A 24-week, parallel-group, open-label, randomized clinical trial comparing the early antiviral efficacy of telbivudine and entecavir in the treatment of hepatitis B e antigen-positive chronic hepatitis B virus infection in adult Chinese patients

Screening for Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Nonpregnant Adolescents and Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

Importance

A 2014 review for the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found antiviral therapy for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection associated with improved intermediate outcomes, although evidence on clinical outcomes was limited.

Objective

To update the 2014 HBV screening review in nonpregnant adolescents and adults to inform the USPSTF.

Data Sources

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Ovid MEDLINE (2014 to August 2019); with surveillance through July 24, 2020.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on screening and antiviral therapy; cohort studies on screening, antiviral therapy clinical outcomes, and the association between achieving intermediate outcomes after antiviral therapy and clinical outcomes.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

One investigator abstracted data; a second investigator checked accuracy. Two investigators independently assessed study quality. Random-effects profile likelihood meta-analysis was performed.

Results

Thirty trials and 20 cohort studies, with a total of 94 168 participants, were included. No study directly evaluated the effects of screening for HBV infection vs no screening on clinical outcomes such as mortality, hepatocellular carcinoma, or cirrhosis. Screening strategies that focused on risk factors such as ever having immigrated from high-prevalence countries and demographic and behavioral risk factors would identify nearly all HBV infection cases. In 1 study (n = 21 008), only screening immigrants from high-prevalence countries would miss approximately two-thirds of infected persons. Based on 18 trials (n = 2972), antiviral therapy compared with placebo or no treatment was associated with greater likelihood of achieving intermediate outcomes, such as virologic suppression and hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg) or hepatitis B surface antigen loss or seroconversion; the numbers needed to treat ranged from 2.6 for virologic suppression to 17 for HBeAg seroconversion. Based on 12 trials (n = 4127), first-line antiviral therapies were at least as likely as nonpreferred therapies to achieve intermediate outcomes. Based on 16 trials (n = 4809), antiviral therapy might be associated with improved clinical outcomes, but data were sparse and imprecise. Nine cohort studies (n = 3893) indicated an association between achieving an intermediate outcome following antiviral therapy and improved clinical outcomes but were heterogeneous (hazard ratios ranged from 0.07 to 0.87). Antiviral therapy was associated with higher risk of withdrawal due to adverse events vs placebo or no antiviral therapy.

Conclusions and Relevance

There was no direct evidence for the clinical benefits and harms of HBV screening vs no screening. Antiviral therapy for HBV infection was associated with improved intermediate outcomes and may improve clinical outcomes.

Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis for Assessing Adverse Effects of Anti-hepatitis B Drugs

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Oral nucleoside/nucleotide analogues (NAs) have been advocated for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) treatment with good efficacy. However, less attention has been put on their adverse events. Therefore, a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to evaluate the relative safety of five NAs (lamivudine, adefovir dipivoxil, entecavir, telbivudine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) in CHB treatment among adults.

METHODS

Eligible randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies were systematically and thoroughly searched until May 1, 2019. Poisson-prior-based Bayesian NMA was performed to synthesize both direct and indirect evidence with reporting hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) for serious adverse events (SAEs) and hepatic/renal impairments.

RESULTS

Thirty-three RCTs and 11 prospective cohort studies were identified. As to SAEs, no statistically significant difference was found of any comparison among five NAs. In terms of hepatotoxicity, lamivudine was safer than telbivudine (HR 0.45; 95% CrI 0.21, 0.85), and entecavir increased the risk by 102% (entecavir vs lamivudine: HR 2.02; 95% CrI 1.19, 3.27).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this large NMA could influence clinical practice, and the methodological framework of this study could provide evidence-based support to analyze sparse safety data in the field.

