Comparable efficacy of tenofovir versus entecavir and predictors of response in treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B: a multicenter real-life study

Efficacy comparison of high-genetic barrier nucleos(t)ide analogues in treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Four high-genetic barrier nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) for chronic hepatitis B (CHB), namely entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), and besifovir dipivoxil maleate (BSV), have been established. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy of four high-genetic barrier NAs using a network meta-analysis of randomized trials and propensity score-matched cohorts.

METHODS

Systematic search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane library, and EMBASE and included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that used propensity score matching. Studies on treatment-naïve CHB patients treated with ETV, TDF, TAF, or BSV were included. Outcomes included alanine aminotransferase normalization and hepatitis B e antigen seroclearance at week 48 and undetectable hepatitis B virus DNA at weeks 48 and 96. Network meta-analysis was performed to synthesize the results.

RESULTS

In total, 15,000 patients from 16 studies were included. In terms of 48- and 96-week virologic response (VR), TDF outperformed ETV with statistical significance (48 weeks: odds ratio [OR], 1.38; p < 0.001; 96 weeks: OR, 1.57; p = 0.004). ETV was ranked first for 48-week biochemical response (BR) and outperformed TDF (OR, 0.76; p = 0.028). In the sensitivity analyses, 48-week VR from randomized-controlled trials were compiled, and the same trend toward the superiority of TDF over ETV was found (OR, 1.51; p = 0.030).

CONCLUSION

Four high-genetic barrier NAs were compared, and TDF was more likely to achieve a VR after 48 weeks, while ETV provided a superior BR after 48 weeks.

Antiviral Therapy of Chronic Hepatitis B Virus between Present and Future

Background/Objectives: The objective of this study was to analyze the results of clinical trials regarding long-term antiviral therapies in chronic hepatitis with HBV to compare current therapeutic protocols and to analyze the results of preliminary studies with new antiviral therapies for HBV. Methods: Clinical studies and meta-analyses from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Research Gate from 2011 to 2024 were analyzed on patients undergoing chronic antiviral therapy for HBV, and a retrospective observational study performed in our clinic on a group of 76 patients undergoing chronic therapy with entecavir was presented. Also, a summary of the results of preliminary studies with various innovative antiviral molecules for HBV was performed. Results: The results of extensive clinical trials reveal that current therapies for chronic HBV are well tolerated and maintain good viral suppression if the patient is adherent to therapy. Innovative therapies aim to eliminate HBsAg and, thus, significantly shorten the duration of treatment, and the preliminary results of the studies are promising. Conclusions: Being an asymptomatic condition that requires life-long therapy, adherence to therapy is a real problem. Also, the risk of decompensation of liver cirrhosis and adenocarcinoma remains important in these patients. Future research is needed to perfect some antiviral therapy schemes that shorten the treatment period but also decrease the rate of progression towards decompensated cirrhosis and liver adenocarcinoma.

Long-term follow-up of treatment-naïve HBeAg-negative patients with chronic hepatitis B

BACKGROUND/AIMS

We aimed to explore long-term results of oral antiviral agents in treatment-naïve "HBeAg negative chronic hepatitis B (CHB)" and determine the factors affecting the complete virological response.

METHOD

Patients with HBeAg-negative CHB who used oral antiviral agents for at least 3 years were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 173 patients were recorded. The mean duration of treatment was 62.2 ± 28.9 months. Complete virological responses (CVR) were 82.8% (n = 53/64) in tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), 84.4% (n = 49/58) in lamivudine (LAM), 83.9% (n = 26/31) in entecavir (ETV), 95% in telbivudine (LdT) (n = 19/20) (p = 0.290). Multivariate analysis revealed age ≤ 40 (p = 0.012, 95%CI = 1.38-13.76, OR = 4.36) and baseline HBV DNA value (p = 0.003, 95%CI = 1.23-2.63, OR = 1.78) as independent factors for CVR. Virological breakthrough was detected in 29 (50%) patients on LAM therapy, two (6.4%) patients on ETV therapy, and two (10%) patients on LdT therapy. Treatment was switched to another antiviral agent due to osteoporosis in four patients in the TDF group, muscle pain in nine patients in the LDT group, and headache in one patient in the ETV group. Hepatocelluler cancer was detected in five patients. HBsAg seroclearance developed in two patients. Anti-HBs seroconversion was not detected.

CONCLUSION

CVR was achieved at similar rates with all four antiviral agents, while younger age (≤ 40) and low baseline viral load were the main factors for virological response. However, drug resistance and virological breakthrough in the LAM group and side effects in the LdT group were detected during the long-term follow-up. Moreover, HBsAg seroclearance was achieved at very low rates with oral antiviral agents.

Comparable outcomes of decompensated chronic hepatitis B patients treated with entecavir or tenofovir: an 8-year cohort study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Whether the efficacies of entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in treating liver-related outcomes of decompensated chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients are comparable remained inconclusive.

METHODS

An 8-year cohort study of 736 decompensated CHB patients was conducted, and 65 TDF-treated patients were sex, age and model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores-1:4 matched with 260 ETV-treated patients through propensity score-matching method.

RESULTS

Of 736 patients, 574 (78%) were male, with a mean age of 54.3 years, 438 (59.5%) had cirrhosis, 147 (20%) were positive for HBeAg, and 84 (11.6%) and 652 (88.4%) were treated with TDF and ETV, respectively. The 652 ETV-treated patients were older, had higher baseline MELD score and rates of encephalopathy, but lower ALT levels than the 84 TDF-treated patients. No significant differences were observed in the cumulative incidences of liver-related mortality or liver transplantation (1-month, 18.45 vs. 14.01%, p = 0.368; 8-year, 39.74 vs. 34.24%, p = 0.298), and hepatocellular carcinoma development (5-year, 7.21 vs.13.17%, p = 0.994; 8-year, 11.60 vs.13.17%, p = 0.857) between the matched 260 ETV- and 65 TDF-treated patients, regardless of time points. Baseline MELD score (subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR): 1.063; 95% confidence interval (CI) of sHR: 1.016-1.112) and hepatic encephalopathy (sHR: 5.127; 95% CI sHR: 3.032-8.669) were independently associated with liver-related mortality or liver transplantation in the matched patients.

