Show simple item record

Meta-analysis: re-treatment of genotype I hepatitis C nonresponders and relapsers after failing interferon and ribavirin combination therapy

dc.contributor.authorSingal, Amit G.en_US
dc.contributor.authorWaljee, Akbar K.en_US
dc.contributor.authorShiffman, Mitchell L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBacon, B. R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSchoenfeld, Philip S.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-01-31T17:36:21Z
dc.date.available2011-12-02T15:41:53Zen_US
dc.date.issued2010-10en_US
dc.identifier.citationSingal, A. G.; Waljee, A. K.; Shiffman, M.; Bacon, B. R.; Schoenfeld, P. S.; (2010). "Meta-analysis: re-treatment of genotype I hepatitis C nonresponders and relapsers after failing interferon and ribavirin combination therapy." Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 32(8): 969-983. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/79170>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0269-2813en_US
dc.identifier.issn1365-2036en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/79170
dc.description.abstractAliment Pharmacol Ther 2010; 32: 969–983The efficacy of re-treating genotype I hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients who failed combination therapy with interferon/pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin remains unclear.To quantify sustained virological response (SVR) rates with different re-treatment regimens through meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Randomized controlled trials of genotype I HCV treatment failure patients that compared currently available re-treatment regimens were selected. Two investigators independently extracted data on patient population, methods and results. The pooled relative risk of SVR for treatment regimens was computed using a random effects model.Eighteen RCTs were included. In nonresponders to standard interferon/ribavirin, re-treatment with high-dose PEG-IFN combination therapy improved SVR compared with standard PEG-IFN combination therapy (RR = 1.49; 95% CI: 1.09–2.04), but SVR rates did not exceed 18% in most studies. In relapsers to standard interferon/ribavirin, re-treatment with high-dose PEG-IFN or prolonged CIFN improved SVR (RR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.16–2.14) and achieved SVR rates of 43–69%.In genotype I HCV treatment failure patients who received combination therapy, re-treatment with high-dose PEG-IFN combination therapy is superior to re-treatment with standard combination therapy, although SVR rates are variable for nonresponders (≤18%) and relapsers (43–69%). Re-treatment may be appropriate for select patients, especially relapsers and individuals with bridging fibrosis or compensated cirrhosis.en_US
dc.format.extent277334 bytes
dc.format.extent3106 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.titleMeta-analysis: re-treatment of genotype I hepatitis C nonresponders and relapsers after failing interferon and ribavirin combination therapyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelOtolaryngologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPharmacy and Pharmacologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDivision of Gastroenterology-Hepatology Section, Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center, Richmond, VA, USA.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherVA Center of Excellence for Health Services Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.en_US
dc.identifier.pmid20937042en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/79170/1/j.1365-2036.2010.04427.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1365-2036.2010.04427.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceAlimentary Pharmacology & Therapeuticsen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.