Chun Yang, Bo Qin, Zhe Yuan, Limin Chen, Hong-yu Zhou
Introduction and aim. Studies suggest that entecavir and lamivudine are useful as prophylactics against hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients undergoing chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy, but which drug is more effective is unclear. Here we meta-analyzed available evidence on relative efficacy of prophylactic entecavir or lamivudine therapy in patients with chronic or resolved hepatitis B infection who were undergoing chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy. Material and methods. Two reviewers searched PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar as well as reference lists in relevant articles to find studies published between January 2005 and May 2015 that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data on HBV reactivation, HBV-related hepatitis and all-cause mortality were extracted from the studies and meta-analyzed. Results. A total of eight studies involving 593 patients were included in the meta-analysis, which was performed using a fixed-effect model since no significant heterogeneity was found. Entecavir was associated with significantly lower risk of HBV reactivation than lamivudine (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.52) as well as lower risk of HBV-related hepatitis (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.40). The two drugs were associated with similar risk of all-cause mortality (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.35). Eggers test suggested no significant publication bias in the meta-analysis. Conclusions. The available evidence suggests that entecavir is more effective than lamivudine for preventing HBV reactivation and HBVrelated hepatitis in patients with chronic or resolved HBV infection who are undergoing chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy.
Key words. Efficacy., Nucleoside analogue., Hepatitis B virus., Reactivation., Prevention.