Adverse events of nucleos(t)ide analogues for chronic hepatitis B: a systematic review

Nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) are the main drug category used in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) treatment. Despite the fact that NAs have a favourable safety profile, undesired adverse events (AEs) may occur during the treatment of CHB. Given the eminent number of patients currently receiving NAs, even a small risk of any of these toxicities can represent a major medical issue. The main objective of this review was to analyse information available on AEs associated with the use of NAs in published studies. We choose the following MesH terms for this systematic review: chronic hepatitis B, side effects and treatment. All articles published from 1 January 1990 up to 19 February 2018 in MEDLINE of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and LILACS databases were searched. A total of 120 articles were selected for analysis, comprising 6419 patients treated with lamivudine (LAM), 5947 with entecavir (ETV), 3566 with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), 3096 with telbivudine (LdT), 1178 with adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) and 876 with tenofovir alafenamide (TAF). The most common AEs in all NAs assessed were abdominal pain/discomfort, nasopharyngitis/upper respiratory tract infections, fatigue, and headache. TAF displays the highest density of AEs per patient treated among NAs (1.14 AE/treated patient). In conclusion, treatment of CHB with NAs is safe, with a low incidence of AEs. Despite the general understanding TAF being safer than TDF, the number of patients treated with TAF still is too small in comparison to other NAs to consolidate an accurate safety profile. PROSPERO Registration No. CRD42018086471.

A comparison of telbivudine and entecavir in the treatment of hepatitis B e antigen-positive patients: a prospective cohort study in China

There are few studies directly comparing the efficacy and safety of telbivudine and entecavir. The present prospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of these compounds in 196 hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive patients with chronic hepatitis B for a median follow-up period of 172 weeks; 97 were treated with telbivudine and 99 were treated with entecavir. Patients showing suboptimal responses could also take adefovir at 24-48 weeks and all patients with viral breakthrough were started on adefovir. The 240-week cumulative proportions of patients showing undetectable hepatitis B DNA levels and serum alanine transaminase (ALT) normalization were similar in the two study groups. Viral breakthrough developed in 14% of the telbivudine group and in 2% of the entecavir group (p 0.002). Interestingly, the cumulative proportions of patients treated with entecavir and telbivudine showing HBeAg seroconversion were 12% versus 21% at 48 weeks (p 0.041), 15% versus 38% at 96 weeks (p 0.001), 24% versus 50% at 144 weeks (p 0.001), 33% versus 53% at 192 weeks (p 0.004) and 36% versus 53% at 240 weeks (p 0.005), respectively. Patients treated with telbivudine were therefore significantly more likely to show HBeAg seroconversion than those receiving entecavir and similar results were observed in study sub-groups matched for age, serum ALT, and HBV DNA levels. A safety analysis identified no differences between grade 3/4 creatine kinase elevations in the study groups and only telbivudine was associated with improved kidney function.

Short Term Virologic Efficacies of Telbivudine versus Entecavir against Hepatitis B-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Telbivudine has been reported to be more effective than lamivudine. However, because of the resistance rate to telbivudine (TLV), the current guidelines recommend entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir (TNV) as the first-line therapy for chronic hepatitis B. We investigated the short term virologic efficacy of TLV in comparison with ETV as the first-line agent of HBV suppression in HBV-related advanced HCC patients. A total of 86 consecutive patients with HBV-related HCC for whom antiviral treatment was initiated in Incheon St. Mary's Hospital between 2010 and 2013 were analyzed. Virologic responses were investigated on the 4th, 12th, and 24th weeks of the antiviral therapies. In patients with advanced TNM stage cancer (stage 3 or 4) and poor liver function (Child-Pugh class B or C), the virologic response rates at weeks 12 and 24 were 25% (1/4) and 42.8% (3/7) in the TLV group and 33.3% (1/3) and 33.3% (1/3) in the ETV group, respectively (P = 0.424, P = 0.800). The short term efficacy of TLV was similar to that of ETV. Since TLV is highly cost-effective, it should be considered as a first-line antiviral agent in patients with advanced HCC, poor liver function, and short life expectancies.

Real-world application of the roadmap model in chronic hepatitis B patients with telbivudine therapy

BACKGROUND

The roadmap concept provides a strategy to maximize hepatitis B virus suppression and minimize drug resistance by add-on or switching therapy in patients with a suboptimal response at Week 24. The efficacy of this strategy in routine clinical practice remains to be validated.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to validate the roadmap concept in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B, and to investigate the virologic efficacy and kinetics of quantitative hepatitis B surface antigen (qHBsAg) during telbivudine therapy in a real-world setting.

METHODS

A prospective, cohort study enrolled 96 consecutive, treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B receiving telbivudine therapy. At Week 24, only 17 of 42 (40%) partial or inadequate responders (hepatitis B virus DNA 60-2000 and >2000 IU/mL, respectively) followed the roadmap model and consented to adefovir add-on therapy. The remaining patients continued to receive telbivudine monotherapy.

