Analysis of clinical and virologic features in Hepatitis B e Antigen (HbeAg)-negative and HbeAg-positive Egyptian chronic hepatitis B patients.
Egypt
HBeAg
Hepatitis B
fibrosis
Journal
African health sciences
ISSN: 1729-0503
Titre abrégé: Afr Health Sci
Pays: Uganda
ID NLM: 101149451
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2020
Jun 2020
Historique:
entrez:
9
11
2020
pubmed:
10
11
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B infection has a divergent clinical course from that of HBeAg-positive infection. To analyze the frequency and to compare the different features of HBeAg-negative and HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B patients. One hundred and twenty one Egyptian patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), underwent laboratory investigations and transient elastography (TE). Comparisons according to HBeAg status were conducted regarding their demographic, liver biochemical and virologic characters. 97 patients (80.2%) were HBeAg-negative while 24 patients (19.8%) were HBeAg-positive. HBeAg-negative patients were significantly older in age than CHBeAg-positive patients (p=0.001). ALT levels in HBeAg-negative patients were significantly lower than those in HBeAg-positive patients (p=0.02), whereas serum albumin was lower in the HBeAg-positive group (p=0.03). The percentage of HBV DNA higher than 20000 IU/mL in HBeAg-negative patients was lower than those in HBeAg-positive patients (p=0.24). Stages of fibrosis by TE showed that 30.9% of HBeAg-negative and 41.7% of HBeAg-positive had a fibrosis score >F2. Four patients (3.3%) were diagnosed with HCC; all of whom were HBeAg-negative. HBeAg-negative patients compared with HBeAg-positive patients had older age, lower ALT and serum HBVDNA levels, but more incidence of HCC.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B infection has a divergent clinical course from that of HBeAg-positive infection.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
To analyze the frequency and to compare the different features of HBeAg-negative and HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B patients.
METHODS
METHODS
One hundred and twenty one Egyptian patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), underwent laboratory investigations and transient elastography (TE). Comparisons according to HBeAg status were conducted regarding their demographic, liver biochemical and virologic characters.
RESULT
RESULTS
97 patients (80.2%) were HBeAg-negative while 24 patients (19.8%) were HBeAg-positive. HBeAg-negative patients were significantly older in age than CHBeAg-positive patients (p=0.001). ALT levels in HBeAg-negative patients were significantly lower than those in HBeAg-positive patients (p=0.02), whereas serum albumin was lower in the HBeAg-positive group (p=0.03). The percentage of HBV DNA higher than 20000 IU/mL in HBeAg-negative patients was lower than those in HBeAg-positive patients (p=0.24). Stages of fibrosis by TE showed that 30.9% of HBeAg-negative and 41.7% of HBeAg-positive had a fibrosis score >F2. Four patients (3.3%) were diagnosed with HCC; all of whom were HBeAg-negative.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
HBeAg-negative patients compared with HBeAg-positive patients had older age, lower ALT and serum HBVDNA levels, but more incidence of HCC.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33163026
doi: 10.4314/ahs.v20i2.13
pmc: PMC7609103
doi:
Substances chimiques
DNA, Viral
0
Hepatitis B e Antigens
0
Alanine Transaminase
EC 2.6.1.2
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
649-655Informations de copyright
© 2020 Fouad R et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None to be declared.
Références
Zhonghua Gan Zang Bing Za Zhi. 2012 May;20(5):348-52
pubmed: 22971279
Gastroenterol Clin Biol. 2008 Sep;32(6 Suppl 1):58-67
pubmed: 18973847
World J Gastroenterol. 2005 Sep 7;11(33):5193-8
pubmed: 16127751
World J Gastroenterol. 2008 Sep 21;14(35):5448-53
pubmed: 18803358
J Viral Hepat. 2002 May;9(3):229-34
pubmed: 12010512
J Hepatol. 2008 Feb;48(2):335-52
pubmed: 18096267
Hepatology. 2002 Jun;35(6):1522-7
pubmed: 12029639
Liver Int. 2015 Sep;35(9):2082-9
pubmed: 25612083
Hepatology. 2004 Sep;40(3):747-55
pubmed: 15349915
Intervirology. 2013;56(5):278-83
pubmed: 23887183
Semin Liver Dis. 2003 Feb;23(1):81-8
pubmed: 12616453
Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi. 2005 Sep;44(9):648-51
pubmed: 16202251
Semin Liver Dis. 2005;25 Suppl 1:3-8
pubmed: 16103976
J Infect Dis. 2010 Nov 1;202(9):1309-18
pubmed: 20874517
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005 Aug 15;22(4):301-7
pubmed: 16097996
J Viral Hepat. 1998 Jul;5(4):241-8
pubmed: 9751010
Hepatology. 2007 Feb;45(2):507-39
pubmed: 17256718
J Hepatol. 2006 Oct;45(4):529-38
pubmed: 16879891
J Viral Hepat. 2007 Mar;14(3):147-52
pubmed: 17305879
J Viral Hepat. 2002 Jan;9(1):52-61
pubmed: 11851903
J Infect Dis. 1997 Jun;175(6):1285-93
pubmed: 9180165
Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2005 Mar;16(2):65-72
pubmed: 18159530
Liver Int. 2005 Jun;25(3):564-70
pubmed: 15910494
J Viral Hepat. 2005 Sep;12(5):456-64
pubmed: 16108759
Hepatology. 2002 Dec;36(6):1408-15
pubmed: 12447866
J Viral Hepat. 2001 Sep;8(5):311-21
pubmed: 11555188
Semin Liver Dis. 2006 May;26(2):130-41
pubmed: 16673291
J Med Virol. 2003 Aug;70(4):529-36
pubmed: 12794714
J Hepatol. 2012 Jul;57(1):167-85
pubmed: 22436845
Gastroenterology. 2003 Feb;124(2):327-34
pubmed: 12557138