乙型肝炎病毒(hepatitis B virus,HBV)e抗原(hepatitis B e antigen,HBeAg)阳性的慢性HBV感染依次经历非活动性肝炎(non-aggressive hepatitis,NAH)和活动性肝炎(aggressive hepatitis,AH)2个分期,但仍缺乏界定HBeAg阳性NAH与AH的可靠...乙型肝炎病毒(hepatitis B virus,HBV)e抗原(hepatitis B e antigen,HBeAg)阳性的慢性HBV感染依次经历非活动性肝炎(non-aggressive hepatitis,NAH)和活动性肝炎(aggressive hepatitis,AH)2个分期,但仍缺乏界定HBeAg阳性NAH与AH的可靠标准。本文根据179例患者的长期随访队列,以自发性HBeAg血清转换作为终点事件,采用Kaplan-Meier生存分析,指定了丙氨酸转氨酶(alanine transaminase,ALT)、HBV表面抗原(hepatitis B surface antigen,HBsAg)和HBV DNA识别HBeAg阳性NAH的功能截断值;在此基础上,评价了ALT串联HBsAg和串联HBV DNA识别HBeAg阳性NAH的性能。结果显示,ALT≤60 IU/L、HBsAg>4.602 log10IU/mL和HBV DNA>7.477 log10IU/mL为识别HBeAg阳性NAH的功能截断值。基于功能截断值,ALT串联HBsAg的患者中,病理学分级≤G1和“分级≤G1且分期≤S2”的构成比均为100%,病理学分期≤S1和“分级≤G2且分期≤S1”的构成比均为68.2%;ALT串联HBV DNA的患者中,病理学分级≤G1和“分级≤G1且分期≤S2”的构成比均为86.2%,病理学分期≤S1和“分级≤G2且分期≤S1”的构成比均为69.0%;ALT串联HBsAg识别病理学分级≤G1和“分级≤G1且分期≤S2”的阳性似然比均为+∞,识别病理学分期≤S1和“分级≤G2且分期≤S1”的阳性似然比均为2.034;ALT串联HBV DNA识别病理学分级≤G1和“分级≤G1且分期≤S2”的阳性似然比分别为3.000和3.068,识别病理学分期≤S1和“分级≤G2且分期≤S1”的阳性似然比均为2.106。以上结果提示,ALT串联HBsAg和串联HBV DNA均可有效识别HBeAg阳性NAH;且ALT串联HBsAg识别HBeAg阳性NAH的性能优于ALT串联HBV DNA。展开更多
AIM： To analysis the factors that predict the response to entecavir therapy in chronic hepatitis patients with hepatitis B virus （HBV） genotype C. METHODS： Fifty patients [hepatitis B e antigen （HBeAg）- negative...AIM： To analysis the factors that predict the response to entecavir therapy in chronic hepatitis patients with hepatitis B virus （HBV） genotype C. METHODS： Fifty patients [hepatitis B e antigen （HBeAg）- negative：HBeAg-positive = 26：24] with HBV genotype C, who received nalve entecavir therapy for 〉 2 years, were analyzed. Patients who showed HBV DNA levels ≥ 3.0 log viral copies/mL after 2 years of entecavir ther- apy were designated as slow-responders, while those that showed 〈 3.0 log copies/mL were termed rapid- responders. Quantitative hepatitis B surface antigen （HBsAg） levels （qHBsAg） were determined by the Archi- tect HBsAg QT immunoassay. Hepatitis B core-related antigen was detected by enzyme immunoassay. Pre-C and Core promoter mutations were determined using by polymerase chain reaction （PCR）. Drug-resistance muta- tions were detected by the PCR-Invader method. RESULTS： At year 2, HBV DNA levels in all patients in the HBeAg-negative group were 〈 3.0 log copies/mL. In contrast, in the HBeAg-positive group, 41.7% were slow-responders, while 58.3% were rapid-responders. No entecavir-resistant mutants were detected in the slow-responders. When the pretreatment factors were compared between the slow- and rapid-responders; the median qHBsAg in the slow-responders was 4.57 log IU/mL, compared with 3.63 log IU/mL in the rapid- responders （P 〈 0.01）. When the pretreatment factors predictive of HBV DNA-negative status at year 2 in all 50 patients were analyzed, HBeAg-negative status, low HBV DNA levels, and low qHBsAg levels were signifi- cant （P 〈 0.01）. Multivariate analysis revealed that the low qHBsAg level was the most significant predictive factor （P = 0.03）. CONCLUSION： Quantitation of HBsAg could be a use- ful indicator to predict response to entecavir therapy.展开更多
基金Supported by A grant from the Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare
文摘AIM： To analysis the factors that predict the response to entecavir therapy in chronic hepatitis patients with hepatitis B virus （HBV） genotype C. METHODS： Fifty patients [hepatitis B e antigen （HBeAg）- negative：HBeAg-positive = 26：24] with HBV genotype C, who received nalve entecavir therapy for 〉 2 years, were analyzed. Patients who showed HBV DNA levels ≥ 3.0 log viral copies/mL after 2 years of entecavir ther- apy were designated as slow-responders, while those that showed 〈 3.0 log copies/mL were termed rapid- responders. Quantitative hepatitis B surface antigen （HBsAg） levels （qHBsAg） were determined by the Archi- tect HBsAg QT immunoassay. Hepatitis B core-related antigen was detected by enzyme immunoassay. Pre-C and Core promoter mutations were determined using by polymerase chain reaction （PCR）. Drug-resistance muta- tions were detected by the PCR-Invader method. RESULTS： At year 2, HBV DNA levels in all patients in the HBeAg-negative group were 〈 3.0 log copies/mL. In contrast, in the HBeAg-positive group, 41.7% were slow-responders, while 58.3% were rapid-responders. No entecavir-resistant mutants were detected in the slow-responders. When the pretreatment factors were compared between the slow- and rapid-responders; the median qHBsAg in the slow-responders was 4.57 log IU/mL, compared with 3.63 log IU/mL in the rapid- responders （P 〈 0.01）. When the pretreatment factors predictive of HBV DNA-negative status at year 2 in all 50 patients were analyzed, HBeAg-negative status, low HBV DNA levels, and low qHBsAg levels were signifi- cant （P 〈 0.01）. Multivariate analysis revealed that the low qHBsAg level was the most significant predictive factor （P = 0.03）. CONCLUSION： Quantitation of HBsAg could be a use- ful indicator to predict response to entecavir therapy.