RESULTS

At Week 96, none of the patients receiving adefovir add-on therapy, and 28% of patients receiving telbivudine monotherapy, either partial or inadequate responders, developed genotypic resistance (P = 0.03). Poor early qHBsAg kinetics (an increase in qHBsAg >0.4 log IU/mL at Week 12) was the only significant predictor of genotypic resistance (adjusted hazard ratio = 13.83; 95% CI, 1.79-106.76; P = 0.01). Telbivudine monotherapy was efficacious in 94% of partial responders who did not have poor early qHBsAg kinetics, remaining free of drug resistance after 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of the roadmap model with add-on adefovir therapy prevented genotypic resistance. However, telbivudine monotherapy achieved a good response in the majority of partial responders who did not have poor early qHBsAg kinetics. Poor early qHBsAg kinetics was an early predictor of genotypic resistance at Week 96. Modification of the roadmap model to incorporate early qHBsAg kinetics may further optimize the efficacy of the treatment strategy of hepatitis B virus.

Telbivudine versus entecavir for nucleos(t)ide-naive HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacies of entecavir and telbivudine in treatment-naive hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg)-positive Asian patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (January 1, 2000 to March 30, 2012) directly comparing entecavir 0.5 mg/d and telbivudine 600 mg/d, used for a minimum of 12 weeks in nucleos(t)ide-naive Asian patients with HBeAg-positive CHB, were searched in the PubMed, Embase, OVID, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP and WanFang databases. Publication quality was assessed using the Jadad quality scale. The rates of viral response, biochemical response, HBeAg loss and HBeAg seroconversion were analyzed using forest plots.

RESULTS

Seven eligible articles (867 patients in total) were included in this meta-analysis. With regard to the rates of hepatitis B virus DNA suppression, there were no significant differences between patients treated with entecavir or telbivudine at 12 and 48 weeks, but telbivudine was superior at 24 weeks. Twelve, 24 and 48 weeks after the start of therapy, the rates of alanine aminotransferase normalization were similar between the 2 drugs, and patients treated with telbivudine had higher HBeAg loss and seroconversion rates than patients treated with entecavir.

CONCLUSIONS

In nucleos(t)ide-naive Asian patients with HBeAg-positive CHB, assessed 12, 24, and 48 weeks after beginning treatment, telbivudine was as potent as entecavir in viral suppression, but superior with regard to HBeAg loss and seroconversion. Telbivudine seems to be more effective and suitable for these patients.

The importance of baseline viral load when assessing relative efficacy in treatment-naïve HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To date no network meta-analysis (NMA) has accounted for baseline variations in viral load when assessing the relative efficacy of interventions for chronic hepatitis B (CHB). We undertook baseline-adjusted and unadjusted analyses using the same data to explore the impact of baseline viral load (BVL) on CHB treatment response.

METHODS

We searched Embase, Medline, Medline in Process and the Cochrane CENTRAL databases for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of monotherapy interventions at licensed doses for use in CHB. Search strategies comprised CHB disease and drug terms (a combination of controlled vocabulary and free text terms) and also a bespoke RCT filter.The NMA was undertaken in WinBUGs using fixed and random effects methods, using data obtained from a systematic review. Individual patient data (IPD) from an entecavir clinical trial were used to quantify the impact of different baseline characteristics (in particular undetectable viral load (UVL) at 1 year) on relative treatment effect. Study level mean baseline values from all identified studies were used. Results were generated for UVL and presented as relative risks (RRs) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) using entecavir as reference treatment.

RESULTS

Overall, for all eight relevant interventions we identified 3,000 abstracts. Following full text review a total of 35 (including the contents of six clinical study reports) met the inclusion critera; 19 were in hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive patients and 14 of the 19 contained outcome information of relevance to the NMA.Entecavir and tenofovir studies had heterogeneous patient populations in terms of BVL (mean values 9.29 and 8.65 log10 copies/ml respectively). After adjusting UVL for BVL using an informative prior based on the IPD analysis, the difference between entecavir and tenofovir was not statistically significant (RR 1.27, 95% CrI 0.96 to 1.47-fixed effects). A similar conclusion was found in all sensitivity analyses. Adjusted tenofovir results were more consistent with observed clinical trial response rates.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the importance of adjusting for BVL when assessing the relative efficacy of CHB interventions in achieving UVL. This has implications for both clinical and economic decision making.

