ObjectiveTo systematically review the diagnostic value of FibroScan for the staging of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B. MethodsWe searched the PubMed, EMbase, Web of Knowledge, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI databases for studies investigated the diagnostic value of FibroScan for hepatic fibrosis B from Jan. 1st, 2003 to Aug. 31st, 2013. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the exclusion and inclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed methodological quality of included studies. Then, Stata 13.0 software was used to analyze the data. ResultsA total of 15 studies involving 2 588 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that:the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio and the AUC of SROC were 0.77 (95%CI 0.69 to 0.83), 0.84 (95%CI 0.70 to 0.87), 3.8 (95%CI 2.6 to 5.6), 0.29 (95%CI 0.22 to 0.38), 13 (95%CI 8 to 21), 0.82 (95%CI 0.82 to 0.88) for hepatic fibrosis; and were 0.81 (95%CI 0.73 to 0.87), 0.89 (95%CI 0.86 to 0.92), 7.5 (95%CI 5.3 to 10.3), 0.21 (95%CI 0.14 to 0.31), 36 (95%CI 20 to 65), 0.93 (95%CI 0.90 to 0.95) for early hepatic cirrhosis, respectively. ConclusionThe current evidence suggests that FibroScan is of good accuracy in the diagnosis of early hepatic fibrosis but not for hepatic cirrhosis in patient with chronic hepatitis B.
Objective To assess the efficacy of telbivudine in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of telbivudine therapy vs. lamivudine therapy in both Chinese and English were retrieved from seven electronic databases with a cut-off date in February 2010, including PubMed, EMbase, VIP, CBM, CNKI, and The Cochrane library. The meta-analyses and evaluation on methodology quality were performed for the included studies. Results Two RCTs as Grade-A study were included. The meta-analyses showed that telbivudine was superior to lamivudine in aspects of therapeutic response (RR=1.28, 95%CI 1.10 to 1.48, P=0.001), ALT normalization (RR=1.12, 95%CI 1.01 to 1.23, P=0.02), and PCR-negative HBV DNA or below the lower limit (RR=1.44, 95%CI 1.36 to 1.53, Plt;0.000 01), primary treatment failure (OR=0.28, 95%CI 0.18, to 0.43, Plt;0.000 01), viral breakthrough (OR=0.38, 95%CI 0.32 to 0.47, Plt;0.000 01) and viral resistance (OR=0.44, 95%CI 0.36 to 0.55, Plt;0.000 01). Conclusion Based on the current clinical evidence, telbivudine demonstrates superiority in comparison with lamivudine on all direct measures of antiviral efficacy for CHB. Because of the short follow-up duration and the small sample size of the included studies, it is expected to further discuss the long-term efficacy.
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different doses of interferon alfa (INF-α) in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C (CHC). Methods Such databases as MEDLINE, EMbase, CENTRAL, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data were searched to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on different doses of INF-α in the treatment of CHC published before August, 2012. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and evaluated the quality of the included studies, and then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0 software. Results A total of 13 RCTs involving 1 442 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis on different doses of INF-α showed that, a) There was no significant difference in the complete response rate between the 3 MU dose group and the 1 MU dose group (RR=0.83, 95%CI 0.52 to 1.32, P=0.43), but there was significant difference in the sustained response rate between those 2 groups (RR=1.89, 95%CI 1.00 to 3.59, P=0.05); and b) No significant differences were found in the complete response rate among the 3 MU dose group, the 6 MU dose group, and the 1 MU dose group. Conclusion INF-α in dose of 3 MU, 3 times daily, is effective in treating CHC, but it would not rule out that higher dose takes more effective action. When INF-α is used to treat CHC, an individualized medication should be applied according to patients’ tolerance and economic status.
