Paper Details

  1. Home
  2. Paper Details

Entecavir vs lamivudine for prevention of hepatitis B virus reactivation among patients with untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma receiving R-CHOP chemotherapy: a randomized clinical trial.

Author: CaoYabing, HuangHe, LiHaoran, LiXueying, LinSuxia, LinTongyu, LinYingcheng, LiuQing, PengJiewen, WangWei, WuXiangyuan, XuBing, YeSheng, ZhangHongyu, ZhuJun

Clinical Trial, Phase IIIA Phase III trial is a trial that further rigorously verifies the efficacy and safety of a new drug or treatment, whose efficacy and safety have been confirmed in a Phase II trial, in a large number of patients, and evaluates whether it is superior to existing treatments.
Comparative StudyResearch that compares multiple groups/interventions to determine differences/similarities in outcomes/characteristics.
Journal ArticleAn article published in an academic or professional journal that reports original research or scholarly analysis.
Multicenter StudyResearch conducted in collaboration with multiple research institutions. It aims to collect a wide range of data and obtain more generalizable results.
Randomized Controlled TrialA clinical trial that randomly assigns participants to treatment and control groups to evaluate the effects of an intervention.
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tResearch funding provided by government agencies outside the United States.

Overview

Entecavir was more effective than lamivudine in preventing hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma undergoing R-CHOP chemotherapy.
Paper Details　
Original Abstract of the Article :
IMPORTANCE: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a serious complication for patients with lymphoma treated with rituximab-containing chemotherapies, despite lamivudine prophylaxis treatment. An optimal prophylactic antiviral protocol has not been determined. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of...See full text at original site
Dr.Camel IconDr.Camel's Paper Summary Blogラクダ博士について

ラクダ博士は、Health Journal が論文の内容を分かりやすく解説するために作成した架空のキャラクターです。
難解な医学論文を、専門知識のない方にも理解しやすいように、噛み砕いて説明することを目指しています。

* ラクダ博士による解説は、あくまで論文の要点をまとめたものであり、原論文の完全な代替となるものではありません。詳細な内容については、必ず原論文をご参照ください。
* ラクダ博士は架空のキャラクターであり、実際の医学研究者や医療従事者とは一切関係がありません。
* 解説の内容は Health Journal が独自に解釈・作成したものであり、原論文の著者または出版社の見解を反映するものではありません。


引用元：
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.15704

データ提供：米国国立医学図書館（NLM）

Entecavir vs. Lamivudine: A Battle for Hepatitis B Prevention in the Desert

This study delves into the complex world of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation, a serious complication for lymphoma patients undergoing chemotherapy. The authors conducted a randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of entecavir and lamivudine in preventing HBV reactivation in patients receiving R-CHOP chemotherapy. Imagine a desert where the threat of HBV reactivation looms large—this study seeks to find the best weapon to fight it.

Entecavir: A Powerful Shield in the Desert

The results revealed that entecavir was superior to lamivudine in preventing HBV-related hepatitis, HBV reactivation, and chemotherapy disruption. It's like finding a sturdy shield in the desert, offering protection against the dangers of HBV reactivation. The study found significantly lower rates of these complications in the entecavir group, demonstrating its effectiveness in safeguarding patients from the ravages of HBV.

Navigating Hepatitis B: A Path to Protection

This study provides valuable insights for managing HBV reactivation in lymphoma patients undergoing chemotherapy. It's like discovering a safe passage through a treacherous desert—choosing entecavir as prophylaxis could significantly reduce the risk of serious complications.

Dr. Camel's Conclusion

Entecavir proves to be a more effective prophylactic agent than lamivudine in preventing HBV reactivation among lymphoma patients receiving R-CHOP chemotherapy. This finding, like a well-worn path through the desert, offers a safer and more effective approach to managing HBV reactivation in this vulnerable patient population.
Date :
  1. Date Completed 2014-12-23
  2. Date Revised 2022-03-09
Further Info :

Pubmed ID

25514302

DOI: Digital Object Identifier

10.1001/jama.2014.15704

SNS
PICO Info
in preparation
Languages

English

Positive IndicatorAn AI analysis index that serves as a benchmark for how positive the results of the study are. Note that it is a benchmark and requires careful interpretation and consideration of different perspectives.

This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.