摘要
目的比较替比夫定与拉米夫定抗乙型肝炎病毒的临床疗效。方法收集慢性乙型肝炎患者100例，按治疗药物不同分为替比夫定组和拉米夫定组各50例。观察两组HBV-DNA基线下降值、HBV-DNA低于检测下限、治疗应答、HBeAg转阴率、ALT复常率、病毒学应答率、原发治疗失败率等。结果治疗52周替比夫定组的疗效：HBV-DNA基线下降值（6．21og10）、HBV-DNA低于检测下限（69．6％）、治疗应答（64．2％）、HBeAg转阴率（30．5％）、ALT复常率（88．9％）、病毒学应答率（30．5％）、原发治疗失败率（3．6％）高于拉米夫定组（5．41og10、43．4％、86．8％、20．3％、75．1％、18．1％、16．0％）（t=3．65，t=6．55，t=3．95，t=3．85，t=8．65，t=6．06，t=15．02，P〈0．05～0．01）。结论替比夫定或拉米夫定治疗52周时可达到较佳疗效；替比夫定疗效高于拉米夫定。
Objective To analyze efficacy in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus by telbivudine or lamivudine. Methods To collect 100 cases of patients with chronic hepatitis B,according different drugs divided into： telbivudine group（50 cases）and 50 cases of lamivudine group. Methods The HBV-DNA baseline decline value,HBV DNA below the detection limit,treatment response. HBeAg negative rate, ALT normalization rate,virological response rates,prlmary treatment failure rate were observed. Results The treatment efficacy at 52 weeks in telbivudine group of HBV-DNA decline in the value of the baseline（6.21og10） ,HBV DNA below the detection limit（ 69. 6% ） ,treatment response （ 64. 2% ）, HBeAg negative conversion rate （ 30. 5 % ）, ALT normalization rate （ 88.9% ）. virologic response rates（30. 5% ） ,primary treatment failure rate（3.6% ） ,higher than the lamivudine group（5.41og10、3.4%. 86.8%,20.3%.75. 1%.18. 1%,16.0%）（t=3.65, t =6.55, t =3.95, t =3.85, t =8.65,t =6.06, t = 15.02,P 〈 0. 05 - 0. 01 ）. Conclusion The curative effect of telbivudine and lamivudine at 52 weeks achieve better efficacy; curative effect of telbivudine higher than the lamivudine.
出处
《中国基层医药》
CAS
2009年第7期1193-1194,共2页
Chinese Journal of Primary Medicine and Pharmacy