CONCLUSIONS

ETV and TDF had comparable efficacy in the short- and long-term liver-related outcomes of decompensated CHB patients, and baseline liver reserve was associated with the outcomes.

Evaluation of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Treatment in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B

Objective

The main purpose of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) treatment is to improve the patients' life quality and prevent the disease from progressing to cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma. Continuous suppression of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA with nucleoside or nucleotide analogues is the most critical way to achieve this goal. This study aimed to evaluate the CHB patients retrospectively followed up with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) treatment.

Materials and Methods

The study was planned as retrospective research by Afyonkarahisar Health Sciences University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology between January 2001 and December 2020. We evaluated all treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients who received TDF (245 mg/day) treatment with the diagnosis of CHB. The data were obtained by reviewing the file information registered in the hospital automation system. HBsAg, Anti-HBs, HBeAg, Anti-HBe, HBV DNA, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) values of the patients were evaluated at 1st, 3rd, 6th, 12th months, and 6-month follow-ups throughout the treatment. Virological (HBV-DNA of < 50 IU/ml), biochemical (decrease below 40 IU/Ml in patients with pre-treatment value of ALT >40 IU/ml) and serological (Anti-HBe seroconversion in HBeAg positives and HBsAg negative and anti-HBs seroconversion in all patients) responses were examined. Adverse effects were also assessed during the treatment.

Results

Data from 131 patients who received TDF treatment were evaluated. Virological responses were determined as 78.6%, 81.3%, 94.2%, and 100% in the patients at 24th week, 48th week, 4th year, and 8th year, respectively. While there was no Anti-HBs seroconversion in any patients in four years of the treatment, it was observed at a rate of 10.5% in the eighth year. We did not determine any significant adverse effects requiring discontinuation of the treatment in the long-term follow-up of 131 patients under TDF treatment.

Conclusion

As a result of our study, TDF was an effective and well-tolerated choice for CHB treatment.

The efficacies of entecavir and tenofovir in terms of enhancing prognosis after curative treatment of hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Whether entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) affords the better prognosis after curative treatment of hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. We compared recurrence and death rates between patients taking ETV and those taking TDF.

METHODS

Between 2013 and 2017, patients with HBV-related HCC who had undergone hepatic resection (n=421) or radiofrequency ablation (n=305) as first-line anti-HCC treatment in three institutes were consecutively enrolled. All patients received ETV or TDF as a first-line antiviral. The cumulative probabilities of recurrence and death were assessed. We adjusted for viral factors, including the HBV-DNA load, and tumor and demographic factors.

RESULTS

During the study period (median 46.6 [interquartile range 25.3-58.9] months), 227 patients experienced recurrence and 53 died. In the ETV (n=405) and TDF (n=321) groups, the annual incidences of recurrence (10.61 and 11.21 per 100 person-years, respectively; P=727) and death (2.28 and 1.79 per 100 person-years, respectively; P=277) were similar, with adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of 0.932 (P=0.622) and 0.667 (P=0.193), respectively. When stratified by treatment modality and the timing of antiviral therapy commencement, the values were similar (all P>0.05). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses yielded results that were similar in the two groups in terms of recurrence (aHR=1.038, P=0.963) and death (aHR=0.799, P=0.431). Furthermore, the early (<2 years) and late (≥2 years) recurrence risks were not statistically different in the two groups (both P=0.400), as confirmed by IPTW analysis (P=0.502 and P=0.377, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The prognoses in terms of recurrence and death after curative treatment of HBV-related HCC were not statistically different between the ETV and TDF groups. Further validation studies are needed.

Tenofovir Alafenamide Fumarate, Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate and Entecavir: Which is the Most Effective Drug for Chronic Hepatitis B? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The therapeutic effect of tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) on chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients remains inconsistent. The aim of this study was to explore the differences in virological responses to TAF, TDF and ETV in patients with CHB.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted of the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials and observational studies published up to July 21, 2020. Statistical comparisons of virological response between TDF, ETV, and TAF were carried out with pooled odds ratio (OR) values.

RESULTS

The virological response in TDF-treated CHB patients was notably superior to that of the ETV-treated CHB patients after 12-weeks [OR=1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89-1.41], 24-weeks (OR=1.33, 95% CI: 1.11-1.61), 48-weeks (OR=1.62, 95% CI: 1.16-2.25), 72-weeks (OR=1.43, 95% CI: 0.78-2.62), and 96-weeks (OR=1.56, 95% CI: 0.87-2.81) treatment. No significant difference was observed for the virological responses in CHB patients after 48-weeks treatment with TAF or TDF. The virological response in TDF+ETV-treated CHB patients was superior to that of TDF-treated CHB patients after 24-weeks, 48-weeks (OR=1.54, 95% CI: 1.17-2.02), 96-weeks, and 144-weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

The virological response in TDF-treated CHB patients was superior to that in ETV-treated CHB patients, but there was no significant difference between TAF and TDF. In addition, the therapeutic effect of TDF+ETV was superior to TDF alone.

Comparable Incidence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients Treated with Entecavir or Tenofovir

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Adherence to medication and maintained virologic response (MVR) are related to the risk of adverse clinical outcomes. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in relation to the adverse clinical outcomes among chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients stratified according to adherence to medication and MVR.

METHODS

A total of 1794 treatment-naive CHB patients treated with ETV (n = 894) or TDF (n = 900) for > 1 year were identified.

