A comparative network meta-analysis of standard of care treatments in treatment-naive chronic hepatitis B patients

Urbano Sbarigia, Talitha Vincken*, Peter Wigfield, Mahmoud Hashim, Bart Heeg, Maarten Postma

*Bijbehorende auteur voor dit werk

OnderzoeksoutputAcademicpeer review

2 Citaten (Scopus)
19 Downloads (Pure)


Objective:Published network meta-analyses of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) treatments are either out-of-date or excluded key treatments. Therefore, we aimed to comprehensively update the efficacy evidence for the following end points: Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) loss, hepatitis B early antigen (HBeAg) seroconversion and hepatitis B virus DNA (HBV DNA) suppression.Materials & methods:Approved treatments in CHB and their combinations were evaluated. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify all randomized controlled trials in treatment-naive CHB patients. Included studies reported at least one of the end points of interest. A frequentist probability network meta-analysis was performed for each end point. The choice of fixed effect or random-effect model was based on the I-square statistic, a measure of variation in study outcomes between studies. The analyses were performed separately for HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative patients. For the primary analyses, end points measured 48 +/- 4 weeks after treatment initiation were considered.Results:A total of 47 randomized controlled trials (13,826 patients), covering 23 unique treatment regimens, were included: a total of 29 reported HBsAg loss, 36 reported HBeAg seroconversion and 37 reported HBV DNA suppression. For both HBsAg loss and HBeAg seroconversion, pegylated interferon-based regimens were the most effective strategy in both HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative patients. On the other hand, for HBV DNA suppression, nucleosides-based regimens were the most effective strategy in both HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative patients.Conclusion:Our findings confirm available evidence around the comparative efficacy of available CHB treatments. Therefore, they can be used to update relevant cost-effectiveness analyses and clinical guidelines.

Originele taal-2English
Pagina's (van-tot)1051-1065
Aantal pagina's15
TijdschriftJournal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Nummer van het tijdschrift15
StatusPublished - aug-2020

Citeer dit