Backgrounds/Aims
It has been shown that adefovir dipivoxil is an effective antiviral agent in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB), not only in wild-type hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, but also in lamivudine-resistant (LAMV-R) cases. However, little is known about the durability of the virologic response to adefovir in LAMV-R CHB patients. Methods: Fifteen HBV e-antigen (HBeAg)-positive, LAMV-R CHB patients showed a virologic response to adefovir monotherapy. These patients received additional adefovir for at least a further 12 months. The virologic relapse rate after discontinuation of adefovir was evaluated. In addition, predictive factors associated with virologic relapse were investigated. Results: The median level of serum HBV DNA before adefovir administration was 7,457,840 IU/mL (range 107,920-99,524,960 IU/mL). The median duration of adefovir treatment was 30 months (range 14-46 months). During a median follow-up period of 14 months after discontinuation of adefovir, the 1-, 2-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month cumulative relapse rates were 26.7%, 53.3%, 73.3%, 80%, and 80%, respectively. High pretreatment HBV DNA levels were found to be the only factor that was predictive of off-therapy relapse. Conclusions: Our data suggest that the adefovir-monotherapy-induced virologic response is not durable in most patients with LAMV-R HBeAg-positive CHB, especially in those with a high pretreatment HBV DNA level. (Korean J Hepatol 2008;15:52-58)

Background/Aims
Adefovir dipivoxil is effective in patients with lamivudine-resistant hepatitis B virus (HBV). However, little is known about its role in Korean patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis. We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy and safety of adefovir dipivoxil in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis with lamivudine resistance, and we compared this to the patients having compensated liver disease.
Methods
The patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic liver disease were enrolled and they received adefovir dipivoxil 10 mg daily. The clinical course and the biochemical and virological response of the decompensated cirrhosis group were compared with those of the patients with compensated liver disease group. Results: One-hundred and one patients (the decompensated cirrhosis group, n=53; the compensated liver disease group, n=48) were evaluated. During the following up, 13 patients in the decompensated group and 4 patients in the compensated group dropped out of the treatment (P=0.011). After adefovir treatment, the proportion of patients with serum HBV DNA below 0.5 pg/mL in the decompensated group was less than that in the compensated group (50.9% vs. 83.3%, P=0.001), but the rates of normalized ALT, HBeAg loss and HBeAg seroconversion did not differ. The change of the Child-Pugh score in the decompensated group was 9.1±1.8 to 6.9±1.6 (P<0.001). The biochemical response in decompensated group was slower than that in the compensated group. Renal toxicity was not observed in either group. Conclusions: These results suggest that adefovir dipivoxil would be an effective and safe treatment for patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis with lamivudine resistance, but its effect might be limited and slower for decompensated cirrhosis. (Korean J Hepatol 2005;11:125-134)