RESULTS

Adherence rates were significantly higher in the TDF than in the ETV (93.4% vs. 89.1%, respectively; P < 0.001). The MVR of ETV and TDF were 64.5% and 71.7%, respectively (P = 0.001). The MVR of ETV and TDF in the good adherence group were 72.1% and 76.4%, respectively (P = 0.083); in the poor adherence group, the MVR of ETV and TDF were 63.0% and 54.0%, respectively (P = 0.384) Multivariate analysis showed that the risk of HCC and death or transplantation was similar between groups (HR 0.826, 95% CI 0.522-1.306; P = 0.413 and HR 0.636, 95% CI 0.258-1.569; P = 0.325, respectively) after adjusting for adherence to medication and MVR. In the 589 propensity-matched pairs of patients, risk of HCC and death or transplantation was similar between treatment groups after stratification according to adherence rates and MVR.

CONCLUSIONS

After adjustment for adherence and MVR, ETV, and TDF did not differ in terms of the risk of HCC and death or transplantation in all patients and propensity score-matched cohorts.

Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Is Superior to Entecavir in Reducing Hepatitis B Surface Antigen for Chronic Hepatitis B in China: 2-Year Comprehensive Comparative Result of a Matched Comparative Study

Aim: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) are equally recommended as the first-line antiviral treatments for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) at present. We aimed to compare the long-term efficacy and safety between ETV and TDF therapy in CHB patients who had not received nucleoside analog treatment.

Method: In this single-center retrospective study, 414 patients who received ETV (290 patients) or TDF (124 patients) therapy at our center from January 2017 to May 2019 were included. To reduce the imbalance of baseline variables, propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to yield 124 pairs of patients at a ratio of 1:1 based on the treatment regimen.

Result: After PSM, the cumulative rate of patients who achieved complete virological response (CVR) was not different by drug therapy at each inspection time (1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months). Subgroup analysis on HBeAg status and level of HBV DNA demonstrated that evolution of proportion of achieving CVR was not significantly different between groups. Despite the insignificant incidence of HBsAg seroclearance in either group, patients in TDF group achieved higher on-treatment HBsAg decline at each inspection time (1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months), 0.39, 0.51, 0.61, 0.64, 0.68, 0.76, and 0.91 log IU/mL, respectively; while the corresponding reduction were 0.27, 0.37, 0.40, 0.45, 0.48, 0.55, and 0.66 log IU/mL in ETV group (p < 0.05). In subgroup analysis, we found that the significant difference still existed in patients with high baseline HBsAg level (>3 log IU/mL). Additionally, the proportion of patients who achieved on-treatment HBsAg decline >1 log IU/mL in TDF and ETV group was 33.3 and 17.1% (p < 0.01) at the 12th month, 44.4 and 29.5% (p = 0.03) at the 24th month, respectively. Mean increase in serum creatinine from baseline was 0.10 and 0.08 mg/dL in TDF and ETV group (p = 0.11), with no patient experienced acute kidney injury.

Conclusions: TDF has higher potency in reducing HBsAg than ETV in this study. Considering the effect still existed in patients with high HBsAg level (>3 log IU/mL), TDF might be a superior therapeutic regimen combining with its relatively safety.

Comparative Effectiveness of Entecavir Versus Tenofovir for Preventing Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) can lead to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). While both tenofovir disoproxil (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) have been shown to reduce the risk of HCC, their comparative effectiveness is unclear. We estimated the comparative effectiveness of these two agents in reducing the risk of HCC in patients with CHB, through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

We searched multiple electronic databases from January 1, 1998, to October 31, 2019, for randomized controlled trials and observational comparative effectiveness studies in adults with CHB treated with ETV compared to TDF, reporting the incidence of HCC (minimum follow-up 12 months). Primary outcome was incidence of HCC, calculated as incidence rate ratio (IRR) with 95% confidence interval (CI, unadjusted analysis) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI (adjusted analysis, where reported). Of 1,971 records identified, 14 studies (263,947 person-years) were included for quantitative analysis. On unadjusted meta-analysis of 14 studies, the risk of HCC was not statistically different between ETV and TDF (IRR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.99-1.66). When using available adjusted data (multivariate or propensity-matched data), the risk of HCC among patients treated with ETV was 27% higher when compared to TDF (seven studies; 95% CI, 1.01-1.60, P = 0.04). Additional analysis of adjusted data when separately reported among patients with cirrhosis demonstrated an adjusted HR of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.66-1.23), suggesting no difference between ETV-treated and TDF-treated groups. The overall confidence in estimates was very low (observational studies, high heterogeneity).

CONCLUSIONS

TDF may be associated with lower risk of HCC when compared to ETV.

Tenofovir is Superior to Entecavir in Patients with Treatment-naïve Hepatitis B e-Antigen-Positive Chronic Hepatitis B

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Chronic Hepatitis B (CHB) is a global health problem affecting around 400 million of people worldwide. Two available first-line antiviral drugs are tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and Entecavir (ETV). Till date,there are few published reports from India comparing efficacy of TDF and ETV in CHB cases. Therefore, this present study was carried out with an aim to compare the efficacy of ETV and TDF in patients with nucleos(t)ide naïve CHB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was carried out in 192 treatment naïve CHB cases, who completed 24 months of treatment with either TDF or ETV between March 2015 and August 2017. The primary end point of the study was undetectable hepatitis B virus DNA after 24 months of therapy.

RESULTS

Of total 192 patients with CHB, 38 hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg)-positive and 53 HBeAg-negative patients were treated with tenofovir, whereas 40 HBeAg-positive and 61 HBeAg-negative patients were treated with ETV. Pretreatment characteristics at baseline were not statistically different between the TDF and ETV groups. Patients treated with TDF achieved significantly higher complete viral suppression as compared with ETV-treated patients (Log rank: 7.04, P = 0.008) in HBeAg-positive CHB during the 24 months follow-up time; whereas no significant difference in viral suppression rate could be noticed in HBeAg-negative patients (Log rank: 0.98, P = 0.38). Both univariate and multivariate analysis by cox proportional hazard model confirmed that tenofovir had significant rate of complete viral suppression in comparison with ETV in HBeAg-positive patients (P < 0.05); whereas complete viral suppression rates were similar in HBeAg-negative patients.

