Evidence Hub

Lamivudine versus telbivudine in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Jiang H, Wang J, Zhao W

European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2013

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of lamivudine (LAM) versus telbivudine (LdT) in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Randomized controlled studies (RCTs) involving the use of LAM versus LdT in CHB patients were included in the study. Data were obtained from the Cochrane-controlled trials register, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases (1/1990 to 12/2011). Two reviewers performed quality assessment and extracted data independently. Eight RCTs were included in the main analysis. Eight eligible trials were included in the analysis. At the end of one-year treatment, LdT was better than LAM at the virological response (RR = 1.43, 95 % CI = 1.12-1.84, P = 0.005), while less than LAM at the viral breakthrough (RR = 0.34,95 % CI = 0.25-0.48, P < 0.00001), viral resistance (RR = 0.41,95 % CI = 0.28-0.58, P < 0.00001), but there was no statistically significant difference in the biochemical response (RR = 1.13,95 % CI = 0.99-1.29, P = 0.06), HBeAg seroconversion (RR = 1.13,95 % CI = 0.92-1.39, P = 0.25), therapeutic response (RR = 1.22,95 % CI = 1.00-1.50, P = 0.05) and adverse events (RR = 1.07,95 % CI = 1.00-1.14, P = 0.05). The creatine kinase (CK) elevation occurred more frequently in the LdT group than in LAM group (RR = 2.43,95 % CI = 1.57-3.75, P < 0.0001). When treatment prolonged to 2 years, LdT was better than LAM at the HBeAg seroconversion (RR = 1.29,95 % CI = 1.12-1.50, P = 0.0007) and therapeutic response (RR = 1.34,95 % CI = 1.21-1.49, P < 0.00001).…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free