Long-term clinical outcomes in cirrhotic chronic hepatitis B patients treated with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for up to 5 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Phase 3 clinical studies have shown that long-term treatment with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) can suppress hepatitis B viral load and promote significant fibrosis regression and cirrhosis reversal in a majority of treated chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. This retrospective analysis investigated the impact of baseline cirrhosis status on virologic, serologic, and histologic outcomes in patients treated with TDF. METHODS: Patients enrolled in studies GS-US-174-0102 and GS-US-174-0103 who had baseline liver biopsy-diagnosed cirrhosis and entered the open-label phase of the studies were included in the virologic and serologic analyses. Patients (both HBeAg positive and negative) with paired liver biopsies at baseline and 5 years (N = 348) were included in a histologic analysis. RESULTS: After 5 years on study, comparing patients with and without baseline cirrhosis, respectively: 99.2 and 98.0% achieved virologic response (hepatitis B viral load < 69 IU/ml) (p = 0.686); 79.7 and 81.9% had normal serum levels of alanine aminotransferase (p = 0.586); 4.0 and 1.2% developed hepatocellular carcinoma (p = 0.044). In HBeAg-positive patients with and without baseline cirrhosis, HBsAg loss occurred in 14.4 and 8.3% of patients, respectively (p = 0.188). One HBeAg-negative patient had HBsAg loss. CONCLUSIONS: This represents the largest analyses to date of CHB patients with sequential liver biopsies demonstrating that treatment with TDF for up to 5 years is associated with favorable virologic, serologic, and histologic outcomes, regardless of baseline cirrhosis status. Notably, histologic improvement was observed in the majority of cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".