CONCLUSION

In our study, tenofovir had more effective antiviral suppressive effect compared with ETV in HBeAg-positive, nucleos(t)ide-naïve CHB cases.

Secondary prevention for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B: are all the nucleos(t)ide analogues the same?

Reducing the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is the key ultimate goal set in essentially all treatment guidelines. There has been solid evidence supporting the relationship between serum hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA level and risk of HCC. Antiviral treatment with oral nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) leads to sustained viral suppression and hence is often adopted as the secondary prevention for HCC in CHB patients. The first-generation NA, lamivudine, reduced the risk of HCC at 3 years compared to placebo; yet, its high emergence of antiviral resistance has made it no longer recommended in the international guidelines. Recent heated debate is about the two current first-line NAs-entecavir and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-Are they just as good to reduce HCC risk in CHB patients? A handful of cohort studies show two different kinds of observations-TDF is better than entecavir in lowering HCC risk, or these two NAs have led to similarly low risk of HCC. Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), a modified version of TDF higher rate of ALT normalization, would be another potent nucleotide analogue is the treatment of choice for secondary prevention for HCC.

Pharmacokinetics of oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in pregnancy and lactation: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), the oral prodrug of tenofovir (TFV), is advocated in pregnancy for prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMCT) with failure of hepatitis B immunoglobulin and vaccination. The pharmacokinetics of TDF monotherapy for PMCT-HBV is important if deployment is to emulate the success of multiple antiretrovirals (ARVs) for PMCT-HIV in resource-constrained settings.

METHODS

This systematic review followed a protocol and is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) guidelines. We included studies that enrolled pregnant women who received oral TDF therapy as monotherapy or in combination with other ARVs: irrespective of the reason for receiving the drug (for example, HIV, HBV or pre-exposure prophylaxis); and reported pharmacokinetics.

RESULTS

The area under the concentration-time curve (AUC), maximum plasma concentrations (C_max) and last measurable plasma concentration (C_last) of TFV were decreased in the second and third trimester compared with first trimester or post-partum. In none of the manuscripts was the non-pregnant HBV threshold of C_max of 300 ng/ml reached, but the 50% effective concentration (EC₅₀) of TFV is lower for treatment of HBV compared with HIV. The TFV concentration in breastfed infants was 0.03% of the recommended infant dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Most knowledge of pharmacokinetics of TFV in pregnancy results from studies on HIV involving multiple ARVs. Increased TFV clearance occurred in the second and third trimester when optimal TFV concentrations are required to maximize suppression of HBV in the window before birth. Dose or duration adjustments will be better conceptualized with concurrent analysis of the pharmacokinetics of TFV monotherapy and hepatitis B pharmacodynamics in pregnancy.

Comparison of the on-treatment risks for hepatocellular carcinoma between entecavir and tenofovir: A propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) may reduce the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in chronic hepatitis B (CHB). However, it is not clear whether there is difference in the on-treatment HCC risks between ETV and TDF.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the on-treatment HCC incidence of ETV and TDF in 1340 consecutive nucleos(t)ide analog-naïve CHB patients by propensity score (PS) matching analysis. PS was calculated by using age, sex, drinking history, diabetes, liver cirrhosis, hepatitis B e antigen positivity, hepatitis B virus DNA, hepatitis B s antigen titer, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alpha-fetoprotein, albumin, bilirubin, prothrombin time, platelet count, and calendar year of treatment initiation as covariates. The HCC risk was assessed by Cox regression with death and liver transplantation as competing risks in the 1:1 PS-matched cohorts (n = 596).

RESULTS

TDF had higher cumulative virologic response (P = 0.027) whereas ETV showed higher AST and ALT normalization rates (P = 0.005 and < 0.001, respectively) in PS-matched cohorts. HCC risk was similar between ETV and TDF, either by PS-matching analysis (hazard ratio [HR] for TDF over ETV = 2.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.98-4.33, P = 0.058) or inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis (HR = 1.30, 95% CI = 0.81-2.10; P = 0.276).

CONCLUSIONS

ETV and TDF treatment was associated with similar risk for HCC development in CHB patients.

Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients Treated With Entecavir vs Tenofovir for Chronic Hepatitis B: A Korean Nationwide Cohort Study

Importance

Entecavir and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate have comparable efficacy in achieving surrogate end points, including virologic response, and are equally recommended as first-line treatments for patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). However, it is unclear whether treatment with these drugs is associated with equivalent clinical outcomes, especially development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Objective

To compare entecavir and tenofovir in terms of the risk of HCC and death or liver transplant in patients with CHB infection.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A nationwide historical population cohort study involving treatment-naive adult patients with CHB who started treatment with entecavir (n = 11 464) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n = 12 692) between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2014, using data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. As validation, a hospital cohort of patients with CHB treated with entecavir (n = 1560) or tenofovir (n = 1141) in a tertiary referral center between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2016, were analyzed. Nationwide cohort data were retrieved from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2016, and hospital cohort data from January 1, 2010, to October 31, 2017.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Cumulative incidence rates of HCC and death and transplant rates.

Results

Among the population cohort of 24 156, the mean (SD) age was 48.9 (9.8) years, and 15 120 patients (62.6%) were male. Among the hospital cohort of 2701, the mean (SD) age was 48.8 (10.5) years and 1657 patients (61.3%) were male. In the population cohort, the annual incidence rate of HCC was significantly lower in the tenofovir group (0.64 per 100 person-years [PY]) than in the entecavir group (1.06 per 100 PY). By multivariable-adjusted analysis, tenofovir therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.54-0.70) and all-cause mortality or transplant (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.65-0.92) compared with entecavir. The tenofovir group also showed a significantly lower risk of HCC in the 10 923-pair propensity score-matched population cohort (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.54-0.70) and 869-pair propensity score-matched hospital cohort (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.46-0.99) compared with the entecavir group.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study suggests that tenofovir treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC compared with entecavir treatment in a population-based cohort of adults with CHB; these findings were validated in a hospital cohort. Given the poor prognosis of patients with HCC, these findings may have considerable clinical implications in prevention of this cancer in patients with CHB infection.

