4.7 Review

Review article: nucleos(t)ide analogues in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection and chronic kidney disease

期刊

ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
卷 39, 期 1, 页码 35-46

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apt.12538

关键词

-

资金

  1. Bristol-Meier Squibb
  2. Gilead
  3. Roche

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundThe treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is based on nucleoside (lamivudine, telbivudine, entecavir) or nucleotide (adefovir, tenofovir) analogues (NAs), but it may be complex and the information is scarce. Entecavir and tenofovir represent the currently recommended first-line NAs for NA-naive CHB patients, while tenofovir is the NA of choice for CHB patients with resistance to nucleosides. AimTo review the efficacy and safety of NAs in adult CHB patients with CKD and to provide reasonable recommendations for their optimal management. MethodsLiterature search in PubMed/Medline and manual search of relevant articles, reviews and book chapters. ResultsNAs are cleared by kidneys and their dosage should be adjusted in patients with creatinine clearance <50mL/min. There are concerns about nephrotoxic potential of the nucleotides, particularly adefovir, while improvements of creatinine clearance have been reported under telbivudine. Most existing data in CHB patients with CKD are for lamivudine and, less frequently, for other NAs, mostly entecavir. Besides CHB, NA should be used in case of immunosuppressive therapy in any HBsAg-positive patient with CKD including renal transplant (RT) recipients and in anti-HBs-positive recipients of kidney grafts from HBsAg-positive donors. ConclusionsChronic hepatitis B patients with chronic kidney disease receiving nucleoside analogues should be followed carefully for treatment efficacy and renal safety. Despite the absence of strong data, entecavir and telbivudine seem to be the preferred options for nucleoside analogue-naive CHB patients with chronic kidney disease, depending on viraemia and severity of renal dysfunction. More studies are certainly needed in this setting.

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

4.7
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