Table 2 Studies on actual clinical practice using entecavir or tenofovir where HBV genotype and virological response information is available
No. of patients | Drug | Race | Genotype | HBeAg-negative, % | Months of follow-up (Median) | Undetectable DNA, % | ALT normal, % | AgHBe loss % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lampertico 2011 | 418 | Entecavir | – | D (90%) | 83 | 60 | 100 (HBeAg+) 99 (HBeAg-) | 90 (36 months) | 55 |
Ono 2012 | 474 | Entecavir | – | A (2.5%) B (14.1%) C (70.9%) | 53 | 28 | 88 (12 months) 96 (48 months) | 83 (12 months) 93 (48 months) | 16 (12 months) 38 (48 months) |
Zoutendijk 2013 | 372 | Entecavir | 48% White 27% Asian 25% Others | A (9.4%) B (6.7%) C (10%) D (36%) | 58 | 20 | 68 (12 months) 93 (36 months) | 78 (Total at the end of treatment)) | 17 |
Kim 2015 | 151 | Tenofovir | 100% Asian | C (100%) | 39.1 | 13 | 64.2 (12 months) | 97.7 (12 months) | 12 (6 months) 15.2 (12 months) |
Lovett 2017 | 92 (55 naive) | Tenofovir | 83.7% Asian 7.6% White 4.3% African 4.4% Others | A (3.3%) B (7.6%) C (14.1%) D (3.3%) | 65.5 | 24 | 59.2 (12 months) 89.3 (36 months) | 86% (Total at the end of treatment) | 16.7 (36 months) |