Minimal increases of serum alpha-foetoprotein herald HCC detection in Caucasian HBV cirrhotic patients under long-term oral therapy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In Caucasian patients with compensated cirrhosis caused by hepatitis B virus (HBV), the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) developing persist despite long-term nucleos(t)ide analogs (NUC) treatment. In the surveillance of this population with persistently normal transaminases because of NUCs, the added value of serum alpha-foetoprotein (AFP) monitoring is poorly defined.

METHODS

Two hundred and fifty-eight Caucasian HCC-free patients with HBV-compensated cirrhosis who started tenofovir or entecavir while having normal serum AFP levels (≤7 ng/mL) at baseline or within the first year of treatment underwent HCC surveillance by semiannual ultrasound evaluation and serum AFP determination.

RESULTS

During 96 (18-120) months of antiviral therapy, 3947 AFP values were collected, median AFP level was 2 ng/mL. Thirty-five patients developed an HCC at an overall 8-year crude cumulative incidence of 14% (annual incidence of 2%). HCC incidence increased in parallel with increasing AFP thresholds: 24%, 36%, 64% and 92% for AFP levels after exceeding 2, 4, 6 and 7 ng/mL for the first-time. Of the 12 patients who experienced an AFP rise > 7 ng/mL, 11 developed an HCC and one had liver metastases of lung cancer. Overall, an AFP > 7 ng/mL had 99.6% specificity, 31.4% sensitivity, 91.7% PPV, 90.2% NPV, LR+ 70.1 and LR- 0.69 for HCC; this excellent specificity was maintained up to 18 months before HCC detection.

CONCLUSIONS

In Caucasian patients with HBV-compensated cirrhosis on long-term NUC, an increase in AFP over 7 ng/mL shows excellent specificity, heralding HCC development within 1 year.

A multicenter study of entecavir vs. tenofovir on prognosis of treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B in South Korea

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is currently unclear which antiviral agent, entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), is superior for improving prognosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Here, we assessed the ability of these 2 antivirals to prevent liver-disease progression in treatment-naïve patients with CHB.

METHODS

From 2012 to 2014, treatment-naïve patients with CHB who received ETV or TDF as a first-line antiviral agent were recruited from 4 academic teaching hospitals. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at enrollment were excluded. Cumulative probabilities of HCC and death or orthotopic liver transplant (OLT) were assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 2,897 patients (1,484 and 1,413 in the ETV and TDF groups, respectively) were recruited. The annual HCC incidence was not statistically different between the ETV and TDF groups (1.92 vs. 1.69 per 100 person-years [PY], respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.975 [p = 0.852] by multivariate analysis). Propensity score (PS)-matched and inverse probability of treatment weighting (ITPW) analyses yielded similar patterns of results (HR 1.021 [p = 0.884] and 0.998 [p = 0.988], respectively). The annual incidence of death or OLT was not statistically different between the ETV and TDF groups (0.52 vs. 0.53 per 100 PY, respectively; adjusted HR 1.202 [p = 0.451]). PS-matched and ITPW analyses yielded similar patterns of results (HR 1.248 [p = 0.385] and 1.239 [p = 0.360], respectively). These findings were consistently reproduced in patients with compensated cirrhosis (all p >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall prognosis in terms of HCC and death or OLT was not statistically different between the ETV and TDF groups. Further studies are needed to validate our results.

LAY SUMMARY

It is currently unclear which antiviral agent, entecavir or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, is superior for improving prognosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection. In this analysis we found that there was no difference in terms of overall prognosis, including risk of hepatocellular carcinoma, death, or the need for a liver transplant, in patients receiving either antiviral.

Efficacy of tenofovir and entecavir in patients who relapsed after pegylated interferon therapy

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections and sequelae present significant health problems worldwide. Two groups of medications are available for chronic HBV infection treatment: (1) interferons (IFNs) and (2) nucleos(t)ide analogues. This study aimed to evaluate entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) efficacies in chronic HBV patients, who achieved virological response during Peg-IFN treatment but did not sustain this response and relapsed a year after treatment end. In this study, 74 patients with chronic HBV infection who had virological responses to 180 μg/week Peg-IFNα-2a treatment were included; 38 (20 and 18 HBeAg positive and negative, respectively) of these patients were treated with 245 mg/day TDF, and 36 (20 and 16 HBeAg positive and negative, respectively) were treated with 0.5 mg/day ETV upon relapse after initial treatment discontinuation. In HBeAg-positive patients biochemical response rates were higher for TDF at weeks 96 and 144 (p = 0.044 and 0.019, respectively). However, biochemical response rates were similar for TDF and ETV in HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative groups at other weeks (p > 0.05). Virological and serological response rates were similar in patients treated with TDF and ETV in HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative groups (p > 0.05).

Efficacy and safety of long-term therapy with nucleos(t)ide analogues in chronic hepatitis B

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of long-term treatment with nucleos(t)ide analogues in patients with chronic hepatitis B.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted an observational study in 101 chronic hepatitis B (HBeAg-negative and HBeAg-positive) patients treated (≥3 years) with entecavir, tenofovir or telbivudine.

RESULTS

Treatment with entecavir and tenofovir was associated with high rate of virologic and biochemical response (&gt;95%) and HBeAg seroconversion (93% and 67%, respectively). Cumulative rate of virologic resistance was 0; 3.1% and 43.5% for tenofovir, entecavir and telbivudine, respectively. Long-term nucleos(t)ide analogues treatment resulted in a regress of liver fibrosis (from 8.92 to 7.18 kPa, р&lt;0.0001) and reduction in the number of patients with advanced fibrosis (from 48.1% to 13.8%, р&lt;0.0001). Entecavir and tenofovir were safe and well tolerated, while treatment with telbivudine was associated with development of myopathy in 13% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Entecavir and tenofovir might be recommended for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B because of having potent antiviral effect, high genetic barriers against resistance and good safety.