Objectives To determine the health benefit of elbasvir/grazoprevir versus peginterferon combing with ribavirin (PR regimen) for Chinese chronic hepatitis C patients with genotype 1b infection. Methods Markov cohort state-transition models were constructed to conduct cost utility analysis. Sensitivity analyses were performed based on base-case analysis. Results Elbasvir/grazoprevir was dominant versus PR, resulting in higher QALYs and lower costs for both noncirrhotic patients (13.867 5 QALYs, 82 090.82 RMB vs. 12.696 2 QALYs, 122 791.55 RMB) and cirrhotic patients (12.841 6 QALYs, 225 807.70 RMB vs. 8.892 4 QALYs, 326 545.01 RMB). Elbasvir/grazoprevir was economically dominant in nearly 100% among all patients within the range of threshold from 0 to 161 805 RMB/QALY. Conclusions Elbasvir/grazoprevir was dominant in treatment of genotype 1b chronic hepatitis C infection in China.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of interferon-alpha (IFN-α) combined with enticavir (ETV) for treatment-na?ve chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients, so as to provide references for clinical practice. MethodsWe electronically searched databases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 7, 2015), Web of Science, WanFang Data, CNKI, CBM and VIP from inception to July 20th, 2015, to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about IFN-α combined with ETV versus IFN-α or ETV monotherapy for treatment-na?ve CHB patients. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsA total of 10 RCTs involving 964 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that:For HBV-DNA loss rate, HBeAg loss rate and HBeAg seroconversion rate, there were no significant differences between the combination therapy group and the monotherapy group at 12-week of treatment, but the combination therapy group was significantly superior to the monotherapy group at 24-and 48-week of treatment except that there was no significant difference between the combination therapy group and the IFN-α monotherapy group in HBeAg seroconversion at 48-week of treatment. For rate of ALT normalization, the combination therapy group was superior to the IFN-α monotherapy group at 12-and 24-week of treatment, but there were no significant differences between the combination therapy group and the ETV monotherapy group at 12-, 24-, and 48-week of treatment. For safety, no pooled analysis was performed because different outcomes were reported by included studies. ConclusionIFN-α combined with ETV is superior to IFN-α or ETV monotherapy in decreasing viral load, and promoting HBeAg loss and HBeAg seroconversion for treatment-na?ve CHB patients, but the evidence of safety is insufficient. Due to the limited quantity and quality of included studies, the aforementioned conclusions still need to be further verified by conducting more large-scale, high quality RCTs.
Objective To investigate the current situation of randomized controlled trials or clinical controlled trial (RCT/CCT) on chronic hepatitis B and whether to offer reliable evidence for clinical practice in China. Methods RCT/CCT identified from six Chinese clinical journals were searched manually and assessed according to international standard of evidence-based medicine. Results 308 issues containing 212 therapeutic articles and 88 RCT/CCT on chronic hepatitis B were identified and analyzed. Conclusion the quantity and quality of RCT/CCT of chronic hepatitis B did not meet the need of clinical practice.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Polyunsaturated phosphatidylcholine (PPC) for chronic hepatitis. Methods We searched EMBASE (1980May,2003), MEDLINE(1966May,2003), CBM (1979May,2003), The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2003 and handsearched 8 related Chinese journals. Randomized controlled trials(RCT) comparing PPC versus placebo/no treatment for chronic hepatitis were included with no restrictions of blinding, language and publication. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and assessed the quality . Data were entered and analyzed by RevMan 4.2 software supplied by the Cochrane Collaboration .Results Six high quality trials involving 568 patients were included. Four studies involving 451 patients showed the clinical effective rate of PPC for chronic hepatitis was 52.5% while the control group was 37.5% with statistical difference [RR1.81,95%CI(1.41,2.33),Z=4.69, Plt;0.00001].A meta-analysis involving three studies with 100 patients showed the PPC can statically improve histopathology of chronic hepatitis comparing with control group [RR 2.58,95%CI (1.61,4.15),Z=3.91,Plt;0.0001].No serious adverse events were reported.Conclusions PPC is a safe medicine used for treating chronic viral hepatitis and may relieve clinical symptoms and signs.At the same time ,it has positive effect on hepatic histopathology for patients .However ,more high quality clinical trials are required.
