Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 389

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparison of Adefovir and Tenofovir in the Treatment of Lamivudine–Resistant Hepatitis B Virus Infection

van Bömmel, Florian, Wünsche, Thomas, Mauss, Stefan, Reinke, Petra, Bergk, Alexandra, Schürmann, Dirk, Wiedenmann, Bertram, Berg, Thomas·2004·Hepatology

Abstract

Adefovir dipivoxil was recently approved for the treatment of wild–type and lamivudine–resistant hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, a congender of adefovir that is used in the treatment of HIV infected patients, has recently been shown to also be effective in patients with lamivudine–resistant HBV infection. We therefore compared the two substances in a study of 53 patients defined by high HBV DNA (>6 log10 copies/mL) levels and genotypic evidence of lamivudine resistance. Thirty–five patients received tenofovir for 72 to 130 weeks, and 18 received adefovir for 60 to 80 weeks. Changes in HBV DNA levels were followed for the complete period of 48 weeks. Early viral kinetics were compared on matched subgroups of 5 patients each. Individually, all tenofovir–treated patients showed a strong and early suppression of HBV DNA within a few weeks whether they were coinfected with HIV or were without comorbidity. In contrast, considerable individual variations in HBV DNA decline were observed in the adefovir group. Thus at week 48, only 44% of these patients had HBV DNA levels below 105 copies/mL in contrast to 100% of the tenofovir–treated patients ( P = .001). No severe side effects were noticed in either group. No evidence of phenotypic viral resistance could be demonstrated in the tenofovir–treated patients in the long term (up to 130 weeks). In conclusion , tenofovir may become an effective alternative for the treatment of patients with lamivudine–resistant HBV infection. (Hepatology 2004;40:1421-1425.)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hep.20464

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 389

Metadata

Authors
van Bömmel, F., Wünsche, T., Mauss, S., Reinke, P., Bergk, A., Schürmann, D., Wiedenmann, B., & Berg, T.
Venue
Hepatology
Published
2004-12
Volume
40
Issue
6
Pages
1421-1425
ISSN
0270-9139 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2058388169
Cited by
389
References
0
FWCI
34.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of Adefovir and Tenofovir in the Treatment of Lamivudine–Resistant Hepatitis B Virus Infection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hep.20464
The paper
van Bömmel, F., Wünsche, T., Mauss, S., Reinke, P., Bergk, A., Schürmann, D., Wiedenmann, B., & Berg, T. (2004). Comparison of Adefovir and Tenofovir in the Treatment of Lamivudine–Resistant Hepatitis B Virus Infection. Hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.20464

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.