Efficacy of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate switch therapy in chronic hepatitis B patients with suboptimal response to adefovir-based combination therapy

In the present study, the efficacy and safety of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) switch therapy were assessed in patients with chronic hepatitis B exhibiting a suboptimal response to adefovir (ADV)-based combination therapy. First, the efficacy of the TDF switch therapy was retrospectively evaluated in 50 patients with chronic hepatitis B who failed to respond to ADV-based combination treatment. Among those, 48 patients with a median age of 35 years were hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and 17, 14 and 19 patients were previously treated with lamivudine (LAM) plus ADV, telbivudine plus ADV and entecavir (ETV) plus ADV, respectively. A total of 41 patients were treated with TDF alone and 9 with TDF plus ETV. The median time of follow-up was 102 weeks. The primary end-point was the cumulative probability of achieving a complete virologic response (CVR). The secondary end-points were the rate of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization, HBeAg seroconversion in HBeAg-positive patients, and the plasma levels of creatinine and creatine kinase. The mean serum hepatitis B virus DNA levels prior to initiation of the TDF switch therapy were 4.8±1.6 log₁₀IU/ml. The cumulative probability of achieving a VR at 24, 48, 96 and 108 weeks was 52.0, 76.0, 89.8 and 94.9%, respectively. The cumulative probability of normalization of ALT at 12, 24, 36, 48, 60,72, 84, 96, 108, 120 and 132 weeks was 34, 44, 50, 58, 66, 70, 74, 80, 90, 92 and 94%, respectively. HBeAg seroconversion was achieved in 5 patients. During the follow-up, 6 patients suffered from a virologic breakthrough, 3 patients failed to respond to the TDF treatment and the remaining patients were able to obtain VR following the continuation of TDF treatment. Slightly elevated serum levels of creatinine were observed in one patient, whereas creatine kinase activity did not increase in any of the subjects. In conclusion, TDF switch therapy is efficient and safe for patients with chronic hepatitis B with a suboptimal response to ADV-based combination therapy.

A long-term multicenter study: Entecavir versus Tenofovir in treatment of nucleos(t)ide analogue-naive chronic hepatitis B patients

BACKGROUND

Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarat (TDF) are the two first-line therapies recommended in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B because of having potent antiviral effect and high genetic barriers against resistance. We aimed to compare efficacy of these drugs and to evaluate predictors of viral suppression.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study was conducted in nucleos(t)ide analogue-naive chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients from different 6 centers.

RESULTS

Of the 252 patients, 166 received ETV and 86 TDF. The two groups were similar in terms of age, gender, baseline ALT levels and fibrosis scores. ETV had significantly higher baseline HBV DNA, histological activity index and lower hepatitis B early antigen (HBeAg) seropositivity. Treatment duration was longer in ETV group (P<0.001). In univariate analysis, undetectable HBV DNA and ALT normalization rates were detected significantly higher in ETV groups (P<0.001 and 0.049, respectively). There was no significant difference between groups in terms of HBeAg seroconversion, virological breakthrough, time to virological breakthrough and time to ALT normalization. Entecavir was more effective in reducing HBV DNA levels at the 3rd, 6th and 12th months of the treatment (P=0.06, 0.021 and 0.012, respectively). However, multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that TDF therapy compared to ETV had an increased probability of achieving complete viral suppression (HR=1, 66; 95% CI 1.21-2.33; P=0.010). Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) seroconversion was occurred in only one patient in ETV group.

CONCLUSION

ETV leads to an early response on HBV DNA decline in the first year of the treatment. However, TDF is more successful than entecavir in achieving virological suppression.

Efficacy and Safety of Tenofovir Disoproxil Treatment for Chronic Hepatitis B Patients with Genotypic Resistance to Other Nucleoside Analogues: A Prospective Study

Background:

Tenofovir disoproxil (TDF) is a promising salvage therapy for patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) who failed regimens of other nucleoside analogues (NAs). In this study, we aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of TDF monotherapy in Chinese CHB patients with genotypic resistance.

Methods:

A total of 33 CHB patients who had failed treatment with other NAs and had genotypic resistance were switched to TDF monotherapy for 48 weeks. Patients’ demographic data (age, sex, history of hepatitis B virus [HBV] therapy), laboratory testing results (hepatitis B e antigen [HBeAg] status, HBV DNA levels, alanine aminotransferase [ALT] levels, serum creatinine, urinary protein, genotypic assay), clinical symptoms, and liver color ultrasound examinations were collected for evaluation at day 0 (baseline) and the 12^th, 24^th, 36^th, and 48^th weeks after initiating treatment. Statistical analyses were carried out using rank sum test or rank correlation.

Results:

With regard to efficacy, the study found that all patients who switched to TDF monotherapy had undetectable HBV DNA levels after 48 weeks. In addition, patients with lower baseline HBV DNA levels realized earlier virological undetectability (r_s = 0.39, P = 0.030). ALT levels were normal in 30 of 33 patients (91%). HBeAg negative conversion occurred in 7 of 25 patients (28%), among whom HBeAg seroconversion (12%) and HBeAg seroclearance (16%) occurred. The time of complete virological response was significantly affected by the number of resistance loci (r_s = 0.36, P = 0.040). Concerning safety, the study found that no adverse events were observed during the 48 weeks.

Conclusion:

TDF monotherapy is an effective and safe salvage treatment for CHB patients who are resistant to other NAs.

Comparison of the long-term efficacy between entecavir and tenofovir in treatment- naïve chronic hepatitis B patients

Background

There have been limited studies directly comparing the long-term efficacy between entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). This study was aimed to compare the long-term efficacy between them in treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B (CHB).

Methods

Out of 345 CHB patients who received first line therapy with ETV (n = 200) or TDF (n = 145) in a cohort, 210 patients were analyzed using propensity score matching, at a ratio of 1:1.