ObjectiveTo investigate the needs for health education in chronic hepatitis B patients, in order to provide a theoretical basis for taking pertinent nursing intervention. MethodsBetween July and December 2011, self-made questionnaires on the needs for health education were used to investigate 70 in-patients with chronic hepatitis B. Meanwhile, factors associated with the needs of health education such as age, education, and the course of the disease were also analyzed. ResultsThe differences in the needs of health education were statistically significant among patients with different cultures, ages, and courses of disease (P<0.01). The needs of health education were correlated with culture, age and courses of disease. ConclusionThere are some deficiencies in the health education for chronic hepatitis B patients. In clinical practice, health education should be multidimensional and continuous based on the age, education degree and the course of the disease.
Objectives To conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of thymosin-α1 for HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Science Citation Index, Current Content Connect, Cochrane Controlled Trial Register and Chinese Biomedical Database (CBMdisc) to September 15, 2005, and screened the references of eligible trials by hand-searching. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing thymosin-α1 with non-antiviral interventions (placebo, no treatment and standard care) in patients with HBeAg positive chronic hepatitis B were eligible for inclusion. We conducted quality assessment and data extraction by two independent investigators with disagreement resolved by discussion. We used chi-square test and Galbraith plot to detect the heterogeneity, and used fixed (Mantel-Haenzel) and random effect model (DerSimonian-Laird) to pool the trials. When the results in two models differed, the results of random effect were reported. Subgroup analysis was performed to detect whether the duration affected the efficacy of thymosin. Results Four RCTs were included. It was found that the rate of loss of HBeAg was 38.8% in thymosin, significantly higher than that of 12.4% in control groups (RR 2.22, 95%CI 1.55 to 3.21, P=0.000). Loss of HBV-DNA was 36.9% in thymosin-α1, significantly higher than that of 13.8% in control groups (RR 2.18, 95%CI 1.50 to 3.17, P=0.000). Both short-duration (8-13 weeks) and regular duration (26-52 weeks) of thymosin-α1 achieved higher loss of HBeAg and HBV-DNA. The complete response rate was 32.3% in thymosin-α1, significantly higher than the control, 11.3% (RR 2.91, 95%CI 1.71 to 4.94, P=0.000). No statistical significance was found for HBeAg seroconversion and ALT normalization. No significant adverse drug reactions were found. Conclusions Thymosin-α1 might be efficacious in loss of HBeAg and HBV-DNA, and complete response for patients with HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B. Little evidence was available on HBeAg seroconversion, normalization of ALT, loss of HBsAg, and histological response. Further high-quality RCTs were needed for confirmation.
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of treatment with Fuzheng Huayu capsule for liver fibrosis of chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Controlled Trials (CCTR), CBMweb and CNKI up to March 2008. The references of retrieved literature were also hand searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared Fuzheng Huayu capsule with placebo or other drugs were collected. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two reviewers independently. The Cochrane Collaboration’ s software RevMan 4.2.10 was used for data analyses. Results Seven RCTs involving 590 cases of liver fibrosis of CHB were included. As for their methodological quality, one was graded A, one was graded B and the others were graded C. We carried out subgroup analyses based on treatment course and intervention measures. In terms of reducing haluronic acid, Fuzheng Huayu capsule was more effective than Huoluo Shugan capsule when the treatment course was 3 months (WMD=–61.75, 95%CI –105.20 to –18.30); significant differences were also noted between Fuzheng Huayu capsule and placebo (WMD=–187.72, 95%CI –244.23 to –31.21) or Huoluo Shugan capsule (WMD=–120.03, 95%CI –158.41 to –81.65) when the treatment course was 6 months. In terms of reducing IV-C, Fuzheng Huayu capsule was more effective than Gantaile when the treatment course was 6 months (WMD=–72.32, 95%CI –84.30 to –60.34). As for improving liver fibrosis at stage S, significant differences were observed between Fuzheng Huayu capsule and Gantaile (RR=2.33, 95%CI 1.37 to 3.96) or Huoluo Shugan capsule (RR=1.30, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.65). Except a very small number of gastrointestinal reactions, no significant adverse reactions were reported. Conclusion Fuzheng Huayu capsule is effective in reducing haluronic acid and improving liver fibrosis at stage S, especially when the treatment course is prolonged from 3 months to 6 months. No significant adverse reactions are reported. Because most of the included trials are of poor quality and small sample size, more high-quality RCTs are needed.