Table 1.
Characteristics of included clinical trials in meta-analysis
| Study | Region | Study type | NA regimens (/day) | Sample size (n) (treatment vs. placebo) | Mean age (ys) (treatment vs. placebo) | Male(%) (treatment vs. placebo) | Mean ALT(U/L) (treatment vs. placebo) | Pre-existing cirrhosis(%) (treatment vs. placebo) | HBeAg (+) (%) (treatment vs. placebo) | Mean treatment duration (mon) | Follow up period (ys) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Papatheodoridis et al.[24] | Greece | Cohort | LAM 100 or 150 mg then add or switch to ADV | 396 (201 vs. 195) | 55.9 (52 ± 11) vs. (49 ± 14) | 82.6 (83.1 vs. 82.1) | 83.2 (98 vs. 68) | 33.3 (31.8 vs. 34.9) | 0 | 48 | 3.8 |
| Matsumoto et al.[25] | Japan | Case-control | LAM 100 mg | 754 (377 vs. 377) | 41.5 (41.5 ± 12.0) vs. (41.4 ± 12.2) | 72.8 (73.2 vs. 72.4) | 171.6 (191.7 ± 234.8) vs. (151.5 ± 180.5) | 17.5 (17.2 vs. 17.8) | 54.8 (51.2 vs. 58.4) | 18.9 | 2.7 |
| Yuen et al.[26] | Hong Kong | Cohort | LAM 100 mg | 266 (142 vs. 124) | 33.7 (33.9 vs. 33.4) | 73.7 (74.7 vs. 72.6) | 61 (65 vs. 56.5) | 0 | 100 (100 vs. 100) | 89.9 | 8.2 |
| Liaw et al.[23] | Taiwan | RCT | LAM 100 mg | 651 (436 vs. 215) | 43.3 (43 vs. 44) | 85 (85 vs. 85) | 69.3 (70 vs. 68) | 61.3 (60 vs. 65) | 58 (58 vs. 58) | 32.4 | 2.7 |
| Eun et al.[27] | Korea | RCT | LAM 100 mg then add or switch to ADV | 222 (111 vs. 111) | M | M | M | 100 | M | M | 4.4 |
| Jong Ryul Eun et al.[28] | Korea | Cohort | LAM | 1355 (768 vs. 587) | 36.8 (39.2 vs. 33.6) | M | 152.7 (161.3 vs. 141.4) | 50.9 (67.3 vs. 25.2) | 85.2 (80.1 vs. 91.8) | More than 48 | 4.4 |
M: Data missing in the studies; LAM: Lamivudine; ADV: Adefovir dipivoxil