Serum HBV DNA and ALT levels were measured every 3 months after entecavir treatment began. Virologic response (VR) was defined as undetectable serum HBV DNA by real-time PCR assay (<60 IU/mL).3,22 more Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to test HBeAg state. Statistical analysis Continuous variables which did not show normal distribution were expressed as the median with range. Differences in baseline characteristics between the patient group with or without HBeAg and VR were analyzed using Student t-test or Mann-Whitney rank sum test for continuous variables and the ��2 test for categorical variables. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was tested for correlation between two variables.

Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was calculated as previously reported23 to assess the predictive value of pre-treatment variables for VR using Medicalc version 11 (Medicalc software, Mariakerke, Belgium). A two-tailed P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS Clinical characteristics Fifty two treatment-na?ve chronic hepatitis B patients were enrolled during the study period, and six patients were lost to follow up after 6 months of entecavir therapy. The median duration of treatment was 26 months (range: 7-35 months). The baseline characteristics of these patients are summarized in Table 1. The baseline HBV DNA levels were significantly higher in the HBeAg-positive group than in the HBeAg-negative group (P=0.001). The HBsAg levels were similar between HBeAg-positive and negative groups.

However, the ratio of baseline HBsAg titer to HBV DNA level (“HBsAg/HBV DNA ratio”, log10 [HBsAg]/log10 [HBV DNA]) was significantly higher in the HBeAg-negative patients (P=0.01). Table 1 Baseline characteristics of the patients Virologic response to entecavir therapy and predictors At 3,6,12 and 24 months, cumulative virologic response rates were 40.0%, 71.2%, 81.5%, and 88.0%, respectively (Fig. 1). When baseline characteristics were compared according to VR, VR (+) group showed significantly lower HBV DNA levels and higher HBsAg/HBV DNA ratio (P=0.013, 0.001, respectively; Table 2). However, HBsAg levels were not significantly different between VR (+) and VR (-) groups (P=0.278; Table 2). Univariate analysis showed that the VR rate was significantly higher in HBeAg-negative patients (55%, 85% and 95% at 3,6 and 12 months, respectively) compared to that in HBeAg-positive patients (34.

4%, 62.5% and 76.1% at 3,6 and 12 months, respectively; P=0.043; Fig. 2A). Gender, presence of cirrhosis, and ALT level were not significant predictors of VR (P=0.223, 0.261, 0.39, respectively; Fig. 2B-D), whereas low pre-treatment serum HBV DNA level was associated with higher VR, although the statistical significance was marginal (P=0.059, Fig. 2F). The HBsAg/HBV AV-951 DNA ratio categorized by the cut-off value of 0.