and received ETV between March 2007 and September 2009 were analyzed retrospectively. Body mass index (BMI) values and Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) scores were obtained at 6 months after the initiation of ETV (0.5 mg daily) treatment. Results: A BMI of 25 kg/m(2) or more was recognized as an indicator of obesity, and a total AUDIT score of 8 or more was recognized as an indicator of hazardous alcohol use. Of the cohort, 24 patients (27.3%) were obese and 17 (19.3%) were hazardous alcohol users. The rate of seroconversion, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization, and hepatitis B virus (HBV)-DNA negativity (< 300 copies/mL) at 3, 6, and 12 months of treatment did not differ significantly between the normal-BMI and high-BMI groups. Moreover, the rate of seroconversion and HBV-DNA negativity at 3, 6, and 12 months of treatment did not differ significantly between the nonhazardous and hazardous alcohol users. However, the frequency of ALT normalization at 12 months was significantly lower among hazardous alcohol users (91.5% vs. 70.6%; P=0.033). Conclusions: Obesity and hazardous alcohol drinking have no significant impact on the outcome of ETV treatment. However, the ALT normalization rate at 12 months after initiation of ETV treatment was significantly lower among the hazardous alcohol users.

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

4.5
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