| Title |
Comparison of entecavir and lamivudine in preventing HBV reactivation in lymphoma patients undergoing chemotherapy: a meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-016-0358-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sisi Yu, Huaichao Luo, Meiling Pan, Angel Palomino Luis, Zhujuan Xiong, Pin Shuai, Zhihui Zhang |
| Abstract |
Background Multiple studies have compared the efficacy of entecavir with lamivudine in preventing hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation among HBV-carrying lymphoma patients with chemotherapy treatment. However, the results were slightly varied. Aim of the review to combine the findings of independent studies assessing the clinical efficacy of the two drugs using a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Chongqing VIP and WanFang Data were retrieved. Two independent reviewers evaluated the study eligibility and extracted eight studies, with 770 patients in total. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 and STATA software. Results HBV-carrying lymphoma patients receiving lamivudine during chemotherapy had a statistically significantly higher odds of HBV reactivation compared to those receiving entecavir (OR 5.0, 95 % CI 2.85-8.78, P < 0.001). The odds of hepatitis, HBV-Reactivation caused hepatitis and chemotherapy disruption was statistically significantly elevated in the patient group receiving lamivudine compared to the entecavir group (OR 4.12, 95 % CI 1.70-9.98, P = 0.002; OR 11.44, 95 % CI 2.70-48.52, P < 0.001; OR 6.71, 95 % CI 2.34-19.26, P < 0.001, respectively). Furthermore, the HBV reactivation rate in Ann Arbor stages I - II patient group was statistically significantly lower than the one in Ann Arbor stages III-IV group, with an overall pooled value of 0.37 (95 % CI 0.17-0.82, P = 0.01). Conclusion The metaanalysis result suggested that among HBV-carrying lymphoma patients undergoing chemotherapy, entecavir is more effective than lamivudine in preventing HBV reactivation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 63% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,380,722
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#784
of 1,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,176
of 364,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#22
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,092 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,029 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.