Clinical utility of entecavir for chronic hepatitis B in Chinese patients

The People's Republic of China has one of the highest rates of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. This review summarizes recent data from studies of entecavir, one of the recommended first-line oral therapies for treating chronic hepatitis B, in Chinese HBV-infected patients. Long-term treatment with entecavir is efficacious and well tolerated, and studies comparing entecavir with other nucleos(t)ide therapies, such as lamivudine, adefovir, and telbivudine, demonstrate superior antiviral effects for entecavir therapy and comparable safety profiles. Entecavir monotherapy and combination treatment with other nucleos(t) ide analogs has been shown to be efficacious in the treatment of lamivudine-resistant and adefovir-resistant patients with HBV infection, as well as in patients with multidrug-resistant disease. Entecavir has also been shown to be effective in patients with HBV-associated clinical morbidity, including cirrhosis and liver failure, as well as in preventing recurrence of HBV following liver transplantation and in preventing reactivation of HBV after immunosuppres-sive therapy. Although the cost of anti-HBV therapy is a particular concern in the People's Republic of China, a number of studies have recently demonstrated that entecavir (particularly long-term therapy) represents a more cost-effective treatment strategy compared with other nucleos(t)ide therapies. Further research is required to assess the effects of entecavir combination therapy on hepatitis B surface antigen clearance, and in drug-resistant patients in the People's Republic of China.

Efficacy and safety of a chinese herbal formula (invigorating kidney and strengthening spleen) in chronic hepatitis B virus carrier: results from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial

A Chinese Herbal Formula (CHF) has acquired a certain therapeutic effect on chronic HBV infection. To assess the efficacy and safety of CHF on HBV replication in chronic HBV carriers, we performed a randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial involving patients from 16 centers. A total of 300 confirmed chronic HBV carriers were randomized at baseline in a ratio of 2 : 1 to receive either CHF or placebo for 52 weeks. The results showed that a greater proportion of CHF than placebo treated patients achieved virological response at week 52; the mean decline of serum HBsAg levels in the CHF group dropped more obviously than that in the control group at all stages of the treatment; however, the rates of HBeAg loss and seroconversion had no difference between the two groups. Meanwhile, were presented significant increases in IFN- γ ; IL-2 levels and reductions in IL-4 and IL-10 levels in the treatment group compared to the control group at week 52. There were no drug-related serious adverse events. In conclusion, the treatment with 52-week CHF is safe and effective in inhibiting HBV replication in chronic HBV carriers. The ability of the compound to modulate host immune function probably contributed to this effect.

Risk for work-related fatigue among the employees on semiconductor manufacturing lines

To examine the potential risk factors for work-related fatigue (WRF) among workers in modern industries, the authors analyzed the records of need-for-recovery questionnaires and health checkup results for 1545 employees. Compared with regular daytime workers, and after adjusting for confounders, the workers adapting to day-and-night rotating shift work (RSW) had a 4.0-fold (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.7-5.9) increased risk for WRF, higher than the 2.2-fold risk (95% CI = 1.5-3.3) for persistent shift workers. Based on highest education level, the male employees with university degrees had the highest adjusted odds ratio (a-OR) 2.8 (95% CI = 1.0-7.8) for complaining of WRF versus compulsory education group. For female workers, currently married/cohabiting status was inversely associated with WRF (a-OR = 0.5; 95% CI = 0.2-0.9), and child-rearing responsibility moderately increased WRF risk (a-OR = 1.9; 95% CI = 1.0-3.7). Day-and-night RSW and the adaptation, educational levels of males, and domestic factors for females contributed to WRF among semiconductor manufacturing employees.

