8% vs. 59.2%, P < 0.05); patients on combined consolidation therapy > 2-years with lower baseline HBV-DNA (< 105copies /mL) had a low cumulative relapse rate of 15.4%. Eight cases had HBsAg seroconversion without relapse. Baseline HBV-DNA and HBsAg at the end of treatment were two factors predictive of relapse. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that a Alvelestat 50% of relapse in NUCs-naïve CHB patients under LdT and LAM treatment. Most of the relapses

occurred within 4-years. Lower relapse rate as an ideal long-term durability could be observed in patients who achieved EVS with extended consolidation therapy and had lower baseline HBV-DNA. HBsAg seroconversion was a solid indicator

for sustained viral response. Disclosures: The following people have nothing to disclose: Hong-Ying Pan, Hong-Yi Pan, Li Chen, DanHong Yang, HaiJun Huang, YongXi Tong, Cui-Rong Chen, XingJiang Jian Background/Aim : Although entecavir (ETV) has high potency for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, partial virological response (PVR) has been shown in some patients. There are limited data of long-term ETV therapy in PVR patients. Saracatinib molecular weight The aim of this study was to determine the probability of response during long-term ETV therapy in PVR patients and to analyze tenofovir diso-proxil (TDF) efficacy on these patients. Methods: We retrospectively studied 120 patients with PVR (detectable HBV DNA at 12 months of therapy) to ETV. We compared the cumulative probability of complete virological response

selleck inhibitor (defined as HBV DNA <20 IU/ml), HBV DNA levels, and HBe Ag loss during prolonged therapy in nucleot(s)ide analogue (NUC)- naTve patients to NUC-experienced patients. We also analyzed CVR rate in patient switched from ETV to TDF Results: Among 120 patients, 96 (80.0%) were NUC- naTve. The cumulative probability of achieving CVR was significantly high in NUC- naTve group (51.2% vs. 39.5% at 12months, 71.1% vs. 39.4% at 24months, 77.3% vs. 39.4% at 36months of treatment from the time of PVR, p=0.036). There were no differences in change of HBV DNA and HBe Ag loss rate in two groups. Upon multi-variate analysis, HBV DNA at PVR (p=0.001) and NUC- experience (p=0.013) were associated with CVR at 24months from the time of PVR. In prediction of CVR at 24month, HBV DNA ≤177 IU/ml at the time of PVR showed 76.2% of sensitivity and 81.6% of specificity (AUROC 0.804, p=0.000). In subgroup analysis in patients switched to TDF or added TDF, the cumulative probability of CVR was 93.1% at 6 months of therapy. Conclusion: TDF therapy is effective for achieving CVR in ETV PVR patients. We should consider TDF therapy in patients with PVR, if patient have NUC- experience or HBV DNA is above 177 IU/ml at the time of PVR.