Sustained response after a 2‐year course of lamivudine treatment of hepatitis B e antigen‐negative chronic hepatitis B
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lamivudine has demonstrated efficacy for the treatment of hepatitis B e antigen-negative chronic hepatitis B (e-CHB). However, treatment withdrawal after 1 year has been associated with a high rate of relapse while long-term treatment is associated with increasing risks of drug resistance. We report our treatment experience of 50 Chinese-Canadian patients with e-CHB. All patients received lamivudine for 2 years. Treatment was withdrawn at month 24 in patients who had undetectable hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA by PCR and normal aminotransferases during the second year of therapy. All patients had HBV genotype B or C. Biochemical response at months 6, 12 and 24 was 74%, 71% and 66%, respectively. HBV DNA was undetectable at months 6, 12 and 24 by hybrid capture and PCR assays in 100%, 92% and 86%; and 94%, 88% and 74% patients, respectively. The cumulative rates of genotypic resistance (GR) after 1 and 2 years were 15% and 25%, respectively. Four (44%) patients with GR experienced a hepatitis flare. The probability of clinical and virological relapse 6, 12, and 18 months after treatment withdrawal were 12% and 30%, 18% and 50%, and 30% and 50%, respectively. Reinstitution of lamivudine resulted in prompt virological and biochemical responses. Our study demonstrates that a sustained response can be achieved after a 2-year course of lamivudine in a subset of patients with e-CHB.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".