Efficacy and Safety of Telbivudine Compared to Entecavir Among HBeAg+ Chronic Hepatitis B Patients: a Meta-Analysis Study

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a serious global health problem that is associated with huge social and economic costs. Early antiviral drugs, such as interferon-α2b, peginterferon-α2a, lamivudine, and adefovir, all have their limitations (such as low responses or safety concerns) in clinical application. Telbivudine and entecavir are two of the latest nucleotide drugs and both have been shown to have potent viral suppression. However, in patients with hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive chronic hepatitis B (CHB), inconsistent results have been generated for efficacy between telbivudine and entecavir. Therefore, evidence-based medical data are required to compare the efficacies, in terms of virological and biochemical responses, and safety between telbivudine and entecavir.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to compare the early antiviral efficacy and safety of telbivudine and entecavir in the treatment of patients with hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive chronic hepatitis B (CHB).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A search for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on HBeAg-positive CHB patients treated with telbivudine and entecavir for 24 or 52 weeks, published before December 2011, was performed. Primary efficacy endpoint was the cumulative rate of undetectable HBV DNA, and secondary efficacy endpoints included rates of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization, HBeAg disappearance, HBeAg seroconversion and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed using the Review Manager v5.1.4 software package. We assessed the pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the fixed-or random-effects model.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 555 patients were included. Telbivudine was associated with significantly higher rates of HBeAg disappearance (RR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.11 - 1.91) and HBeAg seroconversion (RR = 1.76, 95%CI: 1.25-2.48) than entecavir, but had higher adverse events (RR = 2.11, 95%CI: 1.23 - 3.60), compared with entecavir. There was no difference between telbivudine and entecavir in the rate of cumulative undetectable HBV DNA (RR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.90 - 1.10) and ALT normalization (RR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.85 - 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Telbivudine is associated with significantly higher rates of HBeAg disappearance and HBeAg seroconversion than entecavir, whereas entecavir is superior to telbivudine in safety. Both drugs have similar efficacy on rates of cumulative undetectable HBV DNA and ALT normalization.

Effects of telbivudine and entecavir for HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B: a meta-analysis

AIM

To compare the effects of telbivudine (LDT) and entecavir (ETV) in treatment of hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive chronic hepatitis B by meta-analysis.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the VIP database, the Wanfang database and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register for all relevant articles published before April 1, 2012. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LDT with ETV for treatment of HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B were included. The data was analyzed with Review Manager Software 5.0. We used relative risk (RR) as an effect measure, and reported its 95% CI. Meta-analysis was performed using either a fixed-effect or random-effect model, based on the absence or presence of significant heterogeneity. Two reviewers assessed the risk of bias and extracted data independently and in duplicate. The analysis was executed using the main outcome parameters including hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA undetectability, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization, HBeAg loss, HBeAg seroconversion, drug-resistance, and adverse reactions. Meta-analysis of the included trials and subgroup analyses were conducted to examine the association between pre-specified characteristics with the therapeutic effects of the two agents.

RESULTS

Thirteen eligible trials (3925 patients in total) were included and evaluated for methodological quality and heterogeneity. In various treatment durations of 4 wk, 8 wk, 12 wk, 24 wk, 36 wk, 48 wk, 52 wk, 60 wk and 72 wk, the rates of HBV DNA undetectability and ALT normalization in the two groups were similar, without statistical significance. At 4 wk and 8 wk of the treatment, no statistical differences were found in the rate of HBeAg loss between the two groups, while the rate in the LDT group was higher than in the ETV group at 12 wk, 24 wk, 48 wk and 52 wk, respectively (RR 2.28, 95% CI 1.16, 7.03, P = 0.02; RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.16, 1.82, P = 0.001; RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.11, 1.89, P = 0.006; and RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.04, 3.32, P = 0.04). At 4 wk, 8 wk, 60 wk and 72 wk of the treatment, there were no significant differences in the rate of HBeAg seroconversion between the two groups, while at 12 wk, 24 wk, 48 wk and 52 wk, the rate in the LDT group was higher than in the ETV group (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.36, 3.24, P = 0.0008; RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.29, 2.28, P = 0.0002; RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.36, 2.54, P < 0.0001; and RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.21, 2.90, P = 0.005). The rate of drug-resistance was higher in the LDT group than in the ETV group (RR 3.76, 95% CI 1.28, 11.01, P = 0.02). In addition, no severe adverse drug reactions were observed in the two groups. And the rate of increased creatine kinase in the LDT group was higher than in the ETV group (RR 5.58, 95% CI 2.22, 13.98, P = 0.0002).

CONCLUSION

LDT and ETV have similar virological and biomedical responses, and both are safe and well tolerated. However, LDT has better serological response and higher drug-resistance.