Results

Two groups showed no difference in baseline characteristics. During the follow-up of 12 months, HBV DNA levels were similarly suppressed in both groups (ETV vs. TDF; −5.01 vs. -5.242 log₁₀IU/mL, P = 0.559). At month 12, both groups showed no difference in terms of the serologic, biochemical and virologic (VR) response. In multivariate analysis, the initial virologic response at 3 months (IVR-3) was independent factor for VR at 1 year. During the long-term follow-up, HBV DNA levels were more strongly suppressed by TDF than ETV in hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) positive patients (P = 0.035), especially with high viral load (P = 0.012), although there was no significant difference in overall VR between two groups. The type of antivirals was not an independent factor for long-term VR.

Conclusions

Although either ETV or TDF, overall, may show a comparable long-term antiviral efficacy in treatment-naïve CHB, TDF might be better regimen than ETV in the subgroup of HBeAg-positive CHB, especially with a higher HBV DNA levels.

Efficacy and safety of entecavir versus tenofovir treatment in chronic hepatitis B patients: A randomized controlled trial

AIM

Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) are considered among the most potent antiviral agents for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B infection. We aimed to compare treatment efficacy and safety of ETV and TDF in nucleoside-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria were compensated chronic hepatitis B patients who were either hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive or HBeAg-negative. Exclusion criteria were co-infection with hepatitis C virus and/or HIV, concurrent malignancy, and decompensated cirrhosis. Virological, biochemical, and serological end-points at week 96 and 144 were compared. Of 400 patients, 200 patients received ETV and 200 received TDF.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline characteristics including age (41.6 ± 11.5 vs. 41.2 ± 11.6, mean baseline hepatitis B virus DNA (5.91 ± 1.79 vs. 5.94 ± 1.68 log₁₀ IU/mL), mean baseline alanine aminotransferase (68.1 ± 64.1 vs. 76.8 ± 79.8 U/L), and cirrhosis (15.5% vs. 14.5%). At week 144 of treatment, 91 and 94% of the ETV and TDF groups, respectively, achieved undetectable hepatitis B virus DNA. In HBeAg-positive patients, HBeAg seroconversion could be achieved in 27.4% and 33.7% at week 144 for ETV and TDF groups, respectively. Quantitative hepatitis B surface antigen dropped significantly over 144 weeks of treatment period but only 1.0 to 1.5% experienced hepatitis B surface antigen loss. Safety profiles were consistent with previous reports of monotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Both ETV and TDF showed potent antiviral activity against hepatitis B. Either ETV or TDF can be recommended as a treatment of choice for patients with chronic hepatitis B. Both drugs were safe and well tolerated.

The efficacy and safety comparison between tenofovir and entecavir in treatment of chronic hepatitis B and HBV related cirrhosis: A systematic review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety between tenofovir and entecavir in the treatment of CHB and HBV related cirrhosis through Meta-analysis. Methods The electronic databases of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Nature, CNKI and WanFang data were searched. The key words were: ("tenofovir", "entecavir") and ("Chronic Hepatitis B" or "CHB") and "Liver cirrhosis". Heterogeneity and report bias were analyzed.

RESULTS

There was significant difference of ALT norm level in the short-term period of 3months (RR=1.43, 95%CI: 1.06-1.94, P<0.017) and 6months (RR=0.89, 95%CI: 0.81-0.97, P<0.017), and significant difference of undetectable HBV-DNA only in 3months follow-up period (RR=1.59, 95%CI: 1.04-2.42, P<0.017) between TDF and ETV, but no significant difference in the long-term period. There is significant difference between TDF and ETV in eGFR level (RR=1.601, 95%CI: 1.035-2.478, P=0.0034) and hypophosphatemia incidence (RR=4.008, 95%CI: 1.485-10.820, P=0.006).

CONCLUSION

TDF has a better efficacy than ETV in 3months treatment duration, but intriguingly, TDF might not better than ETV during the 6months treatment period in the viral suppression and liver function improvement. There's no significant difference between TDF and ETV in the long-term treatment duration and in the treatment of HBV related liver cirrhosis. Both TDF and ETV could influence renal function but patients under TDF therapy may have more risk to suffer from renal damage and hypophosphatemia.

Slow reduction of IP-10 Levels predicts HBeAg seroconversion in chronic hepatitis B patients with 5 years of entecavir treatment

The aim of this study was to determine the correlation between dynamic changes in serum cytokine/chemokine expression levels in response to entecavir (ETV) treatment and HBV e antigen (HBeAg) seroconversion in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Four cytokines (interleukin [IL]-4, IL-6, IL-8, and interferon-γ) and five chemokines (macro-phage inflammatory protein [MIP]-1α, MIP-1β, platelet derived growth factor-BB, and interferon-inducible protein 10 [IP-10]) before ETV therapy and at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 60 months during therapy in 105 CHB patients were analyzed. The results showed that the low decrease rate of IP-10 levels after 1 year of ETV treatment was an independent predictor of HBeAg seroconversion at year 5 (Hazard ratio = 0.972). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the decrease rate of IP-10 levels after 1 year of treatment to discriminate a year-5 HBeAg seroconversion was 0.752 (p = 0.005). The results indicate that higher IP-10 level at year one of ETV treatment is associated with an increased probability of HBeAg seroconversion. Quantification of IP-10 during ETV treatment may help to predict long-term HBeAg seroconversion in patients with CHB.

Factors associated with HBV virological breakthrough

BACKGROUND

Little is known about non-adherence to HBV therapy. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between self-reported missed days of antiviral therapy and HBV virological breakthrough and factors associated with virological breakthrough.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of 211 HBV patients receiving oral antiviral therapies was undertaken at three tertiary hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Associations between 0 to >6 missed days in the last 30 days and virological breakthrough (defined as >10-fold rise in serum HBV DNA above nadir or after achieving virological response in the last 12 months) were examined. Logistic regression analyses determined the number of missed days most strongly associated with virological breakthrough and the associated factors. We report odds ratios (ORs) and relative risks (RRs).

RESULTS

Of the 204, 32 participants (15.6%) had quantifiable HBV DNA levels (>20 IU/ml); 15 (46.8%) of them experienced virological breakthrough. Participants reported never missing medication (n=130, 63.7%) or missing 1 day (n=23, 11.3%), >1 day (n=23, 11.3%), 2-6 days (n=15, 7.3%) and >6 days (n=13, 6.4%). The most discriminating definition of non-adherence was missing >1 day of medication (RR=8.3; OR=10.2, 95% CI 3.1, 33.8, receiver operating characteristic curve 0.76). Factors independently associated with virological breakthrough included non-adherence (OR=9.0, 95% CI 2.5, 31.9) diagnosed with HBV ≤14 years (OR=5.3, 95% CI 1.0, 26.2) and age ≤47 years (OR=5.4, 95% CI 1.1, 26.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Results provide an evidence-based definition of non-adherence to inform clinical practice and provide a basis for key patient education messages. Closer monitoring of groups at risk of viral breakthrough is required.

Efficacy Comparison of Tenofovir and Entecavir in HBeAg-Positive Chronic Hepatitis B Patients with High HBV DNA

Objectives. To compare entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) effects in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with high HBV DNA. Method. 96 patients treated initially with tenofovir (TDF group) or entecavir (ETV group) were included in this retrospective study. The following parameters were assessed: HBeAg and hepatitis B e antibody (anti-HBe) status, serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and HBV-DNA levels at weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, and 96; time to ALT normalization, undetectable HBV-DNA levels, and HBeAg seroconversion; total duration of follow-up and adverse reactions. Results. The patients included 66 (69%) and 30 (31%) individuals administered ETV and TDF, respectively, comprising 75% males. They were 35.1 ± 4.5 and 33.7 ± 4.6 years old in ETV and TDF groups, respectively. At 36 weeks, the response rate was significantly higher in the TDF group than in ETV treated patients (90% versus 69.7%, p = 0.03). At 48 weeks, less patients administered ETV showed undetectable HBV-DNA levels compared with the TDF group (86.4% versus 96.7%), a non-statistically significant difference (p = 0.13). Only 1 ETV treated patient developed virological breakthrough at 48–96 w. No adverse reactions were found. Conclusion. ETV and TDF are comparable in efficacy and safety to suppress HBV-DNA replication in HBeAg-positive CHB patients with high HBV DNA.

Antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis B viral infection in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Chronic hepatitis B viral (HBV) infection remains a significant global health problem. Evidence-based guidelines are needed to help providers determine when treatment should be initiated, which medication is most appropriate, and when treatment can safely be stopped. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases HBV guideline methodology and writing committees developed a protocol a priori for this systematic review. We searched multiple databases for randomized controlled trials and controlled observational studies that enrolled adults ≥18 years old diagnosed with chronic HBV infection who received antiviral therapy. Data extraction was done by pairs of independent reviewers. We included 73 studies, of which 59 (15 randomized controlled trials and 44 observational studies) reported clinical outcomes. Moderate-quality evidence supported the effectiveness of antiviral therapy in patients with immune active chronic HBV infection in reducing the risk of cirrhosis, decompensated liver disease, and hepatocellular carcinoma. In immune tolerant patients, moderate-quality evidence supports improved intermediate outcomes with antiviral therapy. Only very low-quality evidence informed the questions about discontinuing versus continuing antiviral therapy in hepatitis B e antigen-positive patients who seroconverted from hepatitis B e antigen to hepatitis B e antibody and about the safety of entecavir versus tenofovir. Noncomparative and indirect evidence was available for questions about stopping versus continuing antiviral therapy in hepatitis B e antigen-negative patients, monotherapy versus adding a second agent in patients with persistent viremia during treatment, and the effectiveness of antivirals in compensated cirrhosis with low-level viremia.

CONCLUSION

Most of the current literature focuses on the immune active phases of chronic HBV infection; decision-making in other commonly encountered and challenging clinical settings depends on indirect evidence.

Hepatitis B surface antigen quantification at hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion predicts virological relapse after the cessation of entecavir treatment in hepatitis B e antigen-positive patients

OBJECTIVES

To assess off-treatment virological relapse rates and to determine the role of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) quantification in predicting virological relapse after stopping entecavir (ETV) treatment in patients with hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive chronic hepatitis B (CHB).

METHODS

One hundred and twelve CHB patients for whom ETV was stopped in accordance with the Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver guidelines stopping rules were enrolled. Patient HBsAg and HBV DNA levels were monitored every 4-12 weeks during ETV treatment and after ETV cessation. Post-treatment virological relapse was defined as a serum HBV DNA level of >10 000 copies/ml after stopping ETV treatment.

RESULTS

The virological relapse rate at 52 weeks after stopping ETV was 48.2%. The post-treatment virological relapse rate was significantly higher in patients aged >50 years than in those aged <50 years (p < 0.001), and the virological relapse rate was significantly lower in patients with an HBsAg level <2.0 log10 IU /ml than in those with a level ≥ 2.0 log10 IU /ml at ETV cessation (p = 0.005). An HBsAg level of 2.5 log10 IU/ml at HBeAg seroconversion was the optimal cut-off value for predicting post-treatment virological relapse (p < 0.001). In those aged <50 years and with HBsAg ≤ 2.5 log10 IU/ml at HBeAg seroconversion, the relapse rate was only 5%. In patients with HBsAg ≤ 2.5 log10 IU/ml at HBeAg seroconversion, 52.4% achieved HBsAg levels ≤ 2.0 log10 IU/ml at ETV cessation, while in those with HBsAg >2.5 log10 IU/ml at HBeAg seroconversion, only 4.4% achieved this criterion.

CONCLUSIONS

HBsAg levels can help guide the timing of cessation of ETV treatment. HBsAg levels of 2.5 log10 IU/ml at HBeAg seroconversion may be a useful marker to predict virological relapse after the cessation of ETV treatment in HBeAg-